Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Nashy, post: 2711573, member: 1976"] I'm more accepting of b4l's explanation. Because to suggest Burgess was all they had that year is even crazier. Inglis was injured all year, so how he even comes into it is beyond me. You can hardly compare the two players. Imagine if that's how the NRL worked. Nah, we think he would have been paid heaps more, and Souths sucked when he wasn't there and there were no other contributing factors like injuries or suspensions, no, he's to be signed on..... hmmm... lets run with $800k.... which we made up. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)