Salary Cap

[BG]

Is player sponsorship outside the salary cap?

If its personal sponsorhsip.. i.e the money or more likely goods/service goes directly from the sponsor to the player then it will be outside the salary cap.. if its money/goods/services as a result of a link to the club then I think that's part of the salary cap.

So if a player was to be given the use of a Merc via a local dealership for 24 months then that monetary value would be outside the cap.. but if they received a Land Rover, one of the clubs sponsors, you would assume that was a deal linked to the club/JLR and would be part of the cap.

[Heathen]

Watch this space.

[Westy68]

Pretty sure Sarries have enough room for Jack Willis

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Pretty sure Sarries have enough room for Jack Willis

Like every other brilliant player I'm sure he'd jump at the opportunity to earn less money.

[Heathen]

Some really interesting stuff going around at the Ricoh today. Heard from several sources. Hope it's true. Not long to wait I believe.

[Rossm]

Don't be such a tease, Heathen 

[WallyWasp]

Come on Heathen, what are the rumblings you have heard? Or if not you, then anyone else heard the rumours being mentioned above and can ellaborate as to what the conjecture is?

WW

[AKWasp]

It’s no secret that most clubs want this loophole closed due to the impact it could have on player wages in the future (huge inflation). The only difficulty is that Sarries don’t think they’ve done anything wrong and feel like they don’t deserve punishment.

I believe the independent reviewers will judge Saracens to be not guilty, but will advise that the loophole be closed ‘to maintain fair competition’.

I think Saracens deserve some sort of punishment but even with what I’ve said above, we could see a lot of player moves at the end of the season as their base wages don’t seem to be high enough

[mike909]

I think Saracens deserve some sort of punishment but even with what I’ve said above, we could see a lot of player moves at the end of the season as their base wages don’t seem to be high enough

Me too, as its never a good look to condone getting round the rules others are (we believe) complying with

But I can't see how you would pay for all those RWC players.....let alone the near internationals such as Loz and Goode etc

[SilverShire]

I know I'm going to be the bad guy by saying this but if Sarries are deemed to have done nothing illegal then they can't suffer any sanction. Morally, using the loophole puts others at a disadvantage but nothing illegal has been done (apparently according to the judges panel). The way I see it, the only way that Sarries will be affected this season is if the loophole was closed with immediate effect. I.e Sarries will not be able to pay the players without 'officially' breaking the salary cap.

[mike909]

I think the key problem, least for a lay person like myself, is if the legality is the issue or if its the status of any money/benefits received by Sarries players. As if the monies received are deemed to fall within earnings provided by Sarries/Sarries connected persons and isn't player sponsorship, then there could be a case to answer

If they are deemed in the clear - then closing such a loop hole would cause some interesting outcomes!

[AKWasp]

I know I'm going to be the bad guy by saying this but if Sarries are deemed to have done nothing illegal then they can't suffer any sanction. Morally, using the loophole puts others at a disadvantage but nothing illegal has been done (apparently according to the judges panel). The way I see it, the only way that Sarries will be affected this season is if the loophole was closed with immediate effect. I.e Sarries will not be able to pay the players without 'officially' breaking the salary cap.

I think you’re 100% correct, think it’s most likely that the loophole will be closed at the end of the season. Issue will be that their actual contracts will be miserly without the external businesses so players may feel underpaid

On a side note, Leeds United and spygate was not illegal or broke the rules in any way- but the club was fined £200k for ‘going against the spirit of the game’.

Saracens could be punished under the same phrasing

[SilverShire]

I know I'm going to be the bad guy by saying this but if Sarries are deemed to have done nothing illegal then they can't suffer any sanction. Morally, using the loophole puts others at a disadvantage but nothing illegal has been done (apparently according to the judges panel). The way I see it, the only way that Sarries will be affected this season is if the loophole was closed with immediate effect. I.e Sarries will not be able to pay the players without 'officially' breaking the salary cap.

I think you’re 100% correct, think it’s most likely that the loophole will be closed at the end of the season. Issue will be that their actual contracts will be miserly without the external businesses so players may feel underpaid

On a side note, Leeds United and spygate was not illegal or broke the rules in any way- but the club was fined £200k for ‘going against the spirit of the game’.

Saracens could be punished under the same phrasing

Ahhh I didn't realise a club could be fined for going against the spirit of the game. I which case if the champions are deemed to be going against the spirit of the game some fine might well be allocated to them (and any other team that may have used the loophole). In any case the loophole should be closed regardless of the outcome of the hearing.

[Tervueren]

Has anyone been able to demonstrate that any of the players have received any payment?

They might have been able to raise finance that they could not have done without co-investors, so it might be practicable to count any income they earn as something they would not have received without said investment, but have any of them actually been given any money that could be counted against the salary cap?

[WickedWasp]

I know I'm going to be the bad guy by saying this but if Sarries are deemed to have done nothing illegal then they can't suffer any sanction. Morally, using the loophole puts others at a disadvantage but nothing illegal has been done (apparently according to the judges panel). The way I see it, the only way that Sarries will be affected this season is if the loophole was closed with immediate effect. I.e Sarries will not be able to pay the players without 'officially' breaking the salary cap.

I get the point you are making and I wonder if it is the reason for the hold up. But am I correct in thinking that when breaches were previously settled in private it was agreed any loop holes should be reported to the cap manager before being taken advantage of. Or something to that effect.