Always a Wasp

Can the other 11 clubs gang-up to get them relegated and then vote for ring-fencing?

Home team wins with a bonus point, away team scores 4 tries and within 7 points so come away with 2.  If that's done for the remaining rounds in all games not involving Sarries then that ought to be enough to send them down I'd have thought.

Or just agree to play an open game for the first 40, ensuring both sides have a try bonus by HT, then play the 2nd half to determine the result.  At least that still keeps it competitive while maximising league points all round.

Wasp

Pale

Yep, 4 of us on "the stupid-o'clock BA flight out of Gatwick" tomorrow morning.

I havent seen anything but wonder if any rugby nauses have taken the time to pull finances from companies house to see what sort of numbers we are talking about...the reason i say this is today House of Rugby podcast discusses the situation. Rob Vickerman quite firmly says that the part that pisses him off is the lable that Wray has the offence to pin to the cheating.
He rightly points out that it has nothing to do with welfare as the co op's are only with his top players, not the squad. He also goes on to say he has pulled some data from Companies house and that Maro's company went and bought a 1.5million property, Faz has a 750k one. These are big numbers today, I hate to think what these will be worth in 10 years and if they even stop at just one investment.

Yes, dressing it up as player welfare is the most transparent BS.  The players with the big investments are big name internationals who are very unlikely to fall on hard times post-retirement.  Media work, coaching, after dinner speaking... Even a career outside of rugby will not be hard to find as certain companies will bend over backwards to have someone of their profile on board as a "consultant".

The players that are more likely to fall on hard times post-rugby are those without the high profile, that turned out week in week out for their clubs, mostly falling under the international radar, earning a fraction of what an EPS squad member does (even legitimately within the cap), and these kinds of players at all of the other 11 Premiership clubs are being denied opportunities of success and recognition by one team's cheating.

Really gets my back up.

Fiddle

Thompson, Rieder and Bassett have all made the step up and have proven themselves to be Premiership quality.  Bassett, despite losing form since, played a non-cap game for England not so long ago and Thompson was being mentioned in terms of the senior England squad at one point.  No-one since though.

I guess if the academy structure is working the way the RFU would ideally like, then the top talent should be being identified at a young age and brought through the Premiership academy squads, only being loaned to Championship sides as part of that development.  It may be that the effect of that is to widen the gap between the Prem and Championship, or the gap is being bridged by loaned players.

The turnover of players seems to have become a perennial problem (excuse).  Why are we unable to keep a core of a squad together?  I know we can point to specific reasons as to why certain players have gone that may be outside of the control of Dai, Derek or anyone else, whether that be personal circumstances, England selection, lack of opportunity or just cold hard cash and the need to stay within the cap (Wade, Cips, Hask, Simpson, Hughes, Daly...), coupled with high profile, high quality SH players on short term deals (Le Roux, Beale, Smith, Piutau).  The fact remains that this is a worrying trend, and I think the number one reason that we have become un-competitive in recent seasons.

There are a lot of other issues at play - ongoing uncertainty regarding the training ground; players who relocated failing to settle;  failure to qualify for Champions' Cup; coaching; club finances - that may or may not factor in a player's decision to leave the club.  I'm not saying all of the  above have necessarily contributed to the higher player turnover, but if you're an employee in an organisation where just 2 or 3 of these things give cause for concern then you are most likely more open to approaches from other prospective employers.