without getting into politics I like Wengers idea but this isn't North Korea where you will be shot for defecting to the South for a beyer lifestyle, or never get to see what a better lifestyle is like. All these players need to do is meet up on international duty and discuss wages phone their agent and arrange a move. 
tactica442 said:
You'd be standing on solid ground if only you settled with these examples (and why not Diaby? or even Rosicky I wouldn't argue with, though we owe last season's "success" to him almost as much as That other player, I forget his name). Why do you insist bringing Jack back in here - do you seriously want people to think of him as in the same category? people are building statues and worship places, there are Jack altars all over the world, c'mon.and1rew said:
Have it your way - I think if you wanted you'd have seen it by now, I give up.Crazy no, but you are overdoing it, is all I'm saying from the start. Nothing essential between us, just the proportions. And I still think you call it excessively here. No big deal, but it's "less flat" we need (as in FM rules with tweaks towards "social"), not entirely "Free Market". Unless of course you don't think so: unless, that is, you think there shouldn't be any "human" concessions at all to the wild, purely pragmatic, market dictates. If so - b'bye, we're wasting our time here.
Nothing "basic" about it - it's more of the same: it's about proportions. Put those pay categories into relative terms (as you know you should, particularly in this debate), and you see he was "paid s****". He then became an Intl player (do they make that kind of money? be honest. I'm sure you can see the point
).That's a good point, actually. You might generalize it even, and say that our experience doesn't support the "loyalty" thesis much (many points for Bingobob &co.). I'm not entirely sure just how much this involves pipe dreams, TBH. Buy I guess that whole "British core" thing has to do with insisting it is not something we should give up altogether, that some attachment between club and players could still be nurtured even in this day and time, and perhaps being local gives it a better chance. This is a local shop, for local people.
Dunno. Gerrard? (I know you'd slaughter me if I put Giggs and Scholes, for they actually win. And they started in TA days...). Anyway - is the move legit? is such thinking reasonable? that's the level of criticism I think we should be holding. And with this in mind - I think it is legit. I'm also tempted by trying to tie Jack and make him carry this club to glory, be the next Mr. Arsenal, etc. It might be a bit delusional, I accept - I just think it's worth the punt, and so it's a legit move&thinking.It refers to what we do after we've changed our ways, after we've gone from flat-socialist to pragmatic with concessions. That new found resilience just is the move from old to new, and I'm stressing the need not to be too rigid in that new stance.
I agree that focusing on the difference between large scale and small scale could be helpful in our discussion. I'm not sure I'd take the above as the only way it points to, though. Sometimes it is in smaller groups that differences cannot be tolerated. Also, positive motivation/incentive sometimes work in one way, envy in another. There could be situations where differences both motivate and frustrate at the same time. There are many elements at work here, and finding which is the relevant in the examined context is the important part.law90026 said:
But you can't if you were not born with the talent. And, so they say, some people think we don't really deserve things beyond our control, such as what was given to us in the natural lottery (our talent). And I might be working ten times harder than that c**t standing up there, hardly breaking sweat and averaging .75 goals a game, but I'm not as talented, and so he earns 4, or ten times more than I do though he doesn't really make half the effort. Do I get frustrated? does it encourage me to pass to him? does it even matter or help that I know I really should? I am humanbingobob said:
Well, everything is context dependent as you say yourself. What works in one environment doesn't necessarily work in another. However, what has become fairly universal in the Western hemisphere, both in smaller communities (such as work places) and larger communities like entire nations or regions, is that large inequality in rights and income form clefts between groups and therefore heighten the risk of conflicts. It's scientifically backed up even though it doesn't quite sit right with the mainstream neo-liberal way of thinking (as you can see on here as well).yuvken said:
If you dont have the talent but are showing you deserve it, putting the boot in, winning tackles, driving your team forward obviously that makes a huge difference. Not everyone is gonna be RVP or Messi but these players need a Vieira, a Keane, a Sergio Biscuits, not as talented on the ball but committed showing they deserve their place in the team. If the player you are describing is getting picked week in week out, helping his team win games and trophies then he deserves his money even if he is not as naturally talented as the guy upfront doing nothing other than scoring goals. A team is only as good as the sum of its total parts and it needs all parts from goalkeeper to striker using their talents, God given or just through effort, desire and determination, to win. The person you describe should be on parity with the striker, though the player who swaggers losing the ball, not putting a tackle in, not trying to improve himself or the team does not deserve to be on the same as those with God given talent or man made talent.yuvken said:But you can't if you were not born with the talent. And, so they say, some people think we don't really deserve things beyond our control, such as what was given to us in the natural lottery (our talent). And I might be working ten times harder than that c**t standing up there, hardly breaking sweat and averaging .75 goals a game, but I'm not as talented, and so he earns 4, or ten times more than I do though he doesn't really make half the effort. Do I get frustrated? does it encourage me to pass to him? does it even matter or help that I know I really should? I am humanbingobob said:
OK, we've been through that. I said I think the differences between us are more about proportion, where to draw the line. i don't think another round of this will change that.and1rew said:
Bingobob - you were the designated "no concessions to socialism" guy in this debate... What happened?bingobob said:
It's all complete speculation, he literally makes up a structure that fits the overall and looking around the blog he's got a clear agenda.psycho said:
I believe a bit of both here, actually. It is probably not the best way to instill motivation or boost team morale - not in the strict, flat way, at least. And we certainly have many players eating a significant chunk of the bill for no good reason. Improving on both could, perhaps, open a lot of options, and help us improve the teams quality by quite a bit.Segway said:
