It seems unfortunate, yes. On the other hand, why do people object to athletes making lots of money, but not movie stars? IMO, Harry Kane is far more worthy of being rich than Tom Cruise. And that's not just when viewed through Spurs-colored lenses. Tom Cruise is nowhere near the best actor in the world, while Harry Kane was demonstrably the best striker in the PL.And of course every penny that Sky pays over is extracted from fans one way or another. I suppose that has the effect that all fans are paying towards our costs rather than just those that go to games but the overall effect is that 30 very well off people at each club are taking about £100m off relatively poor people each year. It's all by 'choice' I suppose but it does seem an unfortunate outcome.
