Contract Breakdown at Tigers and Irish?

[Hymenoptera]

Arent most of those rumours from the keyboard massive though, who've have a real downer on the club for the longest time and the players can do no wrong.

[InBetweenWasp]

I've only really read snippets in the Telegraph and their articles at least sound fairly balanced. 

Tigers claiming that they're feeling the pinch more than other clubs because of the size (and associated running costs) of their ground and fan base.

Telegraph suggesting that it's been felt that Tigers have been overly forceful and threatening in their approach - Which is the opposite to how it seems we've chosen to do things, as well as the likes of Sale who exchanged reduced salaries with increased terms to help provide job security to those worried about taking a hit in earnings and being out of a job sooner, rather than later.

It also says that Tigers have supposedly offered players who accept the reduction a mechanism to earn back a proportion of the reduction they've taken once the club returns to profitability. 

[DGP Wasp]

On the face of it, it looks like Leicester are in breach of some players' contracts of employment.  If my employer tried to wriggle out of their contractual obligations to me (in a job where my customers don't place the same expectations of loyalty on me) then I would be seeking advice from a lawyer.  I can sympathise to some extent.  However, I think this has served as a long overdue reality check for clubs and players alike.  Clubs have been sailing so close to the wind financially for so long now, that they were always going to be vulnerable during challenging economic times.  The bubble has burst and players will not have the same earning potential in future. However, where a contract already exists something has to give.

I have a number of friends in the airline industry, many of whom are being asked to re-apply for their existing roles on inferior terms or face redundancy.  A very similar scenario to that which many rugby players seem to have been presented with.

[Hymenoptera]

I've only really read snippets in the Telegraph and their articles at least sound fairly balanced. 

Tigers claiming that they're feeling the pinch more than other clubs because of the size (and associated running costs) of their ground and fan base.

Telegraph suggesting that it's been felt that Tigers have been overly forceful and threatening in their approach - Which is the opposite to how it seems we've chosen to do things, as well as the likes of Sale who exchanged reduced salaries with increased terms to help provide job security to those worried about taking a hit in earnings and being out of a job sooner, rather than later.

It also says that Tigers have supposedly offered players who accept the reduction a mechanism to earn back a proportion of the reduction they've taken once the club returns to profitability.

I'm not understanding why they are being hit more than others, why are their costs so high they are linked to footfall. Having been so heavily supported and thus generating decent cashflow, where has that money gone. On the face of it they should be one of the stronger clubs in this situation.

As for the players, Tigers offering them a recomp when they are back to normal seems more than fair to me..

[Shugs]

There's something bigger wrong at Tigers. It's been simmering for a few years. Not sure what it is - probably a myriad of things but the net result is a huge lack of goodwill between club/players/fans.

[welsh wasp]

Leicester's problems seem to go back a few years. Have made little progress in becoming a more-professionally managed club. Turned down the opportunity to ground-share with Leicester City - sharing costs more sensible than having a large stadium of their own. Whoever is now the majority owner has publicly put the team on sale - but no sign of any takers.

We have been very fortunate. I recall the financial & other problems we had when Steve Hayes took over Adams Park.

[InBetweenWasp]

Leicester's problems seem to go back a few years. Have made little progress in becoming a more-professionally managed club. Turned down the opportunity to ground-share with Leicester City - sharing costs more sensible than having a large stadium of their own. Whoever is now the majority owner has publicly put the team on sale - but no sign of any takers.

We have been very fortunate. I recall the financial & other problems we had when Steve Hayes took over Adams Park.

Which is probably why Tigers didn't fancy a ground share with Leicester City.  You might share costs, but you also share an asset and so share the income.  Presumably Leicester City would want a greater share on the income and they would have more home matches and a greater number of fans.  So the chances are the income is less with less of an asset to borrow against, or use as part of a sale price

[BG]

There's something bigger wrong at Tigers. It's been simmering for a few years. Not sure what it is - probably a myriad of things but the net result is a huge lack of goodwill between club/players/fans.

I think it goes back to when cockers lost his job. Rumours were that the players (a core group) had (or still have) way too much influence and had the ear of the clubs long serving benefactor Peter Toms.

There was a quick succession of coaches being hired and sacked. Looking forward, I can't see how the Borthwick/Murphy dynamic will work either

[baldpaul101]

The Tiger board is a very isnteresting place at the moment:

https://medium.com/@christopheregerton/the-saga-of-manu-the-five-or-6-and-their-contracts-may-or-may-not-end-up-being-one-of-the-more-803966a3e2a6

and also spotted this on there:

https://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/29042632/saracens-ask-top-earners-defer-salaries-amid-coronavirus-crisis

can't see Sarries top talent taking pay cuts in the 100,000's but maybe they have so much stashed away they don' care......