Saturday, November 03, 2007
The sports minister, Gerry Sutcliffe, has suddenly hit the headlines after branding John Terry's salary "obscene". He also attacked Chelsea's general attitude to cash. He said: "Good luck to John, but it is obscene to be on £150,000 a week. People in the street cannot understand salaries like Terry's," he added. "Chelsea are £250m in the red and they may be able to cope with that but it's not the real world - £250m in the red is not sustainable."
Does Sutcliffe have a point? I don't think you can blame Terry for being paid that much - there are very few if anybody I can think of who has ever turned down a better salary. That's the way the market is, and I'm pretty sure that many A-list Hollywood stars, for example, get more than the vast majority of footballers, and for doing less work.
It is worth noting that Chelsea were said to be furious with some of the figures quoted by Sutcliffe. It is believed Blues officials complained to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) that the figures were inaccurate. The rumour is that Terry actually only earns £130,000 a week, which obviously makes it all okay!
What do you think, vote in the poll, is Terry's salary obscene, has football gone mad?