#rmfantasypieces1

[rmfantasysetpieces1]

Congrats to Sierra Leone and look at his face at the end of the race, all muddy.

[rmfantasysetpieces1]

All players have the right to make contracts to get what they want

As I said in the past , the nigerian women in the past had been denied what they are owed , what was in a contract signed by the Nigerian FA. The english women haven't been denied what they are owed by contract. I think they get their money, per their contract. But the english women want more money as if profit in the game is made up, it isn't. But this reflects a problem in the mens game as well… in the men's game the reverse problem is true. When players go to a place that can pay them what they asked to be paid, media/pundits then make the acquisition of more money by a player some negative: low morals/athletically unambitious/greedy when it is none of those things. It is the same issue, a male player has the right like female players to ask for whatever they want and if someone can pay or is willing to pay then they will.

If women feel they warrant more money and they don't have an agreement to get that money then dont play and when the contract is up demand it until whomever is on the other side say yes, and if the other side say no then dont play. It is the same to the men.. it isn't different. You have the right to ask for any level of money you want, any level. From don't pay me, to the highest wage ever, no matter your gender and if you will not play unless your desires are met then don't play.

Yes, Nigerian women are more successful than Nigerian men , English women more successful than english men. Statian women far more successful than Statian men. But, that is athletic value, not financial. BUT, if women or men want more money, when that contract time comes up, demand what you want, and if the other side say no, then if you are truly adament don't play.

IN AMENDMENT Yes, some players will have different opinion, this is why labor unions are challenging because for every female player or male player who is unwilling to play for a club or flag unless paid more, another player is out there who is willing to play for a club or flat at the rate the clubs or flags desire. Neither player is wrong, but it is all in the contract.

#rmsoccer

[rmfantasysetpieces1]

When a fan if a genocidal enslaver?

The sign of a very bad media outlet is when they ask if a player or any worker is overpaid. All pay is even, if any one can't pay then just don't offer the contract. If I own a football club and I offer a player, seventy five million dollars a year, and the player accepts my offer it is up to me to pay that. If I own a football club and a player demands seventy five million dollars a year and I accept the demand it is up to me to pay that. There is no such thing as overpaid. Don't offer if you don't have the money. Don't accept if you don't have the money. But if you offer and a player says yes, or you accept what a player demands, pay up. Every single person who is negotiating to work for a firm in a open market fiscal capitalistic environments has the right to negotiate their wage. Every employer has the right to reject the negotiation. But if a club accepts the players demands then the club has to pay. Fans talking about overpaid should fuck themselves. The idea that some human beings actually think they have the right to suggest another human being who has negotiated evenly should be judged negatively for what said other human being did nonviolently, legally, not killing/murdering/genocide/terrorizing the first peoples in the lands commonly called the americas or other human beings for their land, not enslaving black peoples or other human beings for their labor, proves they are merely poor people who wish to be genocidal slavers themselves.