Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: AKWasp on November 05, 2019, 10:42:58 AM
-
And a £5m fine- twitter noise getting louder, official announcement expected very soon
-
In the Guardian
-
And the Telegraph
-
So what happens to their previous accomplishments? The breach has been happening for a few seasons...
-
The club owners need to decide. Fraudulent league and Euro champions. Do they keep all their players ??
-
So what happens to their previous accomplishments? The breach has been happening for a few seasons...
Debate on rival clubs taking action in that respect, would also like to see what happens in respect to their current squad- if they are that far over and didn’t believe they had done anything wrong then surely they are still a long long way over the limit. How will they get back down?
-
I scanned the Daily Mail article on the other thread and I think it mentioned >£300million since Wray took over, so it must have been going a long time. They should have the full Lance Armstrong treatment for everything they have won since the doping can be proven. They should also be held to the cap from next season (this season if they want to be punitive).
I also think Wasps should be given first refusal on any second rows and 12s, however I'm not sure that this would fly with the other clubs!
-
I feared that PRL were just waiting until they found a big enough carpet to sweep this under, but finally they have addressed the cheating.
This will just be the start though. I'd expect $arries to appeal (not sure on what grounds, but they are unlikely to just roll over and take it). And then potential legal challenges from other clubs for revenue lost as a result. And where does this leave Wray as a "fit and proper" club owner?
-
Some of the vociferous posters from Sarries on the Sportnetwork site are now going to take some heat.
-
Good start but needs so much more!
-
They might have to suffer an away semi-final this season
-
Somewhat ironically, Saracen’s challenge to the findings (which was rejected by the independent panel) wasn’t that they believed they had acted within the confines of the cap, but punishing them for breaching it was anti-competitive...
I have no issues in them wanting to assemble an incredible squad capable of competing with the best clubs in Europe. If they want to spend beyond the cap, also no issues. Just not in this league, with it’s pre-agreed confines to operate within.
-
Apparently Liam Williams is rumoured to be leaving.
And this will cause some massive problems, keeping players, squad culture for this season etc. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Further more, to see if they keep their achievements.
-
Apparently Liam Williams is rumoured to be leaving.
And this will cause some massive problems, keeping players, squad culture for this season etc. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Further more, to see if they keep their achievements.
Been rumoured for a while - they want him back in Wales where they can control his game time.
-
Apparently Liam Williams is rumoured to be leaving.
And this will cause some massive problems, keeping players, squad culture for this season etc. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Further more, to see if they keep their achievements.
Been rumoured for a while - they want him back in Wales where they can control his game time.
The players involved must have also known that the club/Wray was pushing the envelope (brown most likely).
Was the Daly deal the straw that broke the camels back?
-
Apparently Liam Williams is rumoured to be leaving.
And this will cause some massive problems, keeping players, squad culture for this season etc. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Further more, to see if they keep their achievements.
Been rumoured for a while - they want him back in Wales where they can control his game time.
The players involved must have also known that the club/Wray was pushing the envelope (brown most likely).
Was the Daly deal the straw that broke the camels back?
You could be right - it was Danny Care on the BBC podcast that I remember expressing thinly disguised 'surprise' at how they could afford yet another Lion when everybody else struggled to keep their existing squads within the cap.
Brown plays for Quins, so I'm not sure why Wray would be pushing envelopes to him? ;D ;D
-
PREMIERSHIP RUGBY can confirm that an independent disciplinary panel has reached a decision in respect of charges brought against Saracens Rugby Club for alleged breaches of the Premiership Rugby Salary Cap.
The charges, which relate to the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, were brought in June 2019 following a nine-month investigation by Premiership Rugby. In accordance with the Salary Cap Regulations, such charges are referred to the independent dispute service, Sport Resolutions, which appoints an Independent Panel to determine whether the alleged breaches have occurred and to decide any sanction.
The Independent Panel -which conducted a hearing over five days in September and October 2019 - was chaired by the Rt. Hon. Lord Dyson, who was joined on the panel by Aidan Robertson QC and Jeremy Summers. Lord Dyson was Master of the Rolls (President of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales and Head of Civil Justice) for four years until he retired in October 2016. He was a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom from April 2010 until October 2012.
The decision of the Independent Panel is that Saracens Rugby Club failed to disclose payments to players in each of the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. In addition, the Club is found to have exceeded the ceiling for payments to senior players in each of the three seasons. The Panel therefore upheld all of the charges.
The sanction that has been imposed on Saracens Rugby Club by the panel is:
a total fine of £5,360,272.31
and a total deduction of 35 league points.
The Salary Cap Regulations stipulate that a points deduction may be imposed in the current season (2019-20) only. The sanction has no bearing on any other domestic or European competition.
The Independent Panel rejected the Club’s challenge on competition law grounds to the validity of the Regulations. In setting out its conclusions, the Panel noted that the salary cap operates in a pro-competitive manner by promoting the objectives of ensuring the financial viability of Clubs, controlling inflationary pressures, providing a level playing field, ensuring a competitive league and enabling Clubs to compete in European competitions.
Under the Regulations, Saracens Rugby Club has the ability to seek a review of the decision by an arbitration body. The review can only be on the basis that there has been an error of law, the decision is irrational or that there has been some procedural unfairness. In the event that Saracens Rugby Club seeks a review, the sanctions will be suspended pending the outcome of that review.
A Premiership Rugby spokesperson said: "The Salary Cap is an important mechanism to ensure a level playing field for Premiership Clubs and maintain a competitive, growing and financially sustainable league. Today’s decision by the Independent Panel upholds both the principle of the Salary Cap and the charges brought following an extensive investigation by Premiership Rugby. We are pleased that this process has reached a conclusion and we look forward to another exciting season of Premiership Rugby.”
The Premiership Rugby Salary Cap Regulations were first introduced in 1999 and can be viewed at www.premiershiprugby.com/salarycap
-
Rumour from a "journalist" that Daly deal, and the amount, was the last straw for many of the clubs.
-
In my view there should be further investigations into the Agents who must have known about the financial arrangements. Should those who agreed them be barred from dealing with PRL-associated Clubs?
Players I can, to a certain degree, excuse as they often just go along with whatever their agents agree with Clubs.
However what happens about the current playing squad and their contracted payment terms, and the effect it will have on the remainder of this, and future, seasons?
It is the fans I feel for. They have been shafted by the Club they love and support.
-
I believe Saracens don't deal with agents? Only the player...
-
The Independent Panel rejected the Club’s challenge on competition law grounds to the validity of the Regulations. In setting out its conclusions, the Panel noted that the salary cap operates in a pro-competitive manner by promoting the objectives of ensuring the financial viability of Clubs, controlling inflationary pressures, providing a level playing field, ensuring a competitive league and enabling Clubs to compete in European competitions.
So if the clubs challenge hinged on the rules being unfair, then isn't that admission that they have broken the rules?
-
I heard that player(s) formerly of this parish, were making enquiries. Also heard that they had to reduce this year's salary limit by £900K.
-
The Independent Panel rejected the Club’s challenge on competition law grounds to the validity of the Regulations. In setting out its conclusions, the Panel noted that the salary cap operates in a pro-competitive manner by promoting the objectives of ensuring the financial viability of Clubs, controlling inflationary pressures, providing a level playing field, ensuring a competitive league and enabling Clubs to compete in European competitions.
So if the clubs challenge hinged on the rules being unfair, then isn't that admission that they have broken the rules?
Yes it is, but if they can show the cap is illegal then they can keep their squad together.
-
European Rugby must have a view. This has completely devalued their competitions
-
Wow.....incredible situation.
Like many other people what confuses me is that presumably this team is over the limit so how can they be allowed to all compete this season?
Given the talent they have they absolutely could overhaul that to ensure they are not relegated and potentially also win the European Cup and then what?
It is a huge fine to be fair. In this instance I don't blame the players. They are not responsible for administering the club only getting the best deal possible for themselves.
-
European Rugby must have a view. This has completely devalued their competitions
How? It has nothing to do with them really. There is no salary cap in the european rugby tournaments.
-
I can see a scenario whereby whether it's an agent or a player in negotiations, if they're told by Wray or a lawyer in the room that the joint company funding is all above board and fully documented with premier rugby, then they'll happily accept the agreement.
Ultimately, it sounds like these agreements are completely legal providing the club make the salary cap manager aware of them.
The player / agent has to assume that the club does their bit properly.
Ultimately it would be no different to a player being contracted for £500k per year, but the club telling premier rugby that they're only on £300k.
The player would have no knowledge of that
-
You have to also consider whether the salary cap manager is fit for his role.
He gets details of the salaries for every player.
It shouldn't be that hard to see if something is amiss.
I.e. 11 clubs in the premiership are having to pay £400k-£500k for top international players.
One club is only paying them £300k and has a lot more of them.
The salary cap manager / team presumably have all that information. It shouldn't be hard to identify if some players are paid above/below market rates... Then if the same club appears to be involved on a regular basis that's gotta throw some warning signs.
-
Good to see the cheating being addressed, but their titles should have been stripped too as they were won on the back of cheating.
Also, certain players now have established businesses in partnership with Wray. They will presumably continue to financially benefit from this and those benefits still not be counted as part of their club salaries within the cap?
-
It is very poor that this was not resolved before the season started.
Are Sarries allowed to continue to play their whole squad this season as if nothing had happened?
How else can this be resolved? Do we get Daly back !!! As if.
-
"DISCIPLINE. HONESTY. WORK RATE. HUMILITY" - perhaps now they will add "HUBRIS"
-
European Rugby must have a view. This has completely devalued their competitions
How? It has nothing to do with them really. There is no salary cap in the european rugby tournaments.
Because their winners fraudulently qualified in their home country for three seasons.
-
So, will Saracens continue to field the players involved’? Absurd, but nothing about that club should come as a surprise.
One hopes it won’t take Prem Rugby another three years to deduct further points if / when they do.
-
The excuses btl on the Guardian are trying too hard....."inadvertent " ...really?
Hard to argue this is ok as its to the benefit of the players outside of rugby. ...if not available to non Sarries players, surely?
-
The Sarries statement includes "The Club is pleased the Panel acknowledged it did not deliberately attempt to breach the salary cap", is this somewhere in the judgment?
-
The Sarries statement includes "The Club is pleased the Panel acknowledged it did not deliberately attempt to breach the salary cap", is this somewhere in the judgment?
So it was an accident then? Weird, it can't have been done unless decided upon, surely?
-
The Sarries statement includes "The Club is pleased the Panel acknowledged it did not deliberately attempt to breach the salary cap", is this somewhere in the judgment?
I’ve been wondering the same thing. I don’t recall seeing it in the Premier Rugby Presser.
I think this really needs a bit more transparency... I’d like to see
- What were the transgressions in each of the 3 seasons mentions; The value they were over and the reasoning given by Saracens for the oversight
- What was the panels view of that reasoning and their full verdict. In particular, the context around their ‘we don’t believe it was an attempt to deliberately breach the salary cap’ comments
-35pts and a £5m fine suggests they don’t really believe it to be an accident!
-
Was it only last week that their finance manager fell on their sword & left. Was that “inadvertent” too!?
That’s an odd word to use. They didn’t realise they were at risk of breaching the cap? They didn’t explain to their players the basis of the payments being to them - & they insisted that players did not discuss their terms with each other?
I assume that the excess payments will now be withdrawn from the players.
Perhaps INADVERTENT will also appear on their grandstand roof.
-
If co-investment doesn't effect the cap, are sarries over the cap then?, which is why the penalties occur. I don't understand what the fine and points deduction are for - can someone please explain
-
According to the Beeb "The club apologised for "administrative errors relating to the non-disclosure of some transactions"".
That's a very poor and slightly worrying attemtp to downplay what's happened.
For the sums of money that are being talked about we are well outside the realms of admin cockups. Amounts like that can only, in any well-run organisation, be made with the approval of senior people, both in terms of approving the authorising document (eg an invoice or contract) and for the actual payment itself.
This isn't a case of someone in accounts paying an invoice twice.
I wonder how the club's sponsors will react.
-
I think the business support to Sarries players by Wray is a brilliant idea. It sets players up for life after rugby. However, it looks like they considered it as a loophole to be exploited and not as a financial inducement that flouted the cap. After all actual salaries do not kick in until much later. But it must be classed as payment in kind if players are given a wedge of cash investment.
The reason it has to be a breach is it is only open to Sarries players and because Wray has the means and therefore anti competitive. I'm sure it is only for top earning players to get their base salaries down to make it look like they are within the cap. So probably not even available to all at Sarries.
It may be a good idea to allow this in future as long as it is part of the cap. I suspect that Sarries would not be expected to make changes to squad this season as they are unlikely to win the Prem from 35 points down but they should not be allowed to renew contracts for next season unless the total pot is within the cap. That means they may have to encourage some players to leave who are in contract.
-
Didn't see this coming.
Competitive disadvantage in the extreme. If this situation was allowed, Wasps could pay their players 10k per year, remain well under the cap and pay them via property....this has nothing to do with setting players up after rugby life...nice narrative but utter BS. It all about Wray's ego.
For all the hate the Daily Mail gets I for one say thank you to them...they should be acknowledged.
-
I think there must be more we are not being told.
A true joint investment where both parties invest and receive income commensurate with their investment does not involve one party giving money to another. At worst it could be that one party benefits from access to finance or the ability to have a more profitable investment that they might otherwise manage on their own.
Even the idea that one party might nod over their investment to the other as a way round the cap is something in the future, Sarries can hardly be penalised because Wray might give someone some money one day in the future.
To get a 35pt and 5m punishment there surely must have been a lot of other stuff provide there was underhand activity, perhaps other partnerships having been dissolved in the players favour or other secret payment vehicles.
Will we ever see full details?
-
I think the business support to Sarries players by Wray is a brilliant idea. It sets players up for life after rugby. However, it looks like they considered it as a loophole to be exploited and not as a financial inducement that flouted the cap. After all actual salaries do not kick in until much later. But it must be classed as payment in kind if players are given a wedge of cash investment.
The reason it has to be a breach is it is only open to Sarries players and because Wray has the means and therefore anti competitive. I'm sure it is only for top earning players to get their base salaries down to make it look like they are within the cap. So probably not even available to all at Sarries.
It may be a good idea to allow this in future as long as it is part of the cap. I suspect that Sarries would not be expected to make changes to squad this season as they are unlikely to win the Prem from 35 points down but they should not be allowed to renew contracts for next season unless the total pot is within the cap. That means they may have to encourage some players to leave who are in contract.
A couple of points - I agree it is a great idea to support players, but maybe there should be a central fund contributed to equally by all the clubs (which may be an issue I know, but it would remove it as an incentive to move to one club or another).
The second point is that if they are allowed to keep their squad intact and then avoid relegation, someone else playing to the rules is relegated. Is it really any different to winning the title by cheating? They must be made to keep to the cap this season otherwise the punishment is a mockery. (those eagle eyed ones will notice I've changed my position on this as I have thought about it!).
-
I wonder if the Club Chairmen will comment. If they were only told this morning I suspect there may be other conversations going on. I can't believe they will leave it to PRL's very dry statement (posted earlier in the thread). EAs found guilty of three seasons breaching the cap up until May this year so what about this season. The clubs cannot be happy that they have been "let go" to proceed through games untouched (yes there is a fine and a points deduction BUT for previous years). That is three seasons of relegated clubs who "may" not have deserved it had the EAs been promptly punished. Notwithstanding the slimy appeal by Wray this is going to run and run.
Also it is against all sentiment here and elsewhere but can I also say the Daily Mail team played a blinder bringing this out because if they hadn't carpets would have been well and truely brushed under.
-
Also it is against all sentiment here and elsewhere but can I also say the Daily Mail team played a blinder bringing this out because if they hadn't carpets would have been well and truely brushed under.
I would normally be saying something akin to "wash your mouth out for saying such a defence of the DM" but I have to concede for the first time I tip my hat to them!
-
I wonder if the Club Chairmen will comment. If they were only told this morning I suspect there may be other conversations going on. I can't believe they will leave it to PRL's very dry statement (posted earlier in the thread). EAs found guilty of three seasons breaching the cap up until May this year so what about this season. The clubs cannot be happy that they have been "let go" to proceed through games untouched (yes there is a fine and a points deduction BUT for previous years). That is three seasons of relegated clubs who "may" not have deserved it had the EAs been promptly punished. Notwithstanding the slimy appeal by Wray this is going to run and run.
Also it is against all sentiment here and elsewhere but can I also say the Daily Mail team played a blinder bringing this out because if they hadn't carpets would have been well and truely brushed under.
Agreed - a good piece of investigative journalism.
I wonder if they are leaving this season to give them the opportunity to cut their salaries this year, whilst holding the threat of future punishment over them if they don't.
-
Salary cap checks are done in June (I believe) so any breaches for this season will not be addressed until next year. Presumable unless Saracens take action now they will be penalised again?
-
Worcester have issued a statement: https://warriors.co.uk/2019/11/05/club-statement-saracens-salary-cap-breach/ (https://warriors.co.uk/2019/11/05/club-statement-saracens-salary-cap-breach/) so I assume others will too.
-
Now that Sarries have appealed i can see the points reduced and sarries will continue playing all the players has normal. Personally I believe we will be back to square one very shortly
-
I really cannot see how Wray can stay at the Estate Agents after this. His actions have done huge damage to the entire sport of pro rugby. He should fall on his sword and resign. How many EAs home games are scheduled to be televised this season? BT should pull the plug on all of them.
-
Has anything been seen about timescale for the appeal? What are the chances of this being put to bed properly very quickly? Will we have more months of speculation and debate only for the powers that be to ‘decide’ that they (PRL) we’re wrong, Sarries are actually squeaky clean, never done anything wrong guv, sorry our mistake, please carry on as you were.
-
That statement from Worcester is great as it really takes the high ground. I can imagine Sarries getting pretty hot receptions at most away grounds from hereon in. Will take a while to live down and I actually feel sorry for their fans who are going to be getting plenty of stick (both good natured and probably quite vitriolic) for the foreseeable!
-
Should be great fun at the Shed for their fans on Saturday!
-
This could get ugly, didn’t we miss out on a premiership final last year, how much was that worth? This could get very very messy. Oh boy.
-
Fascinating situation with one question answered but so many more left out there. What about the current squad? What about recompense for previous seasons losses etc etc etc. I must admit the statement that really caught my eye was that the sanctions are suspended pending the appeal (which will surely come). Do we really believe this will happen?
-
This could get ugly, didn’t we miss out on a premiership final last year, how much was that worth? This could get very very messy. Oh boy.
How much did relegation cost Newcastle? How much has missing out on the Champions Cup cost numerous teams?
How much did it cost us in terms of a home semi two years ago?
How much has it cost each fan who has paid good money to watch a competition we were told was fair but in fact was anything but?
Quite frankly it should get ugly, it's systematic cheating.
-
Tony Rowe doesn't pull any punches
https://www.devonlive.com/sport/rugby/exeter-chiefs-saracens-tony-rowe-3504101 (https://www.devonlive.com/sport/rugby/exeter-chiefs-saracens-tony-rowe-3504101)
He makes the valid point about Sarries still operating the same squad and is therefore breaching the regulations again this season.
-
Quite a statement and can't disagree with any of it. Rather surprising the owners don't meet until January though as would have expected a get together this or next week to discuss.
-
I hope Sarries are not going to be able to exploit the RFUs current financial problem in order to make the sporting punishment go away.
35 points is lenient, it could easily have been 35 points for each season of offence and as said, what is happening now for this season?
The RFU can't let this drag on too much further into the season.
So, if Sarries, have to release players with immediate effect. Where would players go? France? Ireland? SH?
-
Surely the next RFU move is to charge them with bringing the game into disrepute.
-
So, if Sarries, have to release players with immediate effect. Where would players go? France? Ireland? SH?
Not if they want to play for Eng
-
Tony Rowe doesn't pull any punches
https://www.devonlive.com/sport/rugby/exeter-chiefs-saracens-tony-rowe-3504101 (https://www.devonlive.com/sport/rugby/exeter-chiefs-saracens-tony-rowe-3504101)
He makes the valid point about Sarries still operating the same squad and is therefore breaching the regulations again this season.
What I heard was, that they had to reduce this season's players wages by £900K.
-
Another reasonably high profile comment -
https://inews.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/saracens-points-deductions-trophies-harlequins-john-kingston-828640
He gets the inevitable "bloodgate" comments but as with Tony Rowe you can feel the anger at the EAs.
-
Again this makes interesting reading (picked up from the Bristol board) -
https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1191680940701110273
A legal view of the "appeal".
-
Yes I am trying to make myself tired!
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/a-master-of-the-reverse-pass-1324980.html
"At its peak the newsletter had an unequalled 95,000 subscribers, each paying up to pounds 60 a year. It was big money. Wray supplemented his income further by investing in shares tipped in the newsletter. This was in the days before the Financial Services Act."
-
So, if Sarries, have to release players with immediate effect. Where would players go? France? Ireland? SH?
Not if they want to play for Eng
That was what I was thinking too. Eddie did say we would be seeing a different England team going forward. Maybe he knew something :D
In all seriousness, if a 900k saving is true. That is a lot of, expected, player finance to get wash your hands with.
Can a player be registered with Sarries and just play in European games?
-
Are Saracens and SISI linked? Neither of them seem to accept that they have done anything wrong. And both think it’s ok to appeal.
When they lose the appeal, they will have to closedown all the co-investment schemes. Don’t think the players can complain because they all know there’s a salary cap.
-
They had Kieran Bracken (I think, I didn't catch it) who was saying it was a harsh punishment for a technicality and it wasn't as if they had cheated like Quins had done in bloodgate! They don't get it do they?
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
David Conn in the Guardian has calculated that they are £1.78m over the cap, so if they do need to reduce by £900k it will just be a start.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
There was a loophole, they exploited it for at least 3 years. It’s in the rules to notify the salary cap manager of any potential loopholes and Saracens did not, thereby making a mockery of the cap and threatening the integrity of our league.
Yes Wasps and Quins broke the cap due to admin errors that were basically going over the cap by one England credit due to injury/surprise non-selection, completely different ball park.
-
There was a loophole, they exploited it for at least 3 years. It’s in the rules to notify the salary cap manager of any potential loopholes and Saracens did not, thereby making a mockery of the cap and threatening the integrity of our league.
Yes Wasps and Quins broke the cap due to admin errors that were basically going over the cap by one England credit due to injury/surprise non-selection, completely different ball park.
If you look at some of the players mentioned in the Guardian article then I would say it's been going on longer than they have been found guilty for.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
They had Kieran Bracken (I think, I didn't catch it) who was saying it was a harsh punishment for a technicality and it wasn't as if they had cheated like Quins had done in bloodgate! They don't get it do they?
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
I was thinking about this viewpoint yesterday. I'll be very interested to see the first pre-match ramble by BT Sport presenters and ex-player pundits on Friday and Saturday.
I suspect the ex-players will be on the side of Sarries and especially the players. They will quote "short careers"... "maximising income".. "developed academy talent" "Sarries representing EPL in Europe".. "Sarries providing the backbone of England's squad" etc etc.. all true.. but its missing the bigger picture.
I still think the various club owners will want more to be done (I don't think Tony Rowe's sentiments will be isolated ones). £5m fine is a drop in the ocean for Wray and his various business partners. A 35 pt deduction won't see them relegated and there's a very good chance they will still make top 6 and perhaps even 4.
-
There was a loophole, they exploited it for at least 3 years. It’s in the rules to notify the salary cap manager of any potential loopholes and Saracens did not, thereby making a mockery of the cap and threatening the integrity of our league.
Yes Wasps and Quins broke the cap due to admin errors that were basically going over the cap by one England credit due to injury/surprise non-selection, completely different ball park.
If you look at some of the players mentioned in the Guardian article then I would say it's been going on longer than they have been found guilty for.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Fully agree, the decision that only 3 years are an issue baffles me- their squad progression suggests that this systematic breaking of the salary cap has been happening a lot longer
-
There was a loophole, they exploited it for at least 3 years. It’s in the rules to notify the salary cap manager of any potential loopholes and Saracens did not, thereby making a mockery of the cap and threatening the integrity of our league.
Yes Wasps and Quins broke the cap due to admin errors that were basically going over the cap by one England credit due to injury/surprise non-selection, completely different ball park.
If you look at some of the players mentioned in the Guardian article then I would say it's been going on longer than they have been found guilty for.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Fully agree, the decision that only 3 years are an issue baffles me- their squad progression suggests that this systematic breaking of the salary cap has been happening a lot longer
Maybe the 3 years represents a period they have evidence for?
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
Is it not the three years since the last transgression?
-
Good point. I think it may be.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
Telegraph reporting that clubs will consider withdrawing from Sarries fixtures if they insist on review. That would seem reasonable were Sarries to insist on fielding cap-busting players - inadvertently or otherwise.
-
On the Radio 4 Today program this morning, the Beeb's story was very pro-Saracens, saying how an accidental mistake was being very harshly punished.
-
On the Radio 4 Today program this morning, the Beeb's story was very pro-Saracens, saying how an accidental mistake was being very harshly punished.
Radio 5 was similar until they got another contributer (they had had Bracken saying how unfair it was). This guy carpeted Sarries saying that they should count themselves lucky as they are unlikely to be relegated, may even make it into Europe anyway and £5m is nothing as a fine. After that they started to refer to Rowe too, but by 8:30 it had pretty much disappeared from the sports headlines.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
Radio 5 lives so called sports news presenters are not the best informed on anything that is not football.
Early doors today I did not get the sense they were being overly sympathetic to Sarries - in fact the only soundbites being played were by Tony Rowe.
-
I keep reading this "admin one-off accident" argumemt.
One occurrence is an accident. Repeated occurrences looks very much like a pattern.
-
Telegraph reporting that clubs will consider withdrawing from Sarries fixtures if they insist on review. That would seem reasonable were Sarries to insist on fielding cap-busting players - inadvertently or otherwise.
I can't see that would be allowed under the PRL agreement/rules... oh.. er... let me think
-
Radio 5 lives so called sports news presenters are not the best informed on anything that is not football.
Early doors today I did not get the sense they were being overly sympathetic to Sarries - in fact the only soundbites being played were by Tony Rowe.
I agree.. In fact I think their most knowledgeable rugby person may be Rachael Burden presenting the Breakfast Show. I feel sometimes she holds back so as not to embarrass the sports correspondent.
I dip in and out during the morning, around dog walks and getting the girls off to school. I clearly got a different impression from the bits I caught! I think that is quite interesting in itself.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
On the Radio 4 Today program this morning, the Beeb's story was very pro-Saracens, saying how an accidental mistake was being very harshly punished.
Radio 5 was similar until they got another contributer (they had had Bracken saying how unfair it was). This guy carpeted Sarries saying that they should count themselves lucky as they are unlikely to be relegated, may even make it into Europe anyway and £5m is nothing as a fine. After that they started to refer to Rowe too, but by 8:30 it had pretty much disappeared from the sports headlines.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
That was Bracken the ex-player rather than Bracken the lawyer then!
-
David Conn in the Guardian has calculated that they are £1.78m over the cap, so if they do need to reduce by £900k it will just be a start.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
£1.78m over the cap combined over 3 seasons suggests an annual overspend of around £600k. To cut this season's wage bill by £600k would effectively mean releasing £900k of talent as the Salary Cap year starts in July and we're now a third of the way through the year. When you add in paying up contracts, you could be talking as much as £1.5m of talent leaving Saracens in the next few weeks.
If the review dragged on until February, they'll have to let even more go or accept another points deduction (30 by my calculations) next season and a fine of £1.78m...
-
Pages 28 and 33 of the Salary Cap Regulations (viewable here https://d2cx26qpfwuhvu.cloudfront.net/premier/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/16173132/Salary-Cap-Regulations-2019-20-Board-Approved-Feb-2019.pdf (https://d2cx26qpfwuhvu.cloudfront.net/premier/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/16173132/Salary-Cap-Regulations-2019-20-Board-Approved-Feb-2019.pdf) detail the sliding scale of fines and points deductions. Having found Saracens guilty of a combined overspend of £1.78m, the size of the fine and points deduction should come as no surprise. Premiership Rugby are just applying the regulations as stated. For these regulations to be adopted, all 13 PRL had to unanimously agree the regulations.
I do not see how it can be seen as a surprise.
-
I like the idea that it Sarries insist on a 'review' team will boycott games. I'm pretty sure that when the investigation was put in place Sarries said if found guilty will take it on the chin, obviously I miss read that or Sarries are full of it, again
-
I don't think they will openly propose to release anyone, regardless of the outcome of the appeal. They may end up proposing a scenario where they have some players who are excluded from the the GP squad and only play in Europe, I can't see it being accepted but suspect it will be a move they put forward.
There will be some players who are out of contract at the end of the season, who may be released early if a destination is found, don't know enough about who they might be. ED is an odd one, he hasn't played yet and to be honest I don't think they actually need him, so depending on what he has signed up to then he may find himself caught up in all of this as his contract may be one of the more creative ones, given that he moved for a sandwich and the glory of playing for Saracens ;-)
Liam Williams looks to be heading back to Wales, so he may be released early and Joel Kpoku is rumoured to be heading to Saints ,however his salary will be tiny compared to some of the EA Galacticos and hardly make a dent in the suggested £900k gap.
There does appear to be a lot of moving parts to consider, I am sure the EAs have a plan as they will have known about this for some time, my biggest fear is that they appeal and PRL reduces the points penalty as a soft option and a way of keeping the noise down.
-
David Conn in the Guardian has calculated that they are £1.78m over the cap, so if they do need to reduce by £900k it will just be a start.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
£1.78m over the cap combined over 3 seasons suggests an annual overspend of around £600k. To cut this season's wage bill by £600k would effectively mean releasing £900k of talent as the Salary Cap year starts in July and we're now a third of the way through the year. When you add in paying up contracts, you could be talking as much as £1.5m of talent leaving Saracens in the next few weeks.
If the review dragged on until February, they'll have to let even more go or accept another points deduction (30 by my calculations) next season and a fine of £1.78m...
I missed the 3 years bit and the fact that it was a combined exceedance. Still, to misquote Monty Python; "They are still witches, burn them"
-
They don't do themselves any favours. Looks petulant.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7655357/Saracens-face-punishment-no-Heineken-Champions-Cup-event.html
-
To the football focussed media, the amount over the wage cap probably sounds tiny. The entire cap is probably one decent player in football.
-
I can understand why they are closing the shutters and putting barracades up but when you're in a hole.. stop digging... and start shredding paperwork..
The horse has bolted so there's no point in closing the stable door now
-
They don't do themselves any favours. Looks petulant.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7655357/Saracens-face-punishment-no-Heineken-Champions-Cup-event.html
They should be punished with an immediate 10 point deduction :), however that would favour Munster.... what a predicament
-
Is Liam Williams a marquee player? if so him leaving doesn't make any difference. If not how the hell can they afford him
-
Is Liam Williams a marquee player? if so him leaving doesn't make any difference. If not how the hell can they afford him
He's meant to be Marquee I believe. Though that means they need a new incoming foreign player to qualify for next seasons marquee.
-
Its ok saying they will have to off players. These players have binding contracts, you can't just cease them, they have an legal obligation. If i sign a 3 year contract for 500k, i'm wanting my 500K.
Regarding the calculations, I have seen an alternate one that puts the figure in excess of 2m based on the fine.
-
Its ok saying they will have to off players. These players have binding contracts, you can't just cease them, they have an legal obligation. If i sign a 3 year contract for 500k, i'm wanting my 500K.
Regarding the calculations, I have seen an alternate one that puts the figure in excess of 2m based on the fine.
I'm wondering if some of the players were asked to sign NDA's... but employment law usurps NDA's as one is criminal and one is civil.
No player will want to take a pay cut, so Sarries have a major problem
-
Its ok saying they will have to off players. These players have binding contracts, you can't just cease them, they have an legal obligation. If i sign a 3 year contract for 500k, i'm wanting my 500K.
Regarding the calculations, I have seen an alternate one that puts the figure in excess of 2m based on the fine.
2m a year? I must admit I thought £600k was a little low - what's that a couple of players? Even if you took out a couple of their squad it would still be miles stronger than anyone else.
-
You'd think that even Estate Agents would know they'd need planning permission before they embarked on such a contentious development.
-
Saracens do seem intent on lowering the image people now have of them claiming that they haven’t done anything wrong. Did Wray go ahead with his co-partnerships without seeking any legal opinion. He seems to be claiming that it was all above board.
For the players, they will have to accept pay reductions since they have now been found to be illegal.
Premiership Rugby seems to have made sure they had die high quality lawyers on the review board so they must have expected an appeal.
Interesting that some clubs have made critical comments about Saracens. I think I’m glad that Wasps haven’t joined in.
-
Wasps were fairly vocal last time so expect they have commented, in private, to PRL as other owners appear to have.
-
Does anyone know the substance of the 2015 investigation? Did it involve co-investments such as Wolfpack Lager (founded 2014)? Is this where the defense of "PRL approved of this in the past" comes from?
-
On a slightly lighter note, all credit to Paddy Power.....https://news.paddypower.com/rugby/2019/11/06/ed-woodward-revealed-as-man-behind-saracens-wage-bill/
Other perks for players include a jock strap carved from ivory, pitch-side drinks bottles filled with 1959 Dom Perignon champagne and season tickets for Old Trafford – although very few Saracens players have taken up this offer.
-
For the players, they will have to accept pay reductions since they have now been found to be illegal.
Premiership Rugby seems to have made sure they had die high quality lawyers on the review board so they must have expected an appeal.
Interesting that some clubs have made critical comments about Saracens. I think I’m glad that Wasps haven’t joined in.
Saracens have been found guilty, not the players. It's up to Sarracens to deal with the issue. The contract between a player and a club has nothing to do with the PRL judgement in terms of responsibility.
I hope Wasps and all the clubs come out myself, a consolidated approach to this is what's required, not hiding behind someone else shaking your head.
-
The players are guilty too. They knowingly entered into contracts with Saracens. Let’s not pussy around. People who went to speakeasies were knowingly breaking the law but chose to do it. Same with the players. They need to bear responsibility and any costs.
I noted in an article in the Torygraph that it was ED signing that might have tipped things over the edge.
-
2m a year? I must admit I thought £600k was a little low - what's that a couple of players? Even if you took out a couple of their squad it would still be miles stronger than anyone else.
[/quote]
The investigation showed that Sarries had infringed the Cap for all three of the seasons that were investigated and at £5.3M is therefore equivalent to approx £1,766,000 per year. The fine as set out in the Regs is £3 per £1 they overspent once the Club goes over a threshold of £350,000. So £1.766M divided by £3 plus the £350,000 indicates that Sarries went over the Cap by an average of £938,000 for each of the last three years.
I wonder if more has been found in this investigation..beyond the joint partnerships...in their 'administration/accounting' error.. nothing to substantiate it, just a gut feel.
-
Hands up whose been visiting lots of rugby forums today. More than a usual Wednesday.
Me
-
If it is purely the "investments" and, maybe, they have been deemed to be "non-repayed loans" and so covered by the cap rules and so a breach, if they don't make any further "investments" perhaps they will fall back under the cap, pay the fine, suffer the points, and the recipients get to keep their dodgy dosh and then next season all is as before. The Sarries squad remains the same as there are not many better options for the players, and the behemoth that Wray has built rumbles on. The playing field might have been (apparently) levelled but it will take years for the other clubs to catch up.
That would be depressing.
-
If he intends to keep at legals if the appeal fails as he seems to be saying (video released) then the clubs have to consider what they do because they seem angry. Wray continuing will test their metal.
-
Just seen the video message from Wray putting across his side.
He keeps talking about co-investments being outside the cap as they can go down, but if they are safe, low risk investments then you’re pretty much giving a player extra money on top of their wage.
In terms of what happens this year, I would presume all players are on a basic wage that has been declared to the salary cap manager and is technically within the cap. however if the co-investments are deemed to be part of the cap then they will have to stop them and that basic wage will look a bit measly to those players compared to what they thought they were getting and what they used to get. It’ll be like taking an enforced pay cut but legally would be fine as the investments aren’t part of their contracted salary.
Hope that makes sense
-
The players are guilty too. They knowingly entered into contracts with Saracens. Let’s not pussy around. People who went to speakeasies were knowingly breaking the law but chose to do it. Same with the players. They need to bear responsibility and any costs.
I noted in an article in the Torygraph that it was ED signing that might have tipped things over the edge.
But Fats it matters not, the contract is between Saracens and the player, anything outside of that is irrelevant... The responsibility is wholey on the employer, he made the offer, he issued the contract, he is bound. You call it pussying around, I call it a legal contract...wonder what wins in court.
-
Watched that - he is a weasel. Actually that is hard on weasles! The twitter comments supporting him are beyond deluded.
See that Kingsholm looks to be heading for a sell out.
-
Hands up whose been visiting lots of rugby forums today. More than a usual Wednesday.
Me
Dude, sportsnetwork are rubbing their hands on this one
-
Hope no Sarries players have joint investments in it
-
And now they face a £50K fine for ducking the Champions Cup launch. Not that it will hurt them. It's just pocket money for Wray.
Very brief and intriguing extract from an article in The Guardian today:
"It is understood they will be deregistering players for Europe as they look to cut their squad to ensure they do not go over the cap this season."
Full article here:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/nov/06/exeter-director-saracens-stripped-rugby-union-premiership-titles (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/nov/06/exeter-director-saracens-stripped-rugby-union-premiership-titles)
-
Don't Sarries rent their ground from a council.. what must they be thinking now.. then you have Allianz.. who's name is associated with Sarries.. they must now be questioning that relationship...
-
The relationship with the local authority is far more intertwined than that, in 2018 Barnet Council lent the EAs £23m to develop their new stand, repayable over 30 years - remains a controversial point from what I have read.
Interestingly they will also host the new Galacticos of Rugby League, Toronto Wolfpack for their fixture against St Helens in early 2020.
-
I see Wray is saying that a. They did nothing wrong and b. They don't have to and won't be dismantling their squad. Apparently they are under the cap now because the players love the environment so much. It was in the Independent (I think), if I can find a link I'll post it.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
I see Wray is saying that a. They did nothing wrong and b. They don't have to and won't be dismantling their squad. Apparently they are under the cap now because the players love the environment so much. It was in the Independent (I think), if I can find a link I'll post it.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Getting close to the time where the other owners will have to put up or shut up and accept they are permanently second best.
-
Depressing really. A long appeal process, no change in the squad they illegally assembled. Looks like they got away with it to me.
So they won't be in the champions cup next year. Big deal, neither will a lot of other clubs they cheated.
-
Depressing really. A long appeal process, no change in the squad they illegally assembled. Looks like they got away with it to me.
So they won't be in the champions cup next year. Big deal, neither will a lot of other clubs they cheated.
They may well win the Champions Cup this year and next year. They probably won't win the Premiership this year... That's all really.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
The players are guilty too. They knowingly entered into contracts with Saracens. Let’s not pussy around. People who went to speakeasies were knowingly breaking the law but chose to do it. Same with the players. They need to bear responsibility and any costs.
I noted in an article in the Torygraph that it was ED signing that might have tipped things over the edge.
But Fats it matters not, the contract is between Saracens and the player, anything outside of that is irrelevant... The responsibility is wholey on the employer, he made the offer, he issued the contract, he is bound. You call it pussying around, I call it a legal contract...wonder what wins in court.
A contract has two parties. The “buyer” needs to ensure what he is getting is legal. Caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.
I assume players can read and ask for advice. They have NOT signed up to these agreements blindly. They could have a hard d time on that one.
-
I'm listening to the BBC Rugby Union Podcast. Danny Care is very outspoken - it's Rugby's worst kept secret and has been going on for decades! It's worth a listen, but I don't think this is the end of it.
-
Was an interesting listen. Clearly made his blood boil.
-
You can tell he is very angry. Well worth listening to.
-
I definitely don't think 'business as usual' will cut it for the cheats. Unless there is a clear and obvious attempt to reduce the wage bill I don't think anything they do will be untainted.
Also Allianz are a financial institution...this sort of thing should fit right in with how they operate. I can't see them leaving any time soon.
-
Allianz now branded cheats (by association) can't sit too well with them long term.
-
I see Wray is saying that a. They did nothing wrong and b. They don't have to and won't be dismantling their squad. Apparently they are under the cap now because the players love the environment so much. It was in the Independent (I think), if I can find a link I'll post it.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Getting close to the time where the other owners will have to put up or shut up and accept they are permanently second best.
or the other 12 Clubs walk away and set-up their own "Premiership", leaving Saracens to join the French or Pro 12 leagues, where they can spend up to whatever they want.
-
Now that would be interesting. Just raising it as a possibility will put pressure on PRL not to let it lie and hold the cheats properly responsible.
-
Might be tricky with the CVS investment, there might just be some conditions in that deal that would stop a breakaway.
-
Now that would be interesting. Just raising it as a possibility will put pressure on PRL not to let it lie and hold the cheats properly responsible.
And presumably if not playing in the English Premiership, Sarries players would become ineligible for England selection. That would certainly get interesting.
-
Interesting point re Sarries not dealing with players through agents. Maybe because they didn't want agents to know the details of what they were doing?
Very interesting to see other clubs coming out & opening saying what they think. I don't see how this can go away given the apparent strength of feeling.
-
I think agent fees are included in the salary cap, the players can be paid what would have gone to the agent and get more that way.
-
Agents fees plus VAT are included. That's hiwhow we overspent by £42k a few years ago.
-
just listened to Danny Care.
Wow, no punches pulled, nice to see a players perspective on what its meant to them to see Sarries being essentially undefeatable over a season.
-
The players are guilty too. They knowingly entered into contracts with Saracens. Let’s not pussy around. People who went to speakeasies were knowingly breaking the law but chose to do it. Same with the players. They need to bear responsibility and any costs.
I noted in an article in the Torygraph that it was ED signing that might have tipped things over the edge.
But Fats it matters not, the contract is between Saracens and the player, anything outside of that is irrelevant... The responsibility is wholey on the employer, he made the offer, he issued the contract, he is bound. You call it pussying around, I call it a legal contract...wonder what wins in court.
A contract has two parties. The “buyer” needs to ensure what he is getting is legal. Caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.
I assume players can read and ask for advice. They have NOT signed up to these agreements blindly. They could have a hard d time on that one.
Not that its anything to do with HMRC but... if a trader (a player) takes advice from an accountant how to minimise tax payments.. then finds out later that advice was bad.. its the trader that is liable... its not the accountant (Jimmy Carr).
The prices you see at supermarkets/shops aren't actually prices.. they are "an invitation to treat".. As the buyer you have to make an offer that the seller accepts.. but us sheep simply accept the price we see...
Players who signed up for the Sarries scheme can't hide behind ignorance just because a perma-tanned grey haired rich bloke said it was all above board.. the players who said "ok" are complicit.
-
just listened to Danny Care.
Wow, no punches pulled, nice to see a players perspective on what its meant to them to see Sarries being essentially undefeatable over a season.
Do you have a link?
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07t6mvn
-
Interesting that they slightly skewered Care in saying all the players knew it was going on whilst saying the EAs players wouldn't have known about the machinations of the management. Strongly suggests that most knew exactly what they were doing.
-
I think Care says exactly that...they all knew, but knowing and proving are different things.
-
This is a review, not an appeal. Review basically means that they need to show that the independent panel are either incompetent or biased, which won't be an easy task.
To be inline with salary cap this season, they have until around June I think, to get themselves under. So they can keep their squad, and then need to drop under closer to the end perhaps.
Breaking contracts could be interesting.
We also need to remember that if they can stop the joint investments, then that will bring down the bills too. No need to break the salary contract they signed upto when joining the club, but there may be other cotnracts involved.
-
This is a review, not an appeal. Review basically means that they need to show that the independent panel are either incompetent or biased, which won't be an easy task.
Or that there are legally issues around the rule, I believe. I suspect that is where they will go, hence comments about anti competitive.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
The co-investments will simply vanish into the future and no-one will be able to prove it one way or another.
-
This is a review, not an appeal. Review basically means that they need to show that the independent panel are either incompetent or biased, which won't be an easy task.
Or that there are legally issues around the rule, I believe. I suspect that is where they will go, hence comments about anti competitive.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Problem with that is that they’ve signed up to and agreed rules of a salary cap. And a salary cap is designed to control wage inflation and level the playing field between the most and least wealthy teams. It encourages closer competition and prevents clubs spending themselves into extinction to get to the top
-
This is a review, not an appeal. Review basically means that they need to show that the independent panel are either incompetent or biased, which won't be an easy task.
Or that there are legally issues around the rule, I believe. I suspect that is where they will go, hence comments about anti competitive.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
They already tried anti competition, and failed.
A good summary from a lawyer:
https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1191680940701110273
-
This is a review, not an appeal. Review basically means that they need to show that the independent panel are either incompetent or biased, which won't be an easy task.
Or that there are legally issues around the rule, I believe. I suspect that is where they will go, hence comments about anti competitive.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
They already tried anti competition, and failed.
A good summary from a lawyer:
https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1191680940701110273
Also notice later tweets in that thread whereby the local council lent Sarries money for ground developments, when the Club was breaking the salary cap and they couldn't raise commercial loans, are now in the red and having to make service cuts.
-
"They already tried anti competition, and failed."
Oh the irony!
-
Just realised that this case refers to the three seasons before they signed Daly. That means, presumably, they have added to the over-the-cap costs by recruiting him
-
Just realised that this case refers to the three seasons before they signed Daly. That means, presumably, they have added to the over-the-cap costs by recruiting him
Potentially. Cap runs from something like Jul - Jun, so if they dump a load of players near the end of the season, they'll reduce their wages that way.
And of course, stopping the "investments" which lead them to be over the cap in the first place.
-
ED now won't get whatever extras he might have been promised to compensate for the pay cut he took for joining
-
This is a review, not an appeal. Review basically means that they need to show that the independent panel are either incompetent or biased, which won't be an easy task.
Or that there are legally issues around the rule, I believe. I suspect that is where they will go, hence comments about anti competitive.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
They already tried anti competition, and failed.
A good summary from a lawyer:
https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1191680940701110273
According to the Guardian (who is very sympathetic and claim Billy V is a product of their academy - make of that what you will) this will be their defence, going up to the high court and beyond if necessary. The Guardian also feel they have a good case on the 'process argument' as they claim that the Salary Cap rules text is 'sloppy'. I don't think I buy the latter, I can imagine them trying the former. If they win on that basis the future will be very interesting.
The article's thrust is basically that as they produce so many players from their academy (including BV) then it isn't surprising that they will break the cap in order to hold on to them, that Saracens have better player welfare than other clubs and that in 2015 and 2010 Saracens were among a group of teams that were investigated and like Wasps in 2000 players will play for less for them than anyone else...even going as far as to say the squad would remain intact even if they were relegated! I'm not sure I agree with this interpretation of the facts!
Paul Rees is the correspondent. I don't know anything about him. I think I would be more reliant on David Conn in this case.
-
Isnt his other half employed by them though and doesn't he already have a coffee business so who knows where the funding came from?
-
Just realised that this case refers to the three seasons before they signed Daly. That means, presumably, they have added to the over-the-cap costs by recruiting him
Potentially. Cap runs from something like Jul - Jun, so if they dump a load of players near the end of the season, they'll reduce their wages that way.
And of course, stopping the "investments" which lead them to be over the cap in the first place.
But won't they have already paid a majority of the wages anyway? It may be too late close to the end of the season. I suspect they will change their co-investments into another vehicle to make sure everything is sweet. If they stop the co-investments, I presume they will be inside the cap.
-
Players who signed up for the Sarries scheme can't hide behind ignorance just because a perma-tanned grey haired rich bloke said it was all above board.. the players who said "ok" are complicit.
[/quote]
With respect thats utter rubbish. Remove assumption from your argument and remain on fact. Go test the theory, go to you employer tomorrow and ask them to open their books, including salaries of all your colleagues, because you want to calculate their operational costs versus the contract you have in place...see what they say.
-
Players who signed up for the Sarries scheme can't hide behind ignorance just because a perma-tanned grey haired rich bloke said it was all above board.. the players who said "ok" are complicit.
With respect thats utter rubbish. Remove assumption from your argument and remain on fact. Go test the theory, go to you employer tomorrow and ask them to open their books, including salaries of all your colleagues, because you want to calculate their operational costs versus the contract you have in place...see what they say.
[/quote]
Sorry but the number of players coaches coming out and saying they all knew it was happening suggests the players did know what was going on. Whilst accepting that, apparently, the EAs don't allow agents the players have their own advisers (legal and accounting) so it stretches credibility that the players didn't know what they were signing up to.
-
Of course they bloody knew. They just buried their heads in the sand and kept taking the money.
-
Players who signed up for the Sarries scheme can't hide behind ignorance just because a perma-tanned grey haired rich bloke said it was all above board.. the players who said "ok" are complicit.
With respect thats utter rubbish. Remove assumption from your argument and remain on fact. Go test the theory, go to you employer tomorrow and ask them to open their books, including salaries of all your colleagues, because you want to calculate their operational costs versus the contract you have in place...see what they say.
[/quote]
I am not aware of many businesses having salary caps. Your putative comparison question is a figment of your imagination to support your view point.
It is amazing what you can learn if you ask your employer. Try it sometime.
You're digging a hole for yourself. The players knew, full stop.
-
Many years ago I worked for a company who offered a chance to go on a company holiday, unfortunately HMRC cottoned on to this as being a perk and I paid the appropriate tax for the perk (additional income). A lot was made of the Saracens away trips bragging about team building, it was just a freebie holiday, I wonder who paid for all that !!
-
Given that Sarries have appealed, it makes sense that they are claiming to have robust grounds for appeal. They'd hardly be using the "oh, go on, it's a nice day and we're all good friends" argument.
As far as HMRC are concerned, I'm not sure what the extra tax liability woul be. Unless the funding for these investments has come in the form of loans at an artificially low interest rate, in which case you might, subject to the structure of the deals, have a benefit in kind of interest below market rate then I can't see anything wrong.
As for whether the players knew or not, you have to distinguish between certain knowledge at a level that would stand up in court and suspicion, however strong that may be.
I may well get in contact with the London Boroough of Barnet and ask them to take down the large number of Saracens signs around the borough. They never did it for the many football clubs that used to be located in the borough but have now left. Ironically, Barnet FC no longer play in either the borough or disctrict if Barnet.
-
Look, if a player is offered £x plus other benefits with total up to £y & is assured its all above board and not to worry, do you honestly think they would be expected to do their own due diligence on whether its completely OK?
However, given the public questioning of what's been going on and given the fact they would have been going into work every day surrounded by the best players in the country, they MUST have been wondering how is was being achieved.
-
I may well get in contact with the London Borough of Barnet and ask them to take down the large number of Saracens signs around the borough. They never did it for the many football clubs that used to be located in the borough but have now left. Ironically, Barnet FC no longer play in either the borough or disctrict if Barnet.
The local authority essentially owns the new stand until the 2018 loan is repaid and it has a 29 year payback period attached to it. So I guess they have a vested interest in the promotion of the EAs. i.e. demonstrating why they are such a great asset for the citizens and why lending them that sum of money in times of austerity was justified. Now they have to live with the cheating scandal and the fallout, good luck with that.
-
I may well get in contact with the London Borough of Barnet and ask them to take down the large number of Saracens signs around the borough. They never did it for the many football clubs that used to be located in the borough but have now left. Ironically, Barnet FC no longer play in either the borough or disctrict if Barnet.
The local authority essentially owns the new stand until the 2018 loan is repaid and it has a 29 year payback period attached to it. So I guess they have a vested interest in the promotion of the EAs. i.e. demonstrating why they are such a great asset for the citizens and why lending them that sum of money in times of austerity was justified. Now they have to live with the cheating scandal and the fallout, good luck with that.
"The Cheating Borough of Barnet" does have a ring about it!
-
Hymenoptera is right in that the individual player would not know whether his contract with Saracens pushed them over the cap, and, if he asked, would probably have been told No. The player would not be entitled to ask to see the payroll and do his own sums.
What the player could have asked is that, if it's all above-board, why then does the club feel the need to have this "off-payroll" scheme for me and several others?
As said above, unless the player is unusually dim, the scheme should have raised a question or two in his mind.
It's the salary cap manager's job to report the summary details of the squad to PRL, not that of the player.
Finally, I do agree with the comment that Wray is not a "fit and proper" person to be in rugby. Two counts of cheating to his name and a great discredit done to the game of rugby in this country.
-
I can see Saracens taking this all the way, no matter what. Can it go as high as the supreme court?
I am staggered that still a few Saracens supporters believe that due to they coaching, academy and environment that England rugby will suffer and will all should be grateful them.
-
As a 'fan' who has paid good money to hope that 'my' side has a chance of winning, I do indeed feel cheated. I HAVE been cheated.
If Saracens remain in the Premiership, they will try something else and do it again and again. How many 'fans' will feel like me? Would I consider not renewing my season ticket if I thought it as all fixed by cheats? You bet I would.
The other 12 clubs need to consider this VERY hard. Letting Saracens stay in will seriously damage the credibility of the whole league. Why do I say this? Because Nigel Wray is arguing with the ref. Arguing a decision that is right at that. A 10m march backwards is not enough. He is showing no contrition. Quite the opposite. Everything he says tells us he will do something similar again. He cannot be trusted.
Would I bother to turn up for a Saracens game? What's the point? It wouldn't be a fair game. I would feel like the only reason to turn up would be to wave a Cheats flag and chant cheats all the way through the 'game'.
I really hope the Glaws fans do just that on Saturday.
-
I wonder how many supporters will not go to a Saracens game, home or away, especially if the squad was full of all the international players.
I haven't gone to watch a game with Sarries in it for 2 seasons as i knew Saracens were cheating. I really hope all supporters boycott Saracens games, to show this is not acceptable and the integrity of the game has now a large blemish against it. Just because Sarries will find a loophole in the wording of co investment, they will still believe they have done nothing wrong.
We all need to show Saracens this is all very wrong
-
I really hope the Glaws fans do just that on Saturday.
I hope even more that Glaws win by 20+.......perhaps indulge in some "individual chanting" from the Shed ??
I can't get to many games at present and so pay for TV rights - and yes, I do feel cheated - I probably feel cheated on behalf of Exeter too, especially
-
Look, if a player is offered £x plus other benefits with total up to £y & is assured its all above board and not to worry, do you honestly think they would be expected to do their own due diligence on whether its completely OK?
However, given the public questioning of what's been going on and given the fact they would have been going into work every day surrounded by the best players in the country, they MUST have been wondering how is was being achieved.
Saracens might not have dealt with the Agents directly, but every player has one, and they are recompensed based on what the player receives from the Club.
I would assume that the Saracens players must have had discussions with their agents about what to try to extract in way of income from that Club, and the players must have let the agents know what their deals were - unless of course they only let them know about the "in-cap" payments.
So either the agents were complicit, or the players withheld things from their agents, in which case they could be seen to be defrauding the agents of contracted fees
-
Look, if a player is offered £x plus other benefits with total up to £y & is assured its all above board and not to worry, do you honestly think they would be expected to do their own due diligence on whether its completely OK?
However, given the public questioning of what's been going on and given the fact they would have been going into work every day surrounded by the best players in the country, they MUST have been wondering how is was being achieved.
Saracens might not have dealt with the Agents directly, but every player has one, and they are recompensed based on what the player receives from the Club.
I would assume that the Saracens players must have had discussions with their agents about what to try to extract in way of income from that Club, and the players must have let the agents know what their deals were - unless of course they only let them know about the "in-cap" payments.
So either the agents were complicit, or the players withheld things from their agents, in which case they could be seen to be defrauding the agents of contracted fees
Not only agents but all players at this level have lawyers and accountants. I cannot believe that appropriate advice is not given.
-
There's surely only 2 ways these contact negotiations could have gone
1) Wray: hi player, come play for us. We won't officially pay you a lot, but we'll give you some of the books money. Keep quiet about it and we'll all win together
2) Wray: hi player. Welcome to Saracens. We'd really love to have you playing for us. In return, you'll win silverware and enhance your career record. We'll also help you setup a company so that you have your own business after your career finishes. We'll invest money in it together. This isn't a salary so is not directly related to anything in your club contract. We've discussed this with our lawyers and premier rugby, and can offer you £XXX as a salary.
Even now that it's come out, it's a grey enough area that none of us are confident that it won't stand up.
As such, as a player presumably being told that it's all above board, that premier rugby and the salary cap manager know all about it, there's very little that a player can do to prove that it is dodgy.
Even if a player does their due diligence, what do they do? They go to their agent who is paid to review these kind of things. If the agent agrees that an "investment" without guaranteed value doesn't constitute an income or salary then I really can't see any player walking away.
On top of that, it's not illegal.
It's all going to be above board as far as employment and tax law is concerned.
The only rule broken is the contract that Saracens have signed with premier rugby.
I can't believe that any of the players didn't think something was a bit fishy, but sometimes in life, good opportunities do come out of nowhere.
Ultimately I firmly believe that it's solely the club that have done wrong. At worst, the players have just sat back and happily reaped the trophies
-
I may well get in contact with the London Borough of Barnet and ask them to take down the large number of Saracens signs around the borough. They never did it for the many football clubs that used to be located in the borough but have now left. Ironically, Barnet FC no longer play in either the borough or disctrict if Barnet.
The local authority essentially owns the new stand until the 2018 loan is repaid and it has a 29 year payback period attached to it. So I guess they have a vested interest in the promotion of the EAs. i.e. demonstrating why they are such a great asset for the citizens and why lending them that sum of money in times of austerity was justified. Now they have to live with the cheating scandal and the fallout, good luck with that.
"The Cheating Borough of Barnet" does have a ring about it!
This is the borough that lost millions in the Icelandic banking saga, lost further millions in a recent fraud case thanks to their outsourcing and, in a comparatively minor instance, wasted £138,000 hosting the Olympic torch (yes, moe than a hundred grand so someone could run down the road, arsing up the traffic whilst holding a metal tube that was on fire).
-
As far as punishment is concerned, it's difficult.
The contract that Saracens presumably breached by going over the salary cap already has details of the possible punishments.
It was drawn up in the mistaken belief that no one would properly try to wreck it without caring about the reasons for it.
However, what it means is that premier rugby probably can't use the salary cap issue as a reason to throw Saracens out of the league.
Points deduction and fine already levied, and we're not sure that'll actually stop Saracens from qualifying for Europe.
The salary cap agreement is not with the European competition, so they won't be thrown out of that.
Every club forfeiting Saracens games would be an interesting approach.
It would massively raise the profile of the issue and would make Saracens a club that no one would want to sponsor as there wouldn't be any eyes on them if they're not playing.
However, it would likely devalue the entire League to the point that it too would probably lose its sponsorship
-
On Glos Rugby Twitter
https://t.co/theK1ExVgM (https://t.co/theK1ExVgM)
I assume it is tongue-in-cheek...
-
I quite like the reverse exclusion idea; the other 12 leaving and setting up a new competition....if it could be made to work.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
I'm not here to roast the players. They will take anything that's thrown at them in terms of money but if you listen to Danny Care, it seemed to be an open secret that "perks of the job" was going too far.. those "perks" were attracting U18/20 talent and keeping that talent from there on in... which is why they are now.
Wasps have developed talent and then accepted to lose them when another club offered them a bit more money (when their contract was up).. recently, JCW, Will Stuart and Hughes.. fair play.. players will want to maximise their income ..
But..
I genuinely believe the Elliot Daly move kickstarted something in the background .. the straw that broke the camels back
-
What happens about the point deduction if the review and then the appeals to the various courts that will almost certainly follow if Sarries (Wray) aren't happy with the outcome, drag on well into next season or beyond?
I assume the point deduction can't be actually applied until all the legals have finished, but if the legals drag on they might well qualify for next years ERCC, and it could have won it again before the various appeals have reached their conclusion.
-
Blaming players is a moot point but also according to Danny Care on the BBC podcast a "blind eye" was turned. That does not make it acceptable.
There's a request on this clip from 8 Mar 19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdG2NnBj0Fw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdG2NnBj0Fw) by Craig Doyle on behalf of Premiership Rugby for whistle blowers to come forward.
I wonder if this happened?
-
On Glos Rugby Twitter
https://t.co/theK1ExVgM (https://t.co/theK1ExVgM)
I assume it is tongue-in-cheek...
Don't think so. Getting rid and not ordering more.
-
I'm not here to roast the players. They will take anything that's thrown at them in terms of money but if you listen to Danny Care, it seemed to be an open secret that "perks of the job" was going too far.. those "perks" were attracting U18/20 talent and keeping that talent from there on in... which is why they are now.
Wasps have developed talent and then accepted to lose them when another club offered them a bit more money (when their contract was up).. recently, JCW, Will Stuart and Hughes.. fair play.. players will want to maximise their income ..
But..
I genuinely believe the Elliot Daly move kickstarted something in the background .. the straw that broke the camels back
If this is true I don't think it came from Wasps, as talking to a, non-playing side, Club Official last season it seems Wasps weren't too uptight about losing Daley, as he had been with us for a long time, they could understand him wanting to move on and they felt he "repaid" anything he owed the Club a long time ago. Hughes, on the other hand, they were livid about.
-
I still think that some enterprising flag maker could make up some fake Sarries flags. You know, the ones that have the Crescent and Star, then Saracens, then a hashtag on?
#rugbycheats
-
I still think that some enterprising flag maker could make up some fake Sarries flags. You know, the ones that have the Crescent and Star, then Saracens, then a hashtag on?
#rugbycheats
Ha ha - make it happen. You would get 11 clubs keen to get them. Will be interesting to see what the Shed comes up with on Saturday.
-
Well, the good news is that BT are covering our game on Friday, and the Glaws vs Cheats game on Saturday. Will BT let the pundits speak? I truly hope they do get flags made and they appear on BT TV. Let's hope the Shed are in fine voice.
-
I genuinely believe the Elliot Daly move kickstarted something in the background .. the straw that broke the camels back
The interesting thing is, there was a strong argument at the time that Saracens had enough senior players retiring / leaving that they probably could cover Elliott Daly's wages.
Liam Williams was presumably signed to be a marquee player, so there was need to cover the previous marquee players salary.
They did have a lot of old heads leaving in the summer, so it might have been possible to cover both of their salaries without getting further into red.
However, they were probably already so far into the red by then that it made little difference to them anyway
-
Well, the good news is that BT are covering our game on Friday, and the Glaws vs Cheats game on Saturday. Will BT let the pundits speak? I truly hope they do get flags made and they appear on BT TV. Let's hope the Shed are in fine voice.
I think so. Watch Rugby Tonight Live from last night. Austin and Al Eykyn were good.
-
The Academy angle is an interesting one. Sarries always argued that their cap wasn't breached due to them developing and promoting talent from their academy. But these youths were themselves probably tempted with offers similar to those made to "big name" signings. So even the players helping reduce the cap have probably been attracted by dubious means.
-
The Academy angle is an interesting one. Sarries always argued that their cap wasn't breached due to them developing and promoting talent from their academy. But these youths were themselves probably tempted with offers similar to those made to "big name" signings. So even the players helping reduce the cap have probably been attracted by dubious means.
Moreover, did Saracens have the ability to focus on their academy so much by having a salary cap busting squad made of South Africans?
Before their academy was producing talent, they shipped on a bunch of Southern hemisphere players and started winning championships.
This brought them money, a strong fan base, a following and investment.
However, there were very strong feelings that they weren't within the cap back then.
The strength of their matchday squads allowed them to bring youth players into a winning team and build the model that they now have.
But it was probably built in cheating originally
-
I wonder how this is affecting the overall morale of the squad.
I bet those players who don't have a joint venture with Wray or his cronies are feeling a little miffed that they are now being pilloried because of those who do.
-
With the Elliot Daly situation I believe it did kickstart some investigations etc. He may be within the cap due to players leaving but I think the fact that he was another lion, another international and a player still with his best years ahead of him raised too many questions on how it was logical.
Especially with all the ‘he’s on less salary than he was at wasps’ being replied to by Dai as ‘no one leaves for less money’.
That call and response made a lot of people think, okay he may be on less salary, but he’s getting more money due to investments.
I love Elliot and wish him the best at Saracens as he’s a quality player who deserves success so I don’t want to imply that he should be implicated in any of this negativity but I do think that move sums up what’s been happening at Sarries
-
I wonder how this is affecting the overall morale of the squad.
I bet those players who don't have a joint venture with Wray or his cronies are feeling a little miffed that they are now being pilloried because of those who do.
Some of the WC players appeared on the Jonathan Ross show (presumably filmed last night) to be aired on Sat evening... unsurprisingly no Sarrie player was there.
I would think Sarries will batten down the hatches and pull the draw-bridge up.. but you can't help think some players must be wondering if they're losing out on "extra" perks. It surprised me that Goode doesn't appear to have a co-investment with Wray (or maybe the LTD company has been found yet). He is one of the core spine of the squad.
-
Well there will be nowhere for them to hide at Kingsholm tomorrow afternoon!
-
Other interesting things have happened in this 3 year period.
Latterly they have lost two directors, one of which apparently was the recruiter etc.
A couple of years ago Wray bought out the SA investors, ostensibly to prevent "interference" and because of the Rand exchange rate.
This was personally interesting. I was invited by a club mate and Allianz employee to the 2014 EC semi at Twickenham v Clermont. It was top corporate and Royal Box seat so not to be sneezed at :-)
Tiny crowd made it an awful supporter experience and EC won't repeat.
During the game, Nigel Owens used the TMO to check whether the ball was deliberately knocked over the dead ball line from a high kick. My realisation (being an ex ref) of what he was checking was overheard by the Saffa in front and we had a conversation.
Monday morning my mate phoned to let me know he had identified the guy as an investor and I had been talking to one of the richest guys in SA? Surprised he would be worried by exchange rates?
-
Ref Saffer co-owners there was a rumour at the time that they wanted out because of the first transgression and Wray's operating methods. Just a rumour but was from somebody who is now a platinum season ticket holder (who has gone very quiet on me despite offer8many points for a chat).
-
Ref Saffer co-owners there was a rumour at the time that they wanted out because of the first transgression and Wray's operating methods. Just a rumour but was from somebody who is now a platinum season ticket holder (who has gone very quiet on me despite offer8many points for a chat).
I heard from someone who used to be employed there, that there was a board meeting at which a female South African raised the question of financial irregularities and following heated discussions she threatened that the SAs would withdraw from the Club; shortly afterwards they were "bought-out" by Wray.
-
I'd read or heard the same thing. The female SA was the daughter of the main saffa investor who was on the board looking after their interests. She asked for assurances that everything was above board and obviously what she was told didn't stack up.. not long after, the investors asked for their share to be bought out. I think the Saffa investors (did they own mining companies??) quoted a change on SA tax rules on overseas investments as a reason for pulling out of Sarries.
Coincidental?
-
Apologies if it's been asked before, I've not had time to read the whole thread yet, but if they retain the all of their players, then how to they include the future value of the property assets within the cap? I can't see anyway around it unless they sell the properties now or those players are forced out of the squad?????
Anyone any ideas how this might be achievable?
-
This seasons cap transgressions will not be assessed until June 2020. The findings to date against them are for the last three seasons (ie since they last alledgedly transgressed). This season unless something happens from PRL/The Owners they can effectively continue on and get fined again. Stupid but until clarity is given that is how it looks!
-
Have just found this link which I had completely forgotten about: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/rugby_union/513181.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/rugby_union/513181.stm)
There but for the grace of God...
-
Newspaper headline suggesting that other clubs may sue Saracens?!
Presumably Wray will have sought legal advice before entering any co-investment schemes. Will this explain their defence that any faults were “inadvertent”. I must remember that word for future sins. 😷
-
Have just found this link which I had completely forgotten about: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/rugby_union/513181.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/rugby_union/513181.stm)
There but for the grace of God...
Trying to get their away support above 6?
-
I shall enjoy watching the game tomorrow!
-
Watching Austin trying to get an EA to comment will be painful but fun.
-
It's an away match, how will he find one?
-
Having had the "pleasure" of watching the Glaws game - Sarries apparently "used their anger" according to their coach interviewed, this week for motivation quoting "the haters gonna hate and we don't care"
So the players really don't think anything's wrong? The coach thinks the same in order to "use" the "anger"? ffs.....
I didn't like them before this...but blimey.
-
Having had the "pleasure" of watching the Glaws game - Sarries apparently "used their anger" according to their coach interviewed, this week for motivation quoting "the haters gonna hate and we don't care"
So the players really don't think anything's wrong? The coach thinks the same in order to "use" the "anger"? ffs.....
I didn't like them before this...but blimey.
I'm not surprised. That's the thing about privilege, they probably think they earned it and deserve it. They completely fail to accept that their privilege may be due to unfairness, discrimination, and deception.
-
The Rugby Paper today in its editorial and comments by Colin Boag are supportive of Saracens. They believe the penalty to too harsh, they believe that "per se" Saracens' player arrangements were not wrong...and...(.and I find this to an unbelievable view) they state that cheating is a fact of life in rugby, that rugnu attracts people who want to cheat and that all players spend a full 80 minutes trying to cheat!!!
I will not be renewing my subscription.
-
No I don't buy that paper either due to the narrow minded views of Boag and Fissler.
-
That has saved me some money too, supporting one of the biggest events putting our game in danger... Amazing.
-
The Rugby Paper today in its editorial and comments by Colin Boag are supportive of Saracens. They believe the penalty to too harsh, they believe that "per se" Saracens' player arrangements were not wrong...and...(.and I find this to an unbelievable view) they state that cheating is a fact of life in rugby, that rugnu attracts people who want to cheat and that all players spend a full 80 minutes trying to cheat!!!
I will not be renewing my subscription.
Is there some parallel universe where Sarries' morals exist? FFS, that's quite breath taking
-
More pigs with their noses in the trough?
-
Won't be buying that paper again.
-
That's a shame, I used to like a dog walk, coffee and rugby paper on Sunday. Will have to join the others reading things on my phone instead, or maybe take a book!
-
I find the comments in TRP totally staggering. It's almost an EAs glee club. Don't upset the all conquering Sarries. Yea gods.
I then turned to the Sundsy Times and Stephen Jones is just as bad.
They are going to get away with this unless the other club owners grow some.
-
I've not read the article but perhaps it was "written tongue in cheek"?
I think I mentioned it in a thread that I suspected the established rugby press will simply brush this off... they are reliant on keeping good relations with the top clubs.. PRL and the RFU to be able to write articles.
The story was broken by the DM but it wasn't by their main rugby correspondent Chris Foy who has steared well clear of it.. he knows what side his bread is buttered on.
What annoys me is the fact us fans have been questioning it for seasons and yet PRL didn't even think to dig deeper.. but that's the problem when the paying participant is part owner of the governing body..
In my mind.. Laura doesn't need to investigate any other clubs.. she needs to target PRL to see if there are any cosy relationships.
-
Good points BG
Its not like PRL and its people were unlikely to have had the odd thought along the lines "so how come the EA's can afford 7 or 8 of a Lions 23 in their team alongside a host of internationals"?
Fans have been dismissed as hating them for being good. Which is partly true, but its mainly because we didn't believe we were on a level playing field
-
The one thing is for sure Saracens are superbly coached, I really don’t like them but I can’t stop admiring them for their coaching.
I would like to see what they could do with our players, pretty sure we wouldn’t be at the bottom
-
I couldn't believe the way Stephen Jones has been defending Sarries - very much like the SISU mouthpiece in the Cov. Observer
Our Les' latest piece is about opposing the training facility https://coventryobserver.co.uk/news/wasps-training-ground-plan-for-henley-in-arden-hit-by-huge-opposition-from-clubs-and-community-petition-15775/ (https://coventryobserver.co.uk/news/wasps-training-ground-plan-for-henley-in-arden-hit-by-huge-opposition-from-clubs-and-community-petition-15775/)
-
Reported in the Observer:
"The Observer’s understanding is that the much-trumpeted joint ventures between Wray and his England stars, which have provoked such uproar, are not at issue. Some might not have been registered by Wray, for which the club have been fined and the man himself has apologised, but the practices themselves are legitimate in principle and do not contribute to Saracens’ alleged overspend."
"That reported overspend, reckoned to be in the region of £2m over three seasons, relates to previous dealings between club or third parties and players."
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/nov/10/saracens-plead-innocence-premiership-rugby-structure-on-trial
-
"That reported overspend, reckoned to be in the region of £2m over three seasons, relates to previous dealings between club or third parties and players."
I'm wondering if its payments to agents then? Didn't Itoje's agent get banned for something? It might be a couple of season's ago?
-
Its been publicised that Sarries don't use agent....
I said in another thread I smelt and additional rat..
From The Times on 7 Nov:
‘The independent panel’s ruling stated that Saracens, as well as exceeding the salary cap for three successive seasons, had “failed to disclose payments to players”. The details of those failures to reveal the full extent of their payments to players is yet to be revealed but evidence has been presented to investigators about the club’s use of image-rights payments to offshore accounts.,
-
Anyone watch the discussion on Rugby Tonight Live last night with Craig Doyle, Lol, Austin and Andy Goode? Goodey didn't hold back and they all smirked at the possibility of brown envelopes still being passed around.
-
Missed it. Found a clip but not the whole thing. If anyone finds a link to it, it will be gratefully received.
-
Looks like it's repeated at 10pm on BT Sport 2 this evening.
-
Got it. Thanks
-
Jim Hamilton is a joke given his behaviour at Gloucester on Saturday and then on the rugby pod this week. Even Chris Ashton was not that painful when interviewed about the situation. Saracens PR machine is in overdrive and is clutching.
-
What did Jim say/do on Saturday on BT Sport?
About to listen to the Rugby Pod.
-
Jim Hamilton is a joke given his behaviour at Gloucester on Saturday and then on the rugby pod this week. Even Chris Ashton was not that painful when interviewed about the situation. Saracens PR machine is in overdrive and is clutching.
I missed that, what happened?
-
I can’t repeat it my thumbs won’t let me.
-
I've got a bad feeling about all this guys
No doubt about it, Saracens have cheated. Plain and simple.
However, while CVC will be wanting an even competition, they'll be wanting a competition they can grow and that will be worth good money.
With that comes the need to have players and clubs who have a high profile.
I wouldn't be surprised if CVC don't want to remove or at least significantly increase the salary cap anyway, and this may be seen as a way for it to happen.
It's a gamble, but I suspect it's one they have already invested in.
I think we'll see Saracens let off more lightly than we'd all want in the name of "growing the game"
-
But a league dominated by one or maybe two teams is a poor spectacle, especially if that team is a known cheat.
Upping the cap could easily result in clubs going to the wall which is also a bad look, unless CVS are going to find teams (which their track record in other sports suggests they won't).
I suspect CVS will keep out of it to a large extent.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
Totes agree rifle.
With profits non existent, who wants to dip further into their piggy bank..we'll end up with a league of 3 teams.
CVC are partners and aren't in a position to start calling any shots anyway.
-
If the cap was lifted $aracens will find out they are not the ones with the deepest pockets in the league! I'd like to see Wray's face at the next round of contract renewals!
-
There is a point that the deepness doesn't matter, if your hand can go deep enough that'll do.
You wouldnt need deep pockets anyway, every other team owner would walk away or go bust and it would be a league of Bath, Salaries and Bristol.
-
There is a point that the deepness doesn't matter, if your hand can go deep enough that'll do.
You would need deep pockets anyway, every other team owner would walk away or go bust and it would be a league of Bath, Salaries and Bristol.
It would end up a lot like the Premiership in football but without the constant tramping up and hype that the media provide. A league where you know the winner will be the Cheats, Bath or Bristol will hardly be enthralling. At least the play offs will give one team (probably Exeter) a punchers chance in knock out games.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
I was suggesting that it would a league of 3, total. I'd expect others without the hundreds of millions to just walk and call it a day...whats the point.
-
Maybe, either way it would be crap viewing.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
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.
-
If the cap were lifted the game would descend into a ridiculous state of affairs. The only thing worse would be to keep the cap and not enforce it - not that that would ever happen. ::)
-
Saracens step up PR campaign. They haven't yet lodged their appeal - just bought themselves another week. Loz says it doesn't matter they weren't liked anyway.
No sign of contrition anywhere.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50407548
-
But a league dominated by one or maybe two teams is a poor spectacle, especially if that team is a known cheat.
Upping the cap could easily result in clubs going to the wall which is also a bad look, unless CVS are going to find teams (which their track record in other sports suggests they won't).
I suspect CVS will keep out of it to a large extent.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Absolutely. Their (cvc) record is one of distance on this sort of thing.
The fear we all have may not come to pass. I think the other owners are determined, and for all their tame journos, Sarries will be, to put it bluntly, fucked on 'appeal' /review which will stand the original verdict. We think they will get away with it like last time, but this time the will seems to be there. I hope I am right.
-
Saracens step up PR campaign. They haven't yet lodged their appeal - just bought themselves another week. Loz says it doesn't matter they weren't liked anyway.
No sign of contrition anywhere.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50407548
Yet more sloppy journalism in support of the Saracens narrative. The salary cap is £6.4m not £7m. Saracens are entitled to maximum credits but that takes them to slightly over £7m not "significantly over £7M" and Daracens do not have more than 69% homegrown. They have demonstrated great skill in developing players but the salary cap defines home grown as having joined before 18 and they do not have 60% that meet this definition
-
Saracens have appointed a consulting outfit called FTI Consulting to manage the next phases (whatever that may be), and as you would expect all part of Wray's web of business associates. A quick google of FTI Consulting and Nigel Wray threw this up;
https://otp.investis.com/clients/uk/secure_income_reit_plc/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=2129&newsid=1336978
You can see them as a generic email address at the bottom of the document.
Also mentions Nick Leslau who suddenly left The EAs a few weeks ago.
The plot thickens.
-
Am I alone in finding Loz's comments sickening? The way their fans, players et al, attribute the dislike down to envy alone really grates with me.......
-
This whole thing is genuinely putting me off rugby right now.
Seriously, what is the point in following the Premiership when one team blatantly cheats right out in the open and nothing is done about it?
-
This whole thing is genuinely putting me off rugby right now.
Seriously, what is the point in following the Premiership when one team blatantly cheats right out in the open and nothing is done about it?
This sums up my feeling perfectly.
-
I agree totally. The shine has gone, and sense of anticipation is much reduced for me. If they let Sarries get away with it, I may consider cancelling my BT subscription and telling them why.
I also feel Lozowski's comments are really ill advised.
-
I think we should email/tweet our clubs and PRL to this effect. I am certainly not giving any more of my money to premiership rugby (via tickets, merch or TV) until they can provide assurances that cheats are identified and dealt with.
-
Am I alone in finding Loz's comments sickening? The way their fans, players et al, attribute the dislike down to envy alone really grates with me.......
Loz has to keep kissing Wray's ass as he hasn't got a portfolio yet.
-
I agree totally. The shine has gone, and sense of anticipation is much reduced for me. If they let Sarries get away with it, I may consider cancelling my BT subscription and telling them why.
I also feel Lozowski's comments are really ill advised.
Me too.
-
Several things stick in the throat, including:
a) McCall suggesting its not all black and white...so cheating isn't rather clear?
b) the self important attitude of "its just everyone else being nasty"
c) The comments from players and other coaches as if its "so unfair"
d) Hiring a PR Company as if its an image issue
I'm mentally excluding the EAs from my Prem viewing/interest - but if nothings done, it will make it hard to bother with the Prem
-
One of the things that is pressing my buttons is chat on the Sarries SN site about them signing Cobus Weise, Cips and George Ford. It's sad that Sarries now have an entitled attitude, so much so, that despite falling foul of the rules and authorities, their fans feel they can still pick-up and great player who is supposedly disenchanted at their existing club.
Saracens have done a great disservice to rugby. Their own fans may be the most affected. Change is going to come. If it doesn't, our game in England is finished. We may end up with a European league, led by Wray and likely Craig.
-
I agree totally. The shine has gone, and sense of anticipation is much reduced for me. If they let Sarries get away with it, I may consider cancelling my BT subscription and telling them why.
I also feel Lozowski's comments are really ill advised.
Yes, I read the Loz quotes this morning.
"Since I've been here we've been pretty much been universally disliked so it's not really new to us," he said.
"That's what happens when you have success and win championships."
No, achieve success fairly and you're grudgingly admired, achieve success by systematically cheating and you're universally disliked.
Hope that's cleared that up for you Loz!
-
Has Skelton and Barritt left? I can't see them ever signing Cips whilst Fazza is there.. Ford on the other hand is very reasonable prediction.
Ford was the one shining beacon for tigers last season. He has been friends with Fazza since schoolboy days and obviously they have a good understanding of each others game.
Tigers aren't exactly, or have been, performing very well for the last few seasons.
Ford's contract may be up this season so he might be thinking of where to go to improve his chances of picking up medals .. obviously taking a wage reduction in the meantime :-\
-
That wouldn't surprise me either Chilham.
A European super league essentially for the rich clubs or for prospective owners who think they can make some money by buying a club on the cheap and getting into a big money league at the outset.
-
Actually I can see this happening. A possible league could be:
- Sacracens, Bath, and Bristol, then 1 of Us, Leicester and Exeter for England,
- Glasgow from Scotland,
- Osprays, Scarlets or Cardiff for Wales (I am thinking Osprays, but I don't know enough about Welsh Rugby to know who are the most popular),
- Leinster and Munster for Ireland and
- Stade, Toulon, Racing and Claremont for France (again I don't really know who the most popular / richest clubs are in France)
I would think crowd size and money would be the 2 criteria for competing. Maybe that is why they are so obviously sticking 2 fingers up at everybody else, they already have plans?
-
If this is not cleared up then English rugby is in dire straits. Much as I find following the current England set up hard, it does rely upon a strong Prem providing the players
If the Prem ends, or ends up as a shell of a comp or it becomes a Euro league - then the national team will suffer long term.
This needs to be nailed. No club ought to be able to put out basically an international team, just look at the pack, Mako, George, Kock, Itoje, Kruis, Billy plus perm two flankers
And that's a team able to have a "reserve" SRs Skelton and Nick I.
-
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.
-
And on a point of order, if Sarries haven't officially appealed yet, just announced their intention to appeal through media statements, then surely the 35 point deduction still stands and Wasps move up a place??!!
-
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.
Anyone can get to the basic details on Companies house but you need a logon to get to the finer details. All accountantancy firms will have this.
What's interesting is the properties are owned by LTD companies, and the player will be a director.
People who have multiple properties will almost certainly have those properties part of a LTD company and that company then rents them out at market rates.
The big question is whether the LTD companies, where the player is a director, is charging a market rent or whether the property is being rented back to the player personally on a peppercorn rent... which HMRC (disregarding PRL) would be very interested in.
What PRL would (or should) be interested in, is where the capital came from to buy the property. Was it bought with a high street mortgage or did it come from someone offering a very low interest rate loan.. that might never be asked to be paid back and written off as a bad debt later into the future.
-
Actually I can see this happening. A possible league could be:
- Sacracens, Bath, and Bristol, then 1 of Us, Leicester and Exeter for England,
- Glasgow from Scotland,
- Osprays, Scarlets or Cardiff for Wales (I am thinking Osprays, but I don't know enough about Welsh Rugby to know who are the most popular),
- Leinster and Munster for Ireland and
- Stade, Toulon, Racing and Claremont for France (again I don't really know who the most popular / richest clubs are in France)
I would think crowd size and money would be the 2 criteria for competing. Maybe that is why they are so obviously sticking 2 fingers up at everybody else, they already have plans?
The Welsh don't have any cash, nor much in the way of large attendances. They are also rather unlikely to want such a league- derby pro 14 games draw big crowds, they thirst here for Scarlets vs Ospreys, Cardiff vs Dragons. Watching a denuded ospreys team lose to Munster seconds on a wet Friday in Swansea has little appeal for most fans, sadly.
The problem with a super league is what happens when the Man City type owners come along. Frankly Tigers, Glaws and Wasps would be attractive packages for their name and history, and in the long run poor old Nige might find his pockets not deep enough. It would be a case of just desserts , but the damage to rugby would be immeasurable.
-
I think we should email/tweet our clubs and PRL to this effect. I am certainly not giving any more of my money to premiership rugby (via tickets, merch or TV) until they can provide assurances that cheats are identified and dealt with.
Do you know what, I think I will look to do this at the weekend and possibly add BT sport for effect.
-
This whole thing is genuinely putting me off rugby right now.
Seriously, what is the point in following the Premiership when one team blatantly cheats right out in the open and nothing is done about it?
This sums up my feeling perfectly.
I also agree, finding it harder to get so excited about the coming seasons, if Sarries allowed to keep cheating.
Got fed up with football about 12 years, heading the same way with rugby. Will not stop watching international’s but what is the point of the premiership
-
Ditto football - enjoying my team in the Championship much more. Even games and less hype.
-
Further to the earlier post, here is the contact email address for premiership rugby:
info@premiershiprugby.com
-
One of Chris Ashton's points on the 5 live pod was something like Sarries were applying a London weighting due to the cost of houses! But also, apparently none of these deals were part of contract negotiation anyway. In fairness to Ugo, he pushed back a bit.
I am increasingly irritated by the smug demeanour of Sarries representatives as well and am surprised at the reach of their PR, which must be costing.
I don't envy Sarries, I was pleased to see an open style win the Prem a couple of seasons ago (the last one wasn't quite so good imo), but feel cross that they did it unfairly. I feel disillusioned and will vote with my feet. As a direct result, I'm not going to the Prem final this year, which is a bit sad as it had started to become a tradition for me and my lad. I am also not going to watch Wasps play them at the Ricoh either and will inform Wasps. I don't care what name they chuck at me, such as hater, or envious etc. and I know my stand will make no difference to them, but I can choose not to be a part of it.
-
Here's a suggestion. We should all refer to them as The Asterisks in future.
-
Further to the earlier post, here is the contact email address for premiership rugby:
info@premiershiprugby.com
Its interesting to see where their email servers are located
-
Dublin. Interesting to see who owns the server address; J2Global (who own, among other things, the Ziff Davies publishing empire).
-
Unless i am missing something, they have been found guilty and dealt with. They have sanction in place and appealing is a given.
Lets just wait and see what happens.
There will be no European league. Its much more complicated than that and other competitions are quite happy with their current setup. I also suspect Sarries are alone in this. I don't see Bath or Bristol wanting to spend more just because they can, I believe Craig has calmed down on his previous idea's. Salaries should be worried, if by magic the appeal is upheld, I foresee a fallout with the other clubs and like it or not, Salarycens need the other clubs more than they need them.
-
.... We should all refer to them as The Asterisks in future.
Seconded.
-
.... We should all refer to them as The Asterisks in future.
Seconded.
As somebody else said the three stars on their shirts are now to be taken as asterisks denoting they are cheats.
-
They could be "expletive deleted", as in "f*** Saracens".
-
Unless i am missing something, they have been found guilty and dealt with. They have sanction in place and appealing is a given.
Lets just wait and see what happens.
There will be no European league. Its much more complicated than that and other competitions are quite happy with their current setup. I also suspect Sarries are alone in this. I don't see Bath or Bristol wanting to spend more just because they can, I believe Craig has calmed down on his previous idea's. Salaries should be worried, if by magic the appeal is upheld, I foresee a fallout with the other clubs and like it or not, Salarycens need the other clubs more than they need them.
From what I have seen ... There is no appeal process, only a review process, under very tight definitions, none of which applies in this case. No review has been requested by Sarries, despite all the smoke and mirrors, press statements and all.
If this is all that happens, and they carry on as before, then I, for one, don't see the point of attending games or paying for a season ticket. I would imagine many more 'fans' who like to see a fair game of rugby will simply walk away. I know I will.
It will not take many like minded souls to vote with our feet to really hurt those who have money to waste.
If the owners cannot see that this will happen, they must be blind.
-
Well if the review is unsuccessful then it wont continue to happen surely, the changes will have to be made by Salarycens.
I know what your saying but for Wasps to suffer as a consequence of this lot is a tough stance...though I do get it, it does taste bad.
Like I said, I think their would be a backlash from other clubs..or at least I hope so
-
I suspect that most of us watch live rugby because we love the game.
We buy tickets and season tickets for the Ricoh because we love our club.
The Saracens farce doesn't change that.
What I would love to see though it's an empty Allianz park every week with no way fans at all.
It would be nice for all grounds to be empty when Saracens visit, but unfortunately that would hurt the clubs we love
-
To some extent hit them where it hurts. If they get away with it via the review then all fans from every other team boycott matches at Allianz Park, that leaves only their own meagre support base there. Not good for their bank balance and not good for the TV companies to see.
-
To some extent hit them where it hurts. If they get away with it via the review then all fans from every other team boycott matches at Allianz Park, that leaves only their own meagre support base there. Not good for their bank balance and not good for the TV companies to see.
Wray can afford it.
I would put it development teams against them as long as it is coordinated between all the club's. Take a United stand to demonstrate the futility of playing them. That would force PRL to do something as they would be watching their League disintegrate around them.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
Im not sure that many people go to the Allianz anyway, away supporters i mean...well, both actually.
-
Dublin. Interesting to see who owns the server address; J2Global (who own, among other things, the Ziff Davies publishing empire).
Are there some implications I'm missing here? I don't do subtlety very well........
-
If they get away with it via the review then all fans from every other team boycott matches at Allianz Park, that leaves only their own meagre support base there. Not good for their bank balance and not good for the TV companies to see.
But by being allowed to field that same squad, they have already got away with it to a large extent
-
Not large extent - totally!
-
If they get away with it via the review then all fans from every other team boycott matches at Allianz Park, that leaves only their own meagre support base there. Not good for their bank balance and not good for the TV companies to see.
But by being allowed to field that same squad, they have already got away with it to a large extent
Exactly.
The whole premiership is currently worthless. One team of utterly unapologetic cheats supported by a massive PR machine and several high profile pundits, and the rest scrapping for the leftovers.
-
Ok, accepted, but how do we, the ordinary fans, make our anger known to those ‘in charge’?
-
Ok, accepted, but how do we, the ordinary fans, make our anger known to those ‘in charge’?
Email/write to as many interested parties as you can be bothered to do and then start voting with your feet if/when nothing changes......
-
I know Derek and some of the senior team at Wasps follow this forum, so they will know some of us are feeling this way. Is that enough?
I doubt it.
-
I know Derek and some of the senior team at Wasps follow this forum, so they will know some of us are feeling this way. Is that enough?
I doubt it.
I do away games more than I do home games (yet to visit the Ricoh as it happens, but made an annual visit to AP and made it to Loftus Road), so I won't have the guilt associated with not adding my hard earned to our gate receipts, I totally get it that a lot of people would feel that way, but surely PRL would have to do something more drastic if they saw their product wasting away before their eyes?
I'm so disturbed by this whole scenario, that even watching the game on TV has lost much of its appeal.
-
I don't want to punish Wasps for the Sins of the Sarries. I do think a lot of noise should be made to counter the machine that is being revved up to counter the punishment (and a few pundits need to read the cap rules about the duty to declare potential loopholes). Hopefully the review will be quick, and the actual details of the judgement will be revealed, then the this phoney-war will be over.
-
I don't want to punish Wasps for the Sins of the Sarries. I do think a lot of noise should be made to counter the machine that is being revved up to counter the punishment (and a few pundits need to read the cap rules about the duty to declare potential loopholes). Hopefully the review will be quick, and the actual details of the judgement will be revealed, then the this phoney-war will be over.
I don't think they have actually appealed yet. They have until Monday though.
-
I've had a quick look around other clubs' forums and the sentiments being mentioned here seem to be replicated with other club's supporters.
I just hope that the various clubs' managements keep tabs on these various forums and take onboard everyones concerns about the integrity and transparency of this league.. because fans will eventully stop handing over hard earned cash to watch
What I still can't get my head around is the fact PRL didn't question Sarries squad before? Most supporters of other clubs questioned how they could assemble and more importantly keep the almost international squad. I get the feeling that PRL hoped that no-one would raise awkward questions and have been forced to go through this investigation with gritted teeth.
Corporate sponsors tend not to like being associated with dubious sporting practises (unless you're Nike), malpractise etc so it will be interesting to see what happens going forward.
I stilll think they've got off very lightly.
-
Very few regular EA fans popping up on the Guardian where I also post- people who have been so proud of their team.....
However - if they are allowed to play PRem games with a squad built up by cheating - then they have basically got off
Post xmas, teams might be facing the EA's with potentially 9 players you'd expect in a Lions 23, Goode, the best FB in the Prem plus a host of other internationals.
I think the other clubs need to get a common approach to this matter and press Prem Rugby. Otherwise, what's the point?
-
What happens if a team refuses to play Sarries? Would Sarries be awarded a full 5 points?
-
I am a season ticket holder so club not missing out much by me not going, but to cover spend at the game one option for me would be to buy merchandise, or another would be to go but stay in the bar and not watch.
-
EA have soured the whole of this season for supporters of every other club whatever happens at the review.
To me the big question for all supporters at Wasps and all the other clubs is how do you express that disgust at what the EA have done and the way they have acted while not penalising our own clubs
-
What happens if a team refuses to play Sarries? Would Sarries be awarded a full 5 points?
This is interesting to me. Yes, they would get 5 points but would it matter, the whole season as a farce for the 'champions' but having not played a game all season, supporters not once having watched their team play (outside of Europe), no televised games, sponsorship, England selection impacted, players playing for a team that never takes to the field....etc.
All while the other 11 teams engage in a league as usual with supporters ignoring the table in favor a reality table. There would be a major reaction from PRL, BT, RFU etc...
I'd love to see this..
-
IMO, if Wasps results pick up and we have a steady improvement, or even better really hit the straps and start doing really well, that will outweigh anything that Sarries have done. Yes, if the Sarries situation is not dealt with then there are serious implications, but most of all I want Wasps to be the best that they can be and to have the most support they can get.
-
What happens if a team refuses to play Sarries? Would Sarries be awarded a full 5 points?
This is interesting to me. Yes, they would get 5 points but would it matter, the whole season as a farce for the 'champions' but having not played a game all season, supporters not once having watched their team play (outside of Europe), no televised games, sponsorship, England selection impacted, players playing for a team that never takes to the field....etc.
All while the other 11 teams engage in a league as usual with supporters ignoring the table in favor a reality table. There would be a major reaction from PRL, BT, RFU etc...
I'd love to see this..
I would think any club refusing to play against Sarries would be breaking the PRL/Club contract and would suffer as a result.
Whatever the clubs come up with they need to do it as a single entity else PRL are going to bat it away through the covers.
Essentially though.. PRL are the 13 clubs so if 11/12 all want some addressing etc then the PRL board will be hard pushed to ignore them.
I did read that the organisers of the Euro Cup are already on alert after McCall implied they would simply target the league.. Apparently purposely playing weakened teams isn't permitted outside of "reasonably expected rotation/injuries"..
How that is monitored though can't be easy though
-
What happens if a team refuses to play Sarries? Would Sarries be awarded a full 5 points?
This is interesting to me. Yes, they would get 5 points but would it matter, the whole season as a farce for the 'champions' but having not played a game all season, supporters not once having watched their team play (outside of Europe), no televised games, sponsorship, England selection impacted, players playing for a team that never takes to the field....etc.
All while the other 11 teams engage in a league as usual with supporters ignoring the table in favor a reality table. There would be a major reaction from PRL, BT, RFU etc...
I'd love to see this..
I would think any club refusing to play against Sarries would be breaking the PRL/Club contract and would suffer as a result.
Suffer what though, would it be more or less than the indignity of playing a team that got away with cheating..if all the teams did it, good luck to PRL and their contract
-
EA fan on Guardian suggesting "its not clear" what the breech was and that "co investments were not the problem"
Do we have definitive version of the reason's yet (I may have missed it)
-
According to the PRL statement, the Asterisks failed to report certain payments to the Cap Manager at PRL AND breached the salary cap in each of the last 3 years. Brian Moore suggests that image rights payments were made to offshore bank accounts AND were not declared. What are the so-called "co-investments" (there are other and better descriptions than that) are not specifically mentioned in the PRL statement.
-
IMO, if Wasps results pick up and we have a steady improvement, or even better really hit the straps and start doing really well, that will outweigh anything that Sarries have done. Yes, if the Sarries situation is not dealt with then there are serious implications, but most of all I want Wasps to be the best that they can be and to have the most support they can get.
+1, I have resigned myself to the fact that the EAs may get a reduced penalty, if not then they have adequate firepower to still not be dragged into the relegation quagmire. I just want Wasps to turn a corner and not worry about what other teams are doing.
-
That's all well and good until they replace Skelton with Launchbury (hypothetical of course).
We could turn a corner, then they'd come and take our best players so that we will never really be able to compete.
-
Yes, that is a really important point. Taking the players away from the opposition, giving them equivalent wages by whatever means, more controlled game-time. Eviscerating the opposition.
-
I really don’t get the remakes from McCall, we are only concentrating on the league because we don’t want to get relegated.
That’s not going to happen, I think if you take the last 7 years the worst Sarries would finish is 10th, I could be wrong, or is this a feel sorry campaign.
Sarries are not going to get relegated, I should think top 6 is still a possibility.
I’m not buying we could get relegated story that rubbish
-
I don't want to punish Wasps for Sarries' sins, but, and it is a but, I expect us to take a stand. If we do not, then the club will be less likely to get my cash. I support Wasps, but I also support rugby as a whole, and that is what is hurt by them getting away with it.
If they get away with it, and we say nothing, then surely we are complicit?
-
According to the PRL statement, the Asterisks failed to report certain payments to the Cap Manager at PRL AND breached the salary cap in each of the last 3 years. Brian Moore suggests that image rights payments were made to offshore bank accounts AND were not declared. What are the so-called "co-investments" (there are other and better descriptions than that) are not specifically mentioned in the PRL statement.
This was also stated in the Observer last week.
-
So - are we basically saying that the payment of image rights, placed in offshore accounts, was the only material over payments that breached the salary cap? i.e. players in total were paid image rights, but those payments went offshore? Which is not likely to be a mistake!
Where does that leave the "co-investments" then?
It does seem the EAs are looking to breach the cap by any means possible.
-
No one really knows..they cheated and were found guilty, that's good enough for me.
-
Not been on the thread a few days so apologies if I repeat anything.
1) I’ve heard the appeal is not against the punishment- it’s about whether the rules in the first place are illegal (which has been pretty much quashed as Sarries signed them off when the salary cap was introduced) or whether the independent panel have not enforced/interpreted them properly (which I doubt is true). I don’t think this appeal will stand up.
2) In terms of the investments and the fact that it is based on property- Nigel Wray made his money in this area, I highly doubt that these are high risk investments, yes they may go down but his knowledge means it’s unlikely that they will go down. Not every club/owner can do that.
3) House of rugby was very fair, almost too fair as Tinds appreciated the looking after players aspect but said it was only fair if it was a proper 50-50 investment where the players were investing equal amounts into the company and that they weren’t just businesses that held money (Wolfpack lager, coffee shop being fair game as they are actual businesses providing a service). Rob Vickerman did put some doubt on that with his inspection of companies house and the fact that the only asset was a £1.5m property.
-
No one really knows..they cheated and were found guilty, that's good enough for me.
One one hand, yes. But I'd like to able to counter EA supporter fake news
It seems the rights were the tipping point - but I'd have hoped there was a holistic position such that it was explained if direct salaries = the cap, and that there were then additional image rights payments (offshore ffs!) plus no risk "investments" as I can't see how they otherwise retain so many internationals
And, after that, the salary cap regs probably require adjustments
-
According to S.Jones in the Times tonight, Sarries have accepted the fine and the points deduction.
-
No wonder, Heathen, if they just carry on as usual.
They have a 'lesser' team out tomorrow, but there are still 4 Internationals on the bench [ and I think 9 on the pitch - but don't quote me as I looked in haste].
-
According to S.Jones in the Times tonight, Sarries have accepted the fine and the points deduction.
And in the Mail:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7693821/Saracens-make-dramatic-u-turn-accept-penalties-salary-cap-breaches.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7693821/Saracens-make-dramatic-u-turn-accept-penalties-salary-cap-breaches.html)
-
Ok good, that's the punishment accepted. Now I wonder how are they going to get back under the cap?
-
When will they be giving the trophies they stole back?
-
I've just watched House of Rugby.. Tindall is another apologist.. Rob Vickerman on the other hand sees it from the other side and has looked into Companies House records.
Who owns the following company
Show Me the Monye Ltd
Brilliant company name
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08011859/officers
-
Now that Saracen's have announced that they are not pursuing the review I would like
1 PRL to publicly announce that Saracen's decision is not on the back of a deal with Saracens (not that I'm sceptical, of course.....)
2 Saracen's to publicly apologise for their recklessness, at the very least
3 Saracen's to announce how they intend to comply this year
4 The full "judgement" to be published
Maybe then we can draw a line and move forward, much as it irks and leaves a nasty taste.
-
Now that Saracen's have announced that they are not pursuing the review I would like
1 PRL to publicly announce that Saracen's decision is not on the back of a deal with Saracens (not that I'm sceptical, of course.....)
2 Saracen's to publicly apologise for their recklessness, at the very least
3 Saracen's to announce how they intend to comply this year
4 The full "judgement" to be published
Maybe then we can draw a line and move forward, much as it irks and leaves a nasty taste.
+1
-
So, they're saying that at the moment they're not even considering the co-investments that the Daily Mail brought up - that'll presumably be a separate investigation by the salary cap manager.
The breach is essentially image rights which were being hidden in offshore accounts.
So the top players at Saracens have a salary within the cap, some images rights that are presumably accounted for within the cap, some image rights hidden in offshore accounts outside of the cap, and co-investments with Wray which we currently don't if they're legal or not
I believe people have said that over the last 3 years, the breach is something around £2m, and therefore approx £700k per year.
However that's just for the hidden image rights that have been found so far.
If the co-investments are found to be illegal too, that's going to double/triple that figure at least.
We could genuinely be looking at a team that has been working with 50% more resources then everyone else
-
Nigel Wray has been exposed as a serial cheat. How he can remain at the helm astonishes me. Surely the EA's sponsors will be looking closely at their associations with this tarnished club?
-
Nigel Wray has been exposed as a serial cheat. How he can remain at the helm astonishes me. Surely the EA's sponsors will be looking closely at their associations with this tarnished club?
And yet everyone who is asked about Nigel Wray, even those who want Saracens severely punished, say how great Wray is and how great he is for the game.
-
Nigel Wray has been exposed as a serial cheat. How he can remain at the helm astonishes me. Surely the EA's sponsors will be looking closely at their associations with this tarnished club?
And yet everyone who is asked about Nigel Wray, even those who want Saracens severely punished, say how great Wray is and how great he is for the game.
Nobody's asked me ;D
-
Nigel Wray has been exposed as a serial cheat. How he can remain at the helm astonishes me. Surely the EA's sponsors will be looking closely at their associations with this tarnished club?
And yet everyone who is asked about Nigel Wray, even those who want Saracens severely punished, say how great Wray is and how great he is for the game.
Nobody's asked me ;D
RossM, how do you feel about Nigel Wray?
-
Nigel Wray has been exposed as a serial cheat. How he can remain at the helm astonishes me. Surely the EA's sponsors will be looking closely at their associations with this tarnished club?
And yet everyone who is asked about Nigel Wray, even those who want Saracens severely punished, say how great Wray is and how great he is for the game.
Nobody's asked me ;D
RossM, how do you feel about Nigel Wray?
As I said he's now been exposed as a serial cheat and he is also a liar. Ultimately he has been disastrous for his club and the professional game in England.
-
I believe people have said that over the last 3 years, the breach is something around £2m, and therefore approx £700k per year.
However that's just for the hidden image rights that have been found so far.
If the co-investments are found to be illegal too, that's going to double/triple that figure at least.
We could genuinely be looking at a team that has been working with 50% more resources then everyone else
Well - certainly if co-investments are included - its cheating of the first order as such perks are not available unless you work for the EA's, and so are part of the benefits paid/available to EA plays and EA players alone
That any team can field at full strength around 9 of anyone's Lions 23 suggests something is very wrong with the system.
-
Seems to me the RFU need to find a way to assess a teams compliance with the cap before they start the season. Otherwise we end up with the slightly farcical situation we now have where a team gains points whilst still in breach of the cap.
-
Seems to me the RFU need to find a way to assess a teams compliance with the cap before they start the season. Otherwise we end up with the slightly farcical situation we now have where a team gains points whilst still in breach of the cap.
This 100%
As McCall is quoted as saying no change this season.....so a cheater squad can play on.
-
Multiple reports circulating that the EAs will not appeal as they fear the review may give rise to an even heftier fine and deduction, which offers up the question what have their consultants highlighted that would cause concern beyond the current position? In addition most major dailies are reporting that there is a staff meeting, players and officials on Wednesday, apparently to discuss the way forward. Added to the rumours that they will cut their squad, this will prove to be a most interesting week.
I can only think that if in contract players are cut then that would be a massive legal issue in itself, terminating a player who is in contract would mean severance would kick in and that would cost further millions, I cannot see them cutting academy products as Wray's defence is based on that aspect of their development programme and how 'kind' he has been to England. If any in contract players are cut (a massive IF), it would have to be based on those players who have the least amount of time left, however tempered with earnings as that will drive the severance number, which I expect will be a worry given the club's massive debt pile.
I do feel that in order for the EAs to recover any modicum of credibility from this whole disastrous episode, then they will suck up the punishment and have to make some sort of squad reduction concession. At face value Wray appears to be a confident and 'couldn't care less' kind of character. However given his alleged love of the game, I am sure that he won't want to be documented in rugby history as being the head of the rotting fish that is the biggest cheating scandal in the history of the English professional game since its inception. Will he even be there after this, or will a sword be fallen on?
-
If you have a large squad and were very sneaky, could you not have a core of maybe 6-8 players who you only play in Europe and Premiership Rugby Cup games, ensuring they do not play for and are not included in the Premiership squad?
-
He will be there. He is like a a dose of gonorrhoea you can't shake. Be honest, the club would not exist without him and now he has stained it who would step in? Even if he took a step back, it would be a Putin type sabbatical whilst a puppet ran it, followed by an unwelcome return.
I want to see that squad reduced now, and frankly I don't give a toss if players get shafted, they all knew the score. I fear they will be given the promise of a bung later rather than being told they are not able to play. The coinvestments have not even been considered, a dead rat on top of a few live ones scurrying under the surface. No amount of tame journos will save this one, fans need to make themselves heard at the games, at the post match on BT, in the Rugby Paper, if anyone still buys it after their paid for services as Sarries' PR.
Singleton played for them yesterday, another Billy type pinching of a young international.
-
Ok, so let's take this at face value for a moment.
Let's assume they've accepted that they've cheated. They pay the fine, they take the points deduction and they bring their squad back under the salary cap.
I'm winning to accept that there's special dispensation to allow them to pay off contracts without being forced to pay a full salary cap fine again for the severance pay
So, who and how many would they need to release from the squad before we're happy to believe that they're within the cap?
Even if they dropped Daly, Williams, Farrell (for example) I'm not sure that I'd believe they're within the cap, even though those 3 probably earn over £1.5 million per year between them
-
If you have a large squad and were very sneaky, could you not have a core of maybe 6-8 players who you only play in Europe and Premiership Rugby Cup games, ensuring they do not play for and are not included in the Premiership squad?
I think even non playing staff are included in the cap, aren't they?
-
Wray's defence is based on that aspect of their development programme and how 'kind' he has been to England.
Good job England didn't win the World Cup then. Another trophy tainted.
-
Terms in the salary cap rules include:
"Competition" means any game in the Gallagher Premiership, Premiership Rugby Shield, Premiership Rugby 7s, Premiership Rugby Cup, European Rugby Champions Cup or European Rugby Challenge Cup (as such rugby competitions may be renamed or replaced), which involves any of the Clubs;
Not found anything yet to confirm this (and really should be working so will have to read more later) but it looks as though the intention is that any players in any of these competitions are counted within the cap.
-
Like a steroid user, just stopping does not make the artificially induced muscle mass vanish immediately, so Sarries will still have their mighty squad for the foreseeable.
If they reduce remuneration to top players to be below the cap are players going to object? Take legal action (when on balance of probabilities they might be seen to have been complicit in the cap breach), leave? Where would they go, it has to be England if they want to play for England, but who has space under the cap in the next couple of years to take them without getting rid of players (those players have contracts too).
The players might just have to lump it, Wray will get to cut his costs to offset against the fine, and in a couple of years with new players coming through the current top players might not have the same clout.
This means that for the next few years we have a tainted competition.
Anyone know if they are going to publish the actual report on what they were up to?
-
It's just said on Radio 5 that the report is unlikely to be released.
-
Could the Sarries team of yesterday that got dismantled by Racing be an indication of the level where they might of been if they hadn't cheated the cap?
Obviously they would have had some of their England players even within the cap but they were so far from the french team in every area, you have to start wondering what the last few years in the Prem would have looked like without their cheating.....
-
If you have a large squad and were very sneaky, could you not have a core of maybe 6-8 players who you only play in Europe and Premiership Rugby Cup games, ensuring they do not play for and are not included in the Premiership squad?
I think even non playing staff are included in the cap, aren't they?
No - The salary cap only includes players in the senior squad
Trading figures were released for all clubs for the season before last and amazingly Wuss had 1 of the highest wage bills at around £12m but that would be for the whole club.. players, management, staff etc.
But.. this highlights another massive loophole.. what's to stop a club employing a players wife/girlfriend within the club on a ludricous wage for filling in some spreadsheets 2 days a week.
The PRL has no jurisdiction to inspect players' bank accounts so the salary cap is only really constrained by what a club as a whole can afford. PRL can only ask to see whart money is going out relating to players.. it can''t ask to see what is coming in to players' bank accounts.. and the players will never sign up to that
-
4.2b
the total amounts paid or payable provided or to be provided as Salary in that Salary
Cap Year by or on behalf of a Club or a Connected Party of the Club in respect of its
Senior Players and Academy Players or any Connected Party of those Players in the
form of the spreadsheet at Schedule 6;
Connected party for the players is:
a spouse or civil partner or any other person living with that Player
in an enduring family relationship;
children or step-children;
siblings; and
parents;
Ergo, Saracens will be employing players' children's gerbils for something by this time next year.
-
Blimey.. so PRL did really think about how payments could be made to players if it includes family etc.
Image rights payments have been mentioned. What are they?
-
Blimey.. so PRL did really think about how payments could be made to players if it includes family etc.
Image rights payments have been mentioned. What are they?
Manila envelopes stuffed with £50 notes and hand carried to the Cayman Islands?
-
For those of you having trouble sleeping this site is always interesting.
Good stuff on the legals involved in reasonably understandable English.
http://rugbyandthelaw.com/sports-law-blog/
-
Make sure you have a bucket to puke in before opening and reading Wray's ststement on dropping any appeal.
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/saracens-why-were-not-appealing-salary-cap-punishment
-
Has been officially confirmed that Saracens WILL NOT be appealing.
Wray quoted as ‘doing the wrong thing for the right reasons’. Still trying to push the player welfare and investment stuff. I do appreciate it’s a good thing to make sportsmen well equipped for retirement but think financially, it should be kept until retirement.
Would be interesting to see what the fallout is with their current squad most likely being outside the cap and also how quick Sarries will recoup those remaining lost points.
-
Yippee - in 10th place now :)
-
Onwards and upwards ;D
-
2.3 in the rules cover the duty to report:
"any potential or actual loopholes, lacunae or errors in the Regulations"
I presume he was so involved in attempting to do the right thing by his wonderful club "family" and rugby as a whole, that he forgot to check the page numbers an missed the page with this on.
-
I gather they (Saracens and PRL if I get the reporting correct) have confirmed that they are now within the cap...which is impressive seeing as the added several high profile players since last season. Riiiiight, of course they are.
-
"A director will be appointed to the board to oversee a new governance regime, designed to prevent the club breaching salary cap rules again."
Or to put it another way, to ensure that anything over the cap is better concealed in future.
-
"A director will be appointed to the board to oversee a new governance regime, designed to prevent the club breaching salary cap rules again."
Or to put it another way, to ensure that anything over the cap is better concealed in future.
A month after a director responsible for this left! Hmmm.
-
Did I miss this part happening, as they suck up the punishment....?
'Wray said the club "made mistakes" and accepted the penalties "with humility".'
Not sure I have seen humility ever being shown, I don't believe he does humble?
-
He wasn't very humble then the punishment was first announced!!!
-
Sounds as if the report will never see the light of day, conveniently this protects the PRL from being exposed as not being up to it having failed to spot "the bl%%%%%g obvious" for several years.
-
Sounds as if the report will never see the light of day, conveniently this protects the PRL from being exposed as not being up to it having failed to spot "the bl%%%%%g obvious" for several years.
Exactly what I've been thinking..
But who gets to review PRL?
-
They should appoint an external adjudicator to chair a committee to see that all is above board, maybe someone of high standing from another sport, how about Harry Redknapp?
-
And the lack of publication is already being used by EA supporters to muddy the waters as if nothing really bad had been done. Alongside the meme of "lets just get on with it" as if that's everything closed off
As noted above, steroid use will have benefits long after stopping. And unless the EAs have to restructure their squad, they benefit from cheating
Its not - as stated by fans - "brave" to carry on in the face of criticism, especially if that criticism is valid. And it is
-
In other news Vlad the Impaler would like to put some unfortunate mis-understandings involving the use of sticks behind him....
-
The whole thing is total bullshit. PRL really have no teeth and have no desire to gain any. The EAs will continue as previously ignoring all and breaking new rules as Wray sees fit. Their meeting on Wednesday will probably be to advise those whose finances have been compromised how it will be made good (how many of your relatives wish to be employed?). What really astounds me is the silence from the other owners/boards.
This has completely devalued the Premiership AND the Heineken. I know Europe has said that the EAs have not cheated THEIR competition BUT they cheated to get in and seeded three seasons running. Whole lot stinks and will happen again but we will probably not learn about it unless some young journalist picks something up and runs with it.
-
Saracens schedule crisis talks with players and staff as they prepare to drop appeal against fine and points penalty
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/11/17/saracens-schedule-crisis-talks-players-staff-prepare-drop-appeal/
Saracens’ players and staff have arranged a crisis summit with the club expected to abandon plans to demand a review over their £5.4 million fine and 35-point penalty for salary-cap breaches.
The deadline with authorities for requesting any appeal is on Monday and, while the club remain staunch in their belief that the sanctions are “heavy-handed”, staff are said to be increasingly anxious to draw a line under the saga.
Director of rugby Mark McCall said the appeal decision was a matter for the club’s board on Sunday night, but he confirmed that he and the team would meet to discuss “where we go from here” on Wednesday.
If, as expected, the punishment is enforced without protest on Monday, the back-to-back title winners and European champions will face renewed scrutiny to prove they have rebalanced the books to fall within this season’s salary limits.
Saracens sent their first tranche of financial documents to auditors before the season kicked off, The Telegraph understands, but chairman Nigel Wray still has “active” investments with at least one of the players involved, according to Companies House.
There are 16 categories of expenditure in which the club can make savings now to fall within the salary-cap rules. The club are most likely to abandon the investments rather than dramatically trim the squad. Shortly after the punishments were announced, Wray said players would not have to be sold.
However, the scandal is said to have had a devastating impact on squad morale, and players and staff will gather this week to thrash out how they plan to avoid relegation from -22 points.
An under-strength line-up was torn apart 30-10 by Racing 92 in the European Champions Cup on Sunday, but England stars including Owen Farrell, Maro Itoje, Billy and Mako Vunipola – whose co-investment partnerships with Wray are at the heart of the scandal – are due to return for the away Premiership match against Bath. “They want to come back, they want to play, they want to help their team,” said McCall. “This team has been together a long time, the relationships between the players and the staff are strong. We all care about it. Of course, we are all bothered by it.
“On Wednesday we will have our first proper conversation about where we go from here.”
Saracens’ apparent U-turn is a surprise to some after Wray described the punishment on Nov 5 as “absolutely devastating”.
McCall, who says he wishes the full judgment would come out, refused to comment on claims Saracens had already decided to abandon any review, adding: “I probably know what we’re going to do but I’m not going to tell you. It’s not my decision to make. I’m getting on with trying to get the best out of this group of players. It’s a legal, technical decision whether you appeal or not. You’ve got to have grounds. I’ll leave that to people much cleverer than me.”
Premiership Rugby’s investigations were thought to have centred around Wray’s involvements in companies such as VunProp Ltd (the Vunipola brothers), Faz Investments Ltd (Farrell), Wiggy9 Ltd (Richard Wigglesworth) and MN Property Solutions Ltd (Itoje).
While the appeals process expired, the sanctions were initially suspended. The points penalty will come into immediate effect when Saracens confirm the decision, but Premiership Rugby is likely to allow more time to pay the fine.
Saracens, third in the standings on 13 points, a point behind leaders Bristol, will sit on -22 points, 26 adrift of bottom club Leicester.
An independent panel found the club had not disclosed payments to players in each of the 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 seasons, and had also exceeded the ceiling for payments to senior players.
The expected about-turn over an appeal is said to have been fuelled by a desire to help McCall plan for the season. With the deduction enforced, he will continue to sacrifice team selection in Europe to ensure the club has a chance to stay afloat.
-
Saracens accept 35 point deduction.
Plans to ring-fence the Premiership to commence in 3...2..1..
-
Thanks for that
However, if no players are removed from the squad....it just ends up being an embarrassment rather than providing for a level playing field
-
The whole thing is total bullshit. PRL really have no teeth and have no desire to gain any. The EAs will continue as previously ignoring all and breaking new rules as Wray sees fit. Their meeting on Wednesday will probably be to advise those whose finances have been compromised how it will be made good (how many of your relatives wish to be employed?). What really astounds me is the silence from the other owners/boards.
Other owners/boards will have been desperately trying to make sure that they haven't done anything out of the ordinary.. so they will be looking at lease car deals.. reduced rental properties, other benefits that might be construed as income.
I damn sure Wray and Sarries aren't going to lie down.. They'll let this blow over and then start targetting other clubs.
As to the PRL report.. it will only take one whistleblower working in admin somewhere.. be that at PRL or at one of the other 12 PRL clubs..
-
Can the other 11 clubs gang-up to get them relegated and then vote for ring-fencing?
-
It never rains but it pours...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/11/18/saracens-facing-loss-sponsors-following-salary-cap-punishments/
Saracens' chief sponsor Allianz wishes to hold talks to discuss their future commitment following the club's salary cap breach, putting their seven-year association with the north London club at risk.
Behind the paywall, it may be natural speculation of course...
-
Can the other 11 clubs gang-up to get them relegated and then vote for ring-fencing?
As the other 11 (12) clubs have a combined majority shareholding in PRL I think it is entirely reasonable that further announcement will follow in the next couple of weeks or so. Derek is certainly both aware and sympathetic to the views of the majority of rugby supporters.
-
Eddie's worried it could disrupt England:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50461381
Anyone else read that and think it sounds like a deal may be being struck with the RFU to ensure a good chunk of their England players will be made available to Sarries during the 6N to "compensate" for the points deduction in exchange for them dropping their objection? So hypothetically Itoje, Kruis, Billy and Spencer allowed to play against Wasps on the weekend England play Ireland with Launchbury, Shields and Robson brought in only to be dropped again once the season is done?
-
It never rains but it pours...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/11/18/saracens-facing-loss-sponsors-following-salary-cap-punishments/
Saracens' chief sponsor Allianz wishes to hold talks to discuss their future commitment following the club's salary cap breach, putting their seven-year association with the north London club at risk.
Behind the paywall, it may be natural speculation of course...
Saracens' chief sponsor Allianz wishes to hold talks to discuss their future commitment following the club's salary cap breach, putting their seven-year association with the north London club at risk.
On Monday, Saracens confirmed that they will be accepting the 35-point penalty and £5.36million fine for breaching Premiership Rugby's salary cap regulations. Allianz has given no guarantees for their future sponsorship of the club and its stadium, Allianz Park.
The future partnership between the two parties will be dependent on Saracens assuring the multi-national financial services provider that they have a "shared understanding" of the importance of "transparency and integrity".
The current sponsorship deal runs until 2021, having been extended in December 2017.
Allianz told MailOnline in a statement: "The independent disciplinary panel set up by Premiership Rugby has ruled on the charges brought against Saracens Rugby Club and Saracens have accepted the consequences. We respect that process and have no comment on it.
"Allianz is a long time sponsor but is not a member of any executive or supervisory boards of Saracens. The financial decisions taken in relation to the remuneration of the players are taken by the club’s officials and Allianz has played no part in this process.
"At Allianz we act with transparency and integrity and living up to these high standards is very important to us. We will be holding discussions with the club to confirm this shared understanding and commitment going forward.'
Nigel Wray accepted in his statement that he should have consulted with Premiership Rugby's (PRL) salary cap manager before entering into co-investment partnerships with players.
Wray also added: “We will shortly introduce robust independent governance measures acceptable to all, including the appointment to the Saracens board of a director, who will oversee a new governance regime. I will continue as always to support the club financially going forwards to ensure there is no financial instability or uncertainty.”
Although he insisted that the club is complying with the salary cap this season and will "continue to work transparently with Premiership Rugby in this regard", Allianz seems to want tangible assurances before committing to any future sponsorship.
Telegraph Sport has approached Saracens' smaller sponsors for comment.
-
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.
-
It never rains but it pours...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/11/18/saracens-facing-loss-sponsors-following-salary-cap-punishments/
Saracens' chief sponsor Allianz wishes to hold talks to discuss their future commitment following the club's salary cap breach, putting their seven-year association with the north London club at risk.
Behind the paywall, it may be natural speculation of course...
Here you go..
Saracens' chief sponsor Allianz wishes to hold talks to discuss their future commitment following the club's salary cap breach, putting their seven-year association with the north London club at risk.
On Monday, Saracens confirmed that they will be accepting the 35-point penalty and £5.36million fine for breaching Premiership Rugby's salary cap regulations. Allianz has given no guarantees for their future sponsorship of the club and its stadium, Allianz Park.
The future partnership between the two parties will be dependent on Saracens assuring the multi-national financial services provider that they have a "shared understanding" of the importance of "transparency and integrity".
The current sponsorship deal runs until 2021, having been extended in December 2017.
Allianz told MailOnline in a statement: "The independent disciplinary panel set up by Premiership Rugby has ruled on the charges brought against Saracens Rugby Club and Saracens have accepted the consequences. We respect that process and have no comment on it.
"Allianz is a long time sponsor but is not a member of any executive or supervisory boards of Saracens. The financial decisions taken in relation to the remuneration of the players are taken by the club’s officials and Allianz has played no part in this process.
"At Allianz we act with transparency and integrity and living up to these high standards is very important to us. We will be holding discussions with the club to confirm this shared understanding and commitment going forward.'
Nigel Wray accepted in his statement that he should have consulted with Premiership Rugby's (PRL) salary cap manager before entering into co-investment partnerships with players.
Wray also added: “We will shortly introduce robust independent governance measures acceptable to all, including the appointment to the Saracens board of a director, who will oversee a new governance regime. I will continue as always to support the club financially going forwards to ensure there is no financial instability or uncertainty.”
Although he insisted that the club is complying with the salary cap this season and will "continue to work transparently with Premiership Rugby in this regard", Allianz seems to want tangible assurances before committing to any future sponsorship.
Telegraph Sport has approached Saracens' smaller sponsors for comment.
Meanwhile, Eddie Jones fears some Saracens players could skip England's Six Nations campaign to help their club avoid Premiership relegation.
Jones selected six Saracens for the World Cup final in Yokohama, led by captain Owen Farrell. Mako and Billy Vunipola, Jamie George, Maro Itoje and Elliot Daly - who is yet to play for the club after his summer move from Wasps - were all part of the matchday squad.
The quote by Eddie is revealing.. as an international coach he can pick whoever he likes as long as the games are within the international window.. A player can refuse to be picked but then presumably that player will be kicked out of the EPS.. or does EJ have a cosy relationshio with Sarries.. why on earth would you take Jack Singleton?
I noticed EJ is plying his book at any media outlet that he can find..
-
Brian Moore in todays Torygraph
"So, Saracens are not to continue their appeal against the £5.4 million fine and 35-point deduction for not declaring income and breaking the salary cap for three seasons. This is not surprising for anyone who knows much about the procedural niceties of the case and given the sanction was handed down by a very experienced and highly qualified independent tribunal. It does seem to have come as a bit of a shock to some, who are trying to claim that this move says nothing about the merits of Saracens’ case. Evidently, it is purely on playing grounds and does not dent the claim that Saracens did nothing wrong, bar a bit of administrative misunderstanding.
Sure; and if you believe that you probably think Prince Andrew is a virgin."
Brilliant
-
Brian says it how it is..good on him.
The telegraph is a non story of huge proportions, meeting to ensure alignment..blah.
-
Eddie's worried it could disrupt England:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50461381
Anyone else read that and think it sounds like a deal may be being struck with the RFU to ensure a good chunk of their England players will be made available to Sarries during the 6N to "compensate" for the points deduction in exchange for them dropping their objection? So hypothetically Itoje, Kruis, Billy and Spencer allowed to play against Wasps on the weekend England play Ireland with Launchbury, Shields and Robson brought in only to be dropped again once the season is done?
Urgh, I read it like that too. Sounds like EJ is preparing to not pick Saracens players in the 6 Nations if they need them to key matches in that window. Hope thats purely a pessimistic reading of an ambiguous statement....
-
So if EA players are not picked does that mean a reduction in funding due? Similar to the Haskell toe!
-
Or if Leicester, Bath or Us happen to be in a relegation battle with the Cheats will their England players be excused too? It stinks.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
If they were, thats 125k they miss out on...oh wait I forgot, it doesn't matter to them..
-
It’s said - by Saracens’ new PR advisers no doubt - that they are compliant with the cap this season so no further issues. How did they manage to do that - reduce the payments to players?
-
.... How did they manage to do that - reduce the payments to players?
They have planted a magic money tree in each company's garden and as plants aren't mentioned under the Salary Cap rules it's all ok.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
Not playing for England really stinks. Clubs have been fined for not making players available for international duty (think it’s WR rules) if Sarries didn’t want all these international players missing, maybe they should’ve have broken the cap to sign them?
-
I cannot make up my mind whether Eddie Jones really believes that is a possibility or whether it is just another controversial headline designed to keep his profile high whilst he pumps his book?
If he really believes it is a possibility then it could just be a warning shot across the bows of the RFU to ensure they start talking to the players.
It all really stinks though. On the R5 Live news this morning the tenor of the sports report was a little more sympathetic but Rachel Burden quickly brought it back to reality by asking how they are under the cap this season? I'm just worried that the narrative now becomes "oh fair play - they've held their hands up to the mistake". I don't care if they are relegated or not but if the points deduction is to mean anything the rest of the season needs to be played as it would normally and that includes their England players playing in 6N unless they are injured and out altogether.
-
If the sarries players aren't picked for England then I forsee legal discussions from any team that ends up getting relegated as the RFU could be guilty of 'fixing' the premiership.
There can be no performance excuse for not picking them as they were in the team that were runners-up in the World Cup.
This is going to rumble on for months!
-
I would be interested to visit the SN Sarries site come Jan. Remember, for those who monitor or participate in the DW site, the endless Kruis v Launch debates when the former was playing like a blocked drain? All those fans might be singing a different tune now that they need those players. Expect bigging up of non Sarries players. They might be a bit shafted at hooker as they have number one and three in the pecking order.
-
So cricket penalise Somerset 24 points for one misdemeanor with rugby only penalising 35 points for three years of continual cheating. Different sports and totally different attitudes.
-
I'm so confused.
Saracens appear to be saying that they're now within the cap because Wray is no longer a part of of the co-investment companies.
There's also a statement from him where he says that they're the material part of the breach
(Note, he doesn't say they're the only part of the breach)
So where did this stuff about offshore accounts and image rights payments come from?
I've found a daily mail article from earlier in the year which states that at least 1 club has hired forensic accountants because they believe Saracens money is being hidden in offshore accounts - I've seen nothing else about this, so either nothing was found or there is nothing.
So is this breach about the co-investments or other as yet unknown payments?
It would appear to be the former.
The same daily mail article from earlier this year which referenced the previous cover up, also said that a loophole was closed after that debacle, which I'm assuming was being exploited by some clubs.
That loophole was to sign a marquee player and front load their contract so that the vast majority of their earnings was achieved in the first year. Then, after a year, change them to a normal contract and do the same thing with the next marquee player. Sounds like this had been going on for a while and was potentially the crux of the previous breaches.
I think the word I'm looking for is "shambles'
-
24 points is only 1 good result though, so it's not quite the same.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
:-X
So cricket penalise Somerset 24 points for one misdemeanor with rugby only penalising 35 points for three years of continual cheating. Different sports and totally different attitudes.
.
24 points in cricket is one win with full bonus points. So 5 points in rugby. The equivalent fine in cricket would be 168 points.
-
I'm so confused.
Saracens appear to be saying that they're now within the cap because Wray is no longer a part of of the co-investment companies.
There's also a statement from him where he says that they're the material part of the breach
(Note, he doesn't say they're the only part of the breach)
So where did this stuff about offshore accounts and image rights payments come from?
I've found a daily mail article from earlier in the year which states that at least 1 club has hired forensic accountants because they believe Saracens money is being hidden in offshore accounts - I've seen nothing else about this, so either nothing was found or there is nothing.
So is this breach about the co-investments or other as yet unknown payments?
It would appear to be the former.
This is 1 of the many elements that I find infuriating. No-one is sure what they've done. Various publications have reported that the co-investment companies were not the cause of the breach but that it was simply payments to players and 3rd parties. PRL are making things worse by not publishing a full report
And then Wray announces that Sarries are now within in the cap because he's pulled out of those co-investments.. which implies they were part of the breach. Some papers have said they were not though?
But.. if he's now pulled out of those companies doesn't that mean he's simply handed over his share of the start up capital to the player.. which is what everyone thought was the problem in the first place?
-
Eddie's worried it could disrupt England:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50461381
Anyone else read that and think it sounds like a deal may be being struck with the RFU to ensure a good chunk of their England players will be made available to Sarries during the 6N to "compensate" for the points deduction in exchange for them dropping their objection? So hypothetically Itoje, Kruis, Billy and Spencer allowed to play against Wasps on the weekend England play Ireland with Launchbury, Shields and Robson brought in only to be dropped again once the season is done?
Urgh, I read it like that too. Sounds like EJ is preparing to not pick Saracens players in the 6 Nations if they need them to key matches in that window. Hope thats purely a pessimistic reading of an ambiguous statement....
The comment is a little ambiguous.. using the phrase "they may skip" makes it sound as if the players/club are deciding not to play for England but then EJ implies a bit later that he won't pick the Sarries contingent to help Sarries out... WHAT??
This is all getting out of hand
-
As for Saracens financial status:
"Saracens to build new £23m grandstand at Allianz Park with loan from Barnet council
The 3000-capacity stand is being financed by a £22.9 million loan from Barnet council
By Hugh Godwin
Tuesday, 19th November 2019, 8:23 am
Updated
1 hour ago
Even in their darkest hour of being fined £5,360,000 and docked 35 points for breaking the Premiership salary cap, Saracens are expanding the club by building a new grandstand at their home stadium in North London, at a cost of £23m.
The 3000-capacity stand is being financed by public money in the form of a £22.9 million loan from the local London Borough of Barnet, and i can reveal the first £3.2m was paid to Saracens three weeks ago.
Construction work on the new West Stand at Allianz Park will start soon, with the existing 55-year-old stand closed since the start of the season. Capacity at the stadium, formerly known as Barnet Copthall, will not rise significantly but better facilities should lead to increased revenue for Saracens and serve as a greater community hub.
As Saracens' salary cap appeal deadline approaches, Mark McCall insists 'it's not up to me'
The loan from Barnet Council has an interest rate of six per cent, and is due to be paid back in 30 years’ time. According to documents released under freedom-of-information requests made by local residents at a time of austerity measures in the council’s services, a condition of the loan was Saracens showing themselves to be a going concern. And the club’s financial position has altered in the past two years. The accounts for 2017-18 showed around £45million of debt to the parent company Premier Team Holdings (PTH) had been converted into equity. PTH used to be half-owned by South African investors Remgro but they sold their stake in 2018, leaving chairman Nigel Wray effectively as the sole owner.
In April this year Saracens received £13.5m in cash from CVC Capital Partners as part of the private-equity firm’s deal to buy into the Premiership. Wray, 70, immediately reinvested £2.1m back into the company now running the Premiership’s commercial activity, and headed by CVC.
Wray said in a club statement on Monday: “I will continue as always to support the club financially going forwards to ensure there is no financial instability or uncertainty.”
A Council spokesperson told i: “Barnet Council is extremely proud to host Saracens in the borough. They are an important partner and have supported our community in a number of ways, including through the Saracens Foundation and the Saracens High School.”
Asked about any effect of the £5.36m Premiership fine on Saracens’ ability to repay the loan, the spokesperson said: “The council’s loan agreement with Saracens was designed to be resilient to changes in circumstances over a 30-year period, and we are therefore confident that the council’s interests are protected.”
The remainder of the stadium loan is due to be paid in arrears, based on work completed."
-
£23m for just 1 stand at 6% interest? Makes the deal to buy the Ricoh funded by a bond at a similar rate an absolute steal.
-
A stand that doesnt increase capacity, its just a bit nicer.
Blimey...
-
£23m for just 1 stand at 6% interest? Makes the deal to buy the Ricoh funded by a bond at a similar rate an absolute steal.
Surely you aren't questioning the quote they received from Koch 3 Building Maintenance LTD?!?!?!
-
We have a resident lurking QS here somewhere.. £23m for a 3000 seat stand seems somewhat expensive
-
It is a mere £7,666.66 per seat, pretty cheap for round there.
-
A Council spokesperson told i: “Barnet Council is extremely proud to host Saracens in the borough. They are an important partner and have supported our community in a number of ways..."
Maybe they can get my black bin emptied, those scrotes haven't done it for three weeks.
I'm surprised that Barnet has the cash to spare, the roads and pavements are a disgrace.
-
I’m still wondering how they can now claim to be within the cap - so don’t need to lose any players.
Brits & our new No.8 left at the end of last season. Singleton & Daly arrived.
So where’s the saving? All in closing the co-partnerships?.
-
Daly will surely be on more than Brits was on seeing as Brits contract was probably signed 3 years ago..
Vailanu's wage might have been the same as Singleton's.
Putting my tin hat on.. With EJ selecting Singleton, who was barely used (did he play?) .. that means more credits for Sarries via the EPS.. handy for Sarries!
-
I’m still wondering how they can now claim to be within the cap - so don’t need to lose any players.
Brits & our new No.8 left at the end of last season. Singleton & Daly arrived.
So where’s the saving? All in closing the co-partnerships?.
They lost Bosch, Schalk brits, Dom Day to my knowledge, might have been a another somewhere...there was that winger, Chris Whyleds..can't member if that was this or last season though.
But they have handed out new contracts to many over the last season or so, presumably increased salaries, such as Skelton ...
-
Singleton won't be cheap, he is an outstanding prospect and as Dai says, Daly left for more money than he was on.
Still stinks to me.
Does anyone here feel differently?
Genuine question, I just can't see how they can be within the cap.
-
Or if Leicester, Bath or Us happen to be in a relegation battle with the Cheats will their England players be excused too? It stinks.
It's unlikely to be a relegation scrap involving Sarries as -35 points in previous seasons would have seen them anywhere between about 6th and 10th, but they may well be touch and go for a European or at a push a play off place, where they may well be competing directly with the likes of Tigers, Saints, Glaws, Quins, Bath, Wasps, Bris, Sale, Chiefs who will be expected to release their players for the 6N as usual.
If there is even a whiff that England are not selecting Sarries players in order to give them a bit of a leg up in the league, then I can see other clubs refusing to release players and the EPS agreement disappearing down the toilet.
-
Does anyone here feel differently?
Genuine question, I just can't see how they can be within the cap.
No. To my mind they've got away with a slapped wrist and will continue to cheat, just find another way around it. How can they possibly be allowed to keep the same squad?
-
Nature abhors a vacuum, so in the absence of any meaningful information (i.e. the report from the PRL) we all fill in the gaps.
If the PRL want the competition to have any credibility they should publish, and also make Saracens demonstrate how they can have such a squad without cheating. The onus is on Saracens to prove themselves innocent as only the most ardent denier will believe well of them as they were cheating the cap up to 2015, then again from 2015.
The PRL also need to get some credibility back for themselves.
-
Nature abhors a vacuum, so in the absence of any meaningful information (i.e. the report from the PRL) we all fill in the gaps.
If the PRL want the competition to have any credibility they should publish, and also make Saracens demonstrate how they can have such a squad without cheating. The onus is on Saracens to prove themselves innocent as only the most ardent denier will believe well of them as they were cheating the cap up to 2015, then again from 2015.
The PRL also need to get some credibility back for themselves.
Totally agree with this. PRL as it stands now have zero credibility.
-
I was chatting to a Cheats fan (he didn't like me referring to them as the Cheats for some reason). He came up with the usual guff; all academy players, international credits, it wasn't as bad as Bloodgate etc etc. I pointed out that any side with 29 internationals in it is unlikely to be under the cap.In response I got love of the club, player welfare etc as a reply.
Anyway, he is expecting them to sneak into the playoffs and win the premiership as that would make the best sporting story of the year, how a persecuted club battled adversity and won! He didn't like me telling him it would be the club cheating and winning!
They just don't see what they have done wrong at all. He also expects EJ to rest the Cheat players as it would be detrimental to England to not let them help the Cheats. Personally if that happens I hope all the other clubs withhold their players and bring the agreement to a swift end. The national side cannot be seen to be complicit wit the cheating that is going on at the moment.
-
Or if Leicester, Bath or Us happen to be in a relegation battle with the Cheats will their England players be excused too? It stinks.
It's unlikely to be a relegation scrap involving Sarries as -35 points in previous seasons would have seen them anywhere between about 6th and 10th, but they may well be touch and go for a European or at a push a play off place, where they may well be competing directly with the likes of Tigers, Saints, Glaws, Quins, Bath, Wasps, Bris, Sale, Chiefs who will be expected to release their players for the 6N as usual.
I agree.
They are currently 6 bonus point wins and 7 std wins from break even with 11th place. With 18 games yet to play, the odds are they will claw back into the bottom half. Quins, Wasps and Tigers really need to start kicking on. Sadly, we'll be 0 against Chiefs, then we play Quins, then Quins play Tigers...before you know it they are just 10 points behind the pack. Essentially if they just beat the bottom 3 they are back in it as we all play each other.
Even in a world cup year, followed by six nations it looks ominous.
-
Just to add to Cheats joys BBC sport website saying they’ve been fined an ‘undisclosed amount’ for their no show at the launch of the Euro Cup. I know they can afford it but it all heaps more on them. Keep it coming, more the merrier.
-
Some comments:
- EJ had some kind of coaching role at Saracens a few years ago.
- Wray has gone from being very aggressive about the appeal to being very humble about accepting that he did wrong. Sounds like he has had a severe talking to from a lawyer. Is what they pay the new governance director within the cap!? No need for an answer.
- PRL should ask them to provide evidence of what they have done to ensure that they are now compliant with the cap. The leaders at the other clubs should ask for the same. They can’t just accept Wray’s word.
-
Some comments:
- EJ had some kind of coaching role at Saracens a few years ago.
- Wray has gone from being very aggressive about the appeal to being very humble about accepting that he did wrong. Sounds like he has had a severe talking to from a lawyer. Is what they pay the new governance director within the cap!? No need for an answer.
- PRL should ask them to provide evidence of what they have done to ensure that they are now compliant with the cap. The leaders at the other clubs should ask for the same. They can’t just accept Wray’s word.
EJ was a decade ago there.
I have seen absolutely no humility from Wray at all, not sure what quotes i have been missing.
I suspect/hope PRL indeed have an eye on what made them over cap to be able to qualify at the end of the season. To be clear, you can only investigate at the end of the season
-
I expect them to be within the cap this season to be honest, but the thing that really sticks in my craw is that they continue to compete with an illegitimately assembled squad.
-
Given they knew the investigation was coming down the pipe, hence the big wig heev ho, they may have made adjustments. I still struggle to believe that you can bring that squad under the standard cap. Faz and Todger alone are 1.4m if reports are accurate and I suspect they are..I wont go on and list the other players we all know about..its just not possible.
Not that my moaning will change anything.
-
One of today's papers had a go at salary guessing :
Farrell - 750k
Itoje - 600k
M Vuna - 500k
B Vuna - 500k
Skelton - 400k
Goode - 300k
Daly - 300k
George - 275k
Kruis - 275k
Maitland - 250k
Williams - 230k
Now I think some of those are low. Itoje was alledged to be at the same level as Farrell. I can't believe Billy is on the same as Nathan at Bristol. Daly was alledgedly on that or more with us so it looks slim for an increased move. Of course they have quite a few more internationals who must be on a fair amount. Think Cooper-Wooley to Sale on 300k and some of these must be playing for the love of Wray.
-
The one that stands out as being way too low is Williams. When he signed he was a Wales international (he had enough caps to bypass the Gatland law) and by the point of signing was he a Lion?
Some of the salaries may appear low because they were signed 2 or 3 years ago (this is one of the points everyone is making.. its one thing developing talent but when their stock value rises due to international calls up... how do they afford the inevitable wage increase demands) but I simply do not believe Daly is on £300k when allegedly JCW was offered the same from Sale.
-
As Dai said, no one leaves for worse money.....
I find the suggestion that they can be under the cap, and not lose any players somewhat far fetched....
-
Half time entertainment at Allianz this season will involve a formation flypast by Pinky and Perky!
-
Well they do need to find new ways to bring home the bacon
-
Dire Straits - Money For Nothing? (a 2 for 1 there)
-
Haha...that was a crackling joke.
Seriously (ish) whether they are under the cap or not is somewhat irrelevant now. Unless something is seen to change in the squad then nobody will believe that they are compliant whatever they win or otherwise. Everything will be tainted from no on.
-
The Times today reporting that the other clubs want a change to the rules this season requiring players to disclose their earnings to PRL, not just clubs. Requires a unanimous vote to be brought in mid-season for this year or a 75% vote to apply from next season onwards.
Seems like a sensible change, allows the cap manager to cross check club submissions against all the player submissions. Sanctions would then be possible against players for failure to accurately disclose not just clubs.
-
Paul Gustard has weighed in on what EJ has implied.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7703957/Saracens-stars-effectively-retire-international-rugby-snub-Six-Nations.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-7703957/Saracens-stars-effectively-retire-international-rugby-snub-Six-Nations.html)
As the article points out though, Marler did something similar but for different reasons.
If they did refuse to play that would mean they lose their EPS credits though which makes things worse for Sarries.
I don't think the Sarries players opting out of the 6N's would make much difference because don't Prem Cup matches normally take place then, or has that changed this season?
-
The Times today reporting that the other clubs want a change to the rules this season requiring players to disclose their earnings to PRL, not just clubs. Requires a unanimous vote to be brought in mid-season for this year or a 75% vote to apply from next season onwards.
Seems like a sensible change, allows the cap manager to cross check club submissions against all the player submissions. Sanctions would then be possible against players for failure to accurately disclose not just clubs.
A move in the right direction
-
Whilst the clubs and PRL might want to vote for this I can't see how they can force this through. Why should a player divulge his earnings, some of which might be via their club and some of it won't be but will be perfectly above board. Who knows.. Danny Care might receive a commission for helping selling kangoroo steak via his local butcher.. that's none of our business.
This is similar to World Rugby bringing in new laws to try and fix a previous law that was poorly written or poorly policed.
This is shifting the blame onto the players.
PRL need to a better job policing the current rules and if that doesn't work then the remaining clubs need to get together to then make a pariah out of the one club not playing to the same rules.
I doubt very much whether this would be legally enforceable either. The only body that could get anywhere near this level of governance is HMRC and even they aren't very good at tracking through a web of income and companies.. they also rely on what is being told is honest and truthful... they rely on the penalty being that bad that nobody would risk doing it... which is what hasn't happened with PRL and Sarries
-
The Times today reporting that the other clubs want a change to the rules this season requiring players to disclose their earnings to PRL, not just clubs. Requires a unanimous vote to be brought in mid-season for this year or a 75% vote to apply from next season onwards.
Seems like a sensible change, allows the cap manager to cross check club submissions against all the player submissions. Sanctions would then be possible against players for failure to accurately disclose not just clubs.
What is also needed is a copy of their tax return. But, how do you factor in relatives etc.?
-
The Times today reporting that the other clubs want a change to the rules this season requiring players to disclose their earnings to PRL, not just clubs. Requires a unanimous vote to be brought in mid-season for this year or a 75% vote to apply from next season onwards.
Seems like a sensible change, allows the cap manager to cross check club submissions against all the player submissions. Sanctions would then be possible against players for failure to accurately disclose not just clubs.
What is also needed is a copy of their tax return. But, how do you factor in relatives etc.?
With great difficulty - it is a bloody mess.
-
If they did refuse to play that would mean they lose their EPS credits though which makes things worse for Sarries.
I don't think the Sarries players opting out of the 6N's would make much difference because don't Prem Cup matches normally take place then, or has that changed this season?
EPS credits are for those named in the England Elite Player Squad. EPS is something like 45 players, so plenty of scope to pick creatively from that. Not sure if there are then additional cap adjustments based on actual match squad involvement. (Happy to be corrected if someone's more au fait with the ins and outs)
In terms of Premiership fixtures, there are 2 rounds on the same weekend as 6N fixtures (one of which is Wasps v Sarries), plus a further 2 rounds played on the 6N "rest" weeks, when I believe under the EPS agreement, England are a liberty to retain players and not release them back to their clubs. Ordinarily, Sarries would expect to be without (as a minimum) Vunipola x 2, George, Itoje, Kruis, Faz, Daly for all of those.
-
If I remember correctly, being part of EPS starts at £10k.. then the player/club accrues more credits the more that person is used up to a max of £80k.
I think the EPS is reset every 6 months.. summer and just after new year.
So the Sarries players could still be part of the EPS come new year but if the players opt not to be picked that would be like the tail wagging the dog and then we get into a RFU and PRL battle.
Wray hasn't thought about the ongoing consequences of what he's done.. there's a good chance PRL clubs, seeing what Sarries are doing, will simply not sign a new PRL/RFU deal and concentrate on themselves, which means RFU have no control over the players accept outside of the international windows
-
https://www.planetrugby.com/breaching-salary-cap-easy-to-do-sale-sharks-owner/
-
https://www.planetrugby.com/breaching-salary-cap-easy-to-do-sale-sharks-owner/
Whilst it may be true seems a silly comment to make at the moment unless it spurs the PRL into more action.
-
https://www.planetrugby.com/breaching-salary-cap-easy-to-do-sale-sharks-owner/
Whilst it may be true seems a silly comment to make at the moment unless it spurs the PRL into more action.
It might be easy in terms of allowances and the like, but I'm sure it not "easy" to avoid the conclusion that co investments and offshoring are deliberate attempt to get around the cap.
-
The cap needs phrases like 'schemes to avoid payments being included in the cap, whether by direct intent or otherwise'. To be judged by effect or outcome, not intent.
-
An interesting tweet from Ali Eykyn of BT Sport: https://twitter.com/alastaireykyn/status/1199001897958617088?s=08
-
An interesting tweet from Ali Eykyn of BT Sport: https://twitter.com/alastaireykyn/status/1199001897958617088?s=08
Beat me to it. It looks as they really have been rumbled. No Prem club can have that squad and be within the salary cap!!
-
Still a lot of indignant Saracens supporters about.
Like I said before, I'm no going to spend another penny on premiership rugby until this is dealt with properly. What's the point? This should hurt PRL and its clubs because they collectively deluded us over many seasons.
-
An interesting tweet from Ali Eykyn of BT Sport: https://twitter.com/alastaireykyn/status/1199001897958617088?s=08
Beat me to it. It looks as they really have been rumbled. No Prem club can have that squad and be within the salary cap!!
I suspect this is the real reason they dropped the review. The longer into the salary cap year this drags on, the more talent they need to offload. Month 5 ends on Saturday.
-
I won't get too excited yet.
I have a feeling the outcome of this will be that they're morally over the cap, but not actually over it.
Imagine a scenario where Wray tells his top30 players that he's gonna pay them all £100k under their going rate.
That gives him £3m extra cap space to play with.
To make up for it, he'll pay them all £75k per year that they're at the club, off the books.
The player wins cos they get more money.
The club wins cos they get a stronger squad
Wray loses a few quid, but becomes the owner of the most dominant club around.
Then it all blows up.
Wray simply stops putting the £75k per year into everyone's secret accounts.
Suddenly, the club is under the cap, and the players are still pretty happy cos they've already earnt more than they could have done elsewhere.... And they've won trophies at the same time.
A few reassurances from Wray that he'll find another loophole and all the players stick with it waiting for the good times to come back again.... While still winning all their games.
It sucks!
-
I honestly can't see how Saracens can ever be credible without significant squad changes and Wray being removed.
It's no longer about whether they are actually above the cap or not, but whether people believe they compliant. That can't happen unless things change.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
-
I am sure there are embarrassed supporters too. It takes a brave person to stick their heads up when their peers are defending the club. The loudest voices will be the ones who are most unreasonable.
How would we be if it were us? The natural inclination is to defend. Most of us say that we would want us to win fair and square, most of us differentiate between fiscal doping and having playing loose with the uncontested scrums, for example. But when you have had lots of success, and the club has built up and sold itself on a bunker mentality, peddling the "something special" (TM) bull, well I guess it would be hard to give that up and admit it was something rotten, which it was. I am sure there are genuinely bereft Sarries fans aghast at what the sickly, spiv-like Mr Wray has done, and many who are uncomfortable with it but recognise the vast sums he has stumped up. I have to be honest, I don't know how I would react. I would like to think that I would call out the club for this, but part of me knows that it is easy to buy into the bunker mentality-"no one likes us, we don't care".
-
I am sure there are embarrassed supporters too. It takes a brave person to stick their heads up when their peers are defending the club. The loudest voices will be the ones who are most unreasonable.
How would we be if it were us? The natural inclination is to defend. Most of us say that we would want us to win fair and square, most of us differentiate between fiscal doping and having playing loose with the uncontested scrums, for example. But when you have had lots of success, and the club has built up and sold itself on a bunker mentality, peddling the "something special" (TM) bull, well I guess it would be hard to give that up and admit it was something rotten, which it was. I am sure there are genuinely bereft Sarries fans aghast at what the sickly, spiv-like Mr Wray has done, and many who are uncomfortable with it but recognise the vast sums he has stumped up. I have to be honest, I don't know how I would react. I would like to think that I would call out the club for this, but part of me knows that it is easy to buy into the bunker mentality-"no one likes us, we don't care".
Very sensible post
-
Couple of additional rumours -
Club owners apparently telling Wray he is not welcome at their clubs &
Al Eykyn saying there is more to come on EAs current squad size (on Twitter).
The pot keeps stirring.
-
In today's Telegraph:
Premiership clubs have supported Exeter Chiefs chairman Tony Rowe’s incendiary attack on Nigel Wray and have indicated that the Saracens owner would not be welcome at their grounds.
Despite Saracens accepting a 35-point deduction and £5.3 million fine for their breach of Premiership Rugby’s salary cap, the hostility towards them shows no signs of abating. There is particular anger that Saracens have never apologised to other clubs for their offences and that they have been able to maintain a squad containing seven British and Irish Test Lions – more than the rest of the Premiership put together.
As chairman of the club who have lost to Saracens in the past two Premiership finals, Rowe has been the most outspoken of their critics and has not held back from making personal attacks on Wray. “[Wray] is a cheater,” Rowe told The Times. “I believe he brought the sport into disrepute and he shouldn’t be allowed to get away with it.”
That view drew a sympathetic response among other Premiership chairmen and chief executives, who have indicated that Wray would be best advised to avoid away games.
“Rugby is supposed to be based on intense competition on the field and then friendship off it,” a high-level source said. “Given what Saracens have done, which is nothing less than sustained cheating, I would find that hard to overlook and forgive them. I think most clubs feel the same way. What is still an issue is that Saracens have shown no contrition. They are still pushing this line that what they did was nothing more than an accounting error. That is what sticks in the throat.”
Rowe has threatened to sue Saracens, although he has not yet met with lawyers to discuss this. Earlier this month, Rowe told Telegraph Sport that Saracens’ salary cap breaches had directly affected their revenue. “Of course it impacts our commercial earnings,” he said. “We could have been three-times English champions, and that would do so much for us. If you can’t earn an extra £2.5 million a year from your commercial rights because you are European and English champions, then your commercial department is not doing very well.”
However, successfully prosecuting a legal case would be far from straightforward. As legal rugby expert Ben Cisneros wrote for Telegraph Sport this month, if Exeter were to sue Saracens for breach of contract, they would have to prove that they suffered a loss and that Saracens’ salary cap breach caused that loss. He concluded the chances of Exeter or another club winning such a case were “slim”. Other lawyers, however, believe that other Premiership clubs may try to force an out-of-court settlement, as Liverpool paid to Manchester City over the allegations of spying.