The Jeff:Tigers (and other top sides) fans have every right to growl and grumble

First topic message reminder :

No team gives more to the England cause yet every trap is laid to snare the Tigers (and other top clubs).

Playoffs, EPS payments, and wage caps (irrespective of affordability) and the refusal to suspend the Jeff during the RWC - everything goes against the top sides contributing to the cause.

Look at today's 22 ( pretty much accepted as the best English side available this RWC) :

England
15 Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)
14 Chris Ashton (Northampton Saints)
13 Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers)
12 Mike Tindall (Gloucester Rugby)
11 Mark Cueto (Sale Sharks)
10 Jonny Wilkinson (Toulon)
9 Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)
1 Alex Corbisiero (London Irish)
2 Steve Thompson (London Wasps)
3 Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
4 Louis Deacon (Leicester Tigers)
5 Tom Palmer (Stade Francais)
6 Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers)
7 Lewis Moody (Bath Rugby, capt)
8 James Haskell (Ricoh Black Rams)
Replacements
16 Lee Mears (Bath Rugby)
17 David Wilson (Bath Rugby)
18 Simon Shaw (Unattached) [ed: probably Wasps]
19 Tom Wood (Northampton Saints)
20 Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens)
21 Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers)
22 Delon Armitage (London Irish)

So fact that top clubs are being turned over is a surprise? I don't think so.

It is a disgrace that the Jeff is being played under such unfair conditions.

It's not as though they will be guaranteed to come home fit and able to partake in the HEC and Jeff.

None of the big English contributors are being treated fairly.

It's an effin shambles.

aslongasbut100 of those lot only Mujati and PDJ stand out as players. Also they are hardly leaders are they?

Sam I said Clarke, the outside centre. I don't see Saints as a particularly frightening side. Once you take away their England contingent they struggle against everyone.

Fair enough I suppose about Manu Samoa but if he was good enough he could go to the world cup confident he would get a contract anyway. Vasily Armitiev has been at the world cup for Russia.

Saints lack a true squad structure. They generally rely on a first choice XV. Their new signings have not been seamlessly fitted in to the Saints side. It takes time for new signings to gel.

Also their first choice XV isn't even the best in England.

Sam I said Clarke, the outside centre

Sorry thought you meant Calum Clark the flanker. The Saints midfield is looking increasingly stodgey, it could do with a bit more va va voom being brought in as Saints were increasingly dependent on their pack running rough shod over the opposition last season.

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/Peter-Wheeler-says-cup-replace-Premiership-World/story-13505128-detail/story.html

Sam surprisingly your club and my club are on the same side on this matter. Read the link to see what I mean.

I think this line says a lot…

"However, it is thought that only four clubs, Leicester, Bath, Saracens and Northampton, voted for the LV=Cup option when Premier Rugby wrote to them."

The 'big 4' in financial terms who would most likely end up so far ahead of the rest were this option to be pushed through. I think the World Cup period has been great for the Premiership.

For my club we have seen that JJ is more than capable fo playing at outside centre in the AP. Max Lahiff has been brought on massively in the absence of Corbisiero. Tom Homer has been fantastic and Irish fans are question where Delon Armitage will fit into the team as a result of the youngsters form.

I appreciate that Tigers are not used to being at the bottom end of the table, but it is getting boring now, their board and some fans whinging about it and wanting to change the structure of the season solely so that it suits them. Saracens have coped without their players and are not moaning, and to be fair to Saitns, I have heard no moaning from them, just Mallinder saying that they must be better.

Tigers will have their players back come the next round of AP games, so hopefully then we'll get an end to hearing about how unfair on them it all is.

ozzy3213 I definitely am not moaning I agree the premiership has been more exciting. Nice to see the likes of Quins and Sale performing so well. I wouldn't be complaining about the world cup anyway as our replacement players should be good enough to absorb any injuries or callups.

I wouldn't say Saracens are part of any big 4. Our losses are ludicrous and our attendances are poor. Yes our financial backing is absolutely massive and our team is very strong but we haven't got the right financial infrastructure yet.

Bit disappointed not to get the try bonus point against Newcastle but that's our own fault. We should be good enough with or without callups.

At Saracens the academy boys train with the first team squad so everyone is in the same boat. Of course it must be tougher but it makes them more ready for the AP.

Beshocked, I klnow in terms of self-sustainability (is that a word?) that Saracens are no better off than the rest of us, and ar ein fact in a worse shape than some, but at present you are safe in the knowledge that the South Africa sugar daddies can just stick their hands in their pockets and pull out the cash to deal with any losses.

I have a question about a couple of players for you as well, which may not be for this thread, but as you're here I'll ask them.

Andy Saull was touted as the next big thing in the 7 shirt but seems to have fallen away a bit, and I've now been hearing that Will Fraser is the real deal. What's your thoughts on them, and could either be a potential long term solution at 7 for England?

I appreciate that Tigers are not used to being at the bottom end of the table, but it is getting boring now, their board and some fans whinging about it and wanting to change the structure of the season solely so that it suits them

Wouldn't you want your club to look for a solution if they were likely to be missing almost the entire first team for the opening 6 games of the season? The board haven't moaned about the situation they just tried to change the schedule for the season which as I said above was worth the attempt.

As for fans whinging I think that's long since stopped as currently we have nobody to blame but ourselves. We could have and probabley should have beaten Quins at the weekend, Rose continues to be in my view the best ref in the AP so there's no complaints there and we actually had a fit tighthead and lineout operator for a change. Chances were created but were butchered by poor choices, individual errors and Staunton's incompetence. The lack of earlier substitutions did not help as the defence was visibly tiring and Tom Youngs impact off the bench was good but was required 20 minutes before. Only real bright spark was the young scrum half Sam Harrison who's passing was very good and quick from the base and if he has been playing with an attacking 10 could have had a great day, just a shame to see those bullet passes going to Staunton who was miles behind the gainline.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

I appreciate that Tigers are not used to being at the bottom end of the table, but it is getting boring now, their board and some fans whinging about it and wanting to change the structure of the season solely so that it suits them

Wouldn't you want your club to look for a solution if they were likely to be missing almost the entire first team for the opening 6 games of the season? The board haven't moaned about the situation they just tried to change the schedule for the season which as I said above was worth the attempt.

I would want my club to be looking for a solution, but I would expect them to be looking within, rather than attempting to change the structure of the season in order that it favours them over everyone else.

Not favouring them over everyone else though is it. Most the clubs are missing players and are weakened because of it, there's not a lot the can do internally when over half the wage cap is either in NZ or is injured (in most cases long term). There's only so much money Tigers have.

We all have players in NZ. We all have players injured, yet it only really seems to be Tigers who are making noises about how unfair it all is.

What Tigers are essentially saying is they only want the AP played on weeks that they have all of their best players available, becuase they know that for a number of reasons, they have more international/top class players at their disposal than almost every other team when that is the case.

What you want, is the season loaded in your favour.

If what Tigers are asking for was the case, it would be pointless playing a full AP season, as there are a number of teams who woudl have little or no chance of success, and you would have an elite top 3 or 4 teams that nobody could catch, who owul djust get bigger and stronger year on year and would destroy the competitive nature of the league.

So it's a much better idea to hamstring the teams that provide England with international players making it less beneficial to utilise English players? It's also a much better idea for everyone to aim for mediocracy rather than push on to try and grow the game in this country by improving the teams within it's leagues?

How is ensuring that the top teams get bigger whilst the rest have no chance of success condusive to growing the game in this country and improving the teams.

Leicester have a history of success, so can recruit players from smaller teams who will go on to be internationals. Saracens and Bath have sugar daddies so can recruit top players based on salary, and in Saracens case recent success.

If we play all of our AP games only when those teams have no international commitments, how do other teams break into that top tier Sam? They can't because they are unable to compete in terms of recruitment of players at either senior or academy level.

At present, the playing field is levelled by abstractions. Tigers have the biggest and best squad for most of the year, but that has a flip side that for the international periods they lose more players. It ensures that it is a squad game and means that others have a reasonable chance to fight their way up the ladder, thereby perhaps persuading top players that they may be a good club to join as they are aiming for success.

What you want may make Tigers, Saracens and Bath European super powers, but it woudl be at the expense of every club in this country, and I am sorry but that is not acceptable to me.

After reading some of the comments about the Saints it has come to the point where we are being attacked without looking at the whole picture of the premiership.

Saracens, and to a degree Leicester, spend significantly over the salary cap. Is there definitive proof to take to the RFU? No of course not. So Saracens must be within the salary cap then? Lets not forget people are paid a large amount of money to make sure there is no proof. As has been suggested on these boards before, and I have also heard from another source, Saracens like to pay players in foreign currency or into a South African bank account. For Leicester I have been informed by a friend, who is a Leicester fan, that they are creative with paying players bonuses. As a Saints fan am I slightly bitter of this happening? Of course I am. Keith Barwell constantly refuses to spend well over the salary cap, we like most clubs bend the rules slightly, and whilst he is taking the moral high ground it unforunately does not solve the problem.

When you claim the Saints squad doesn't have strength in depth, then yes you are correct. With a (ex)Chairman refusing to spend, spend, spend like other clubs then we are restricted on who and how many we can afford. Let us not forget we have been a completely self-sufficient club for the past few years.

In regards to Samu Manoa, for a guy who was playing amateur rugby last season I think he has done extremely well with the transition to the professional game.

Saints do rely on our 1st XV, the majority of our funds go on the top 15 or 16 players so the replacements are either not good enough or are young and need time to develop. Our tactics have been to try and win as many games as possible to reach the top 4 with the 1st XV and hope they have enough time to recover for the playoffs. The only criticism I have of Mallinder's selection is his lack of giving youngsters a chance. This season it appears to have changed with the introduction of Nutley and Haywood (should have been Man of the Match on Saturday) who seem to be playing well so far.

I'm sure I will get reponses of, "there is no proof of breaking the salary cap so therefore it hasn't happened", but from what I have seen and been told it appears that the accountants of some clubs are better than the ones employed by the RFU to monitor the salary cap.

For Leicester I have been informed by a friend, who is a Leicester fan, that they are creative with paying players bonuses

I doubt that somewhat as Tigers purely don't have the financial might to pay vastly over the wage cap especially with the planned stadium improvements. Not the best thing to do when you are campaigning for a gentle increase in the salary cap either. What do you mean by creative bonuses? Generic examples obviously.

DKMax you should be careful when throwing around accusations. Leicester and Saracens evidently both play within the rules. If they didn't then they would both be ripped to pieces by whoever regulates the salary cap.

All that matters is that none of the clubs break the rules set in place.

Saints simply haven't got strength in depth. It can't be blamed on the salary cap.

Sam - As far I have been told players are being given a bonus for playing say 15 games a season, or starting a certain amount of games in a row. Apparently the bonuses fall outside the salary cap.

beshocked - That's not the case though. It is widely accepted that most clubs break the salary cap slightly. If you had read what I actually put you would realise that I said there is no definitive proof that this happens. However, if you look at the players Saracens have brought in and the size of their squad you can quite easily see it does not add up. Saints lack of depth is completely and entirely down to the salary cap. We chose to pay for very good 1st XV players and have weaker replacements as we knew we could not get a complete squad within the restrictions.

It would appear other people think the same thing:

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/club-rugby/salary-cap-allegations-made-by-wasps-1956672.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/apr/19/premiership-salary-cap-flouted-steve-meehan

This is the one I was particularly after:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/7647789/London-Irishs-Andy-Martin-warns-that-salary-cap-abuses-put-clubs-at-risk.html

No one accused Saracens of anything, but Griffiths felt he needed to defend you?

DK Max most of those are out of date.

Griffiths felt the need to defend us because it is obvious some are pointing the finger at us. We only have 2 players in the England squad so salaries will be lower. Both Wigglesworth and Stevens weren't playing for England when we signed them.

Saints must be paying the likes of Tongauiha,PDJ,Ashton,Foden,Lawes,Hartley and Wood whopping great salaries.

Our players are good but hardly household names. The players that have come to us have enhanced their names since to coming to us. The likes of Ernst Joubert,Jacques Burger, Mouritz Botha were unknown.

Players like Barritt,Short,Goode,Farrell have only come onto the scene in the last two years.

The reports are from last year, the issue with the salary cap did not start this season, so actually they are completely relevant.

Just because someone doesn't play for England it does not mean they are on a low salary. Wood was not in England contention when we signed him and as far as I know he is on the same contract. Ashton, Foden, Hartley and Tongauiha are on big salaries. If I remember correctly Lawes contract is up at the end of the season so was not on a great amount of money. PDJ's salary is easily covered by Reihana leaving, and Murray leaving in the middle of last season also gave us a massive chunk of the cap back. As I have said on two previous occasions, the vast majority of our salary cap is spent on the 1st XV.

Do you not think if everyone is pointing the finger there is some truth behind it?

It's something that needs to be looked at. It seems to me the clubs who deliver the bulk of the players for the England squad are disadvantaged.

I agree very much with Mr Meehan on this. As I agreed when the Wasps fans pointed out how tough it was for them and I currently sympathise for Saints who are re-structuring their salary outlay and are doing their best to shift out some of the big earners.

It's great signing good emerging talent Beshocked, bit of a pain when it comes to renewing contracts though (Barritt, Goode, Short etc will all be wanting wages reflecting their status). That's where Tigers have struggled and why the squad is in a continual cycle of regeneration. It means there's always room for new superstars to emerge though so it at least keeps things interesting.

As far I have been told players are being given a bonus for playing say 15 games a season, or starting a certain amount of games in a row. Apparently the bonuses fall outside the salary cap.

I'm fairly sure that isn't the case and that bonuses are monitored within the cap, through some accrual system or similar (e.g. the bonuses come under the cap the following season). If the bonus system is outside of the cap then there would be nothing wrong with that anyway as they would be playing by the rules.

There are schemes in place to try and disperse salary, for example loading the contract towards the end so the player recieves more towards the end of their contract which would help with young talents who are challenging an older but established player. You don't want two big salaries under the cap at the same time so you time the younger players contract to rise as he takes over from the established player who is then moved on or given a smaller contract etc so a balance is maintained. That is perfectly legitimate, there are less legitimate activities that don't exist anymore such as paying the spouse of a player to work in the clubhouse bar for a large salary with minimal (e.g. no) hours to work (rumoured that a Mrs Farrell did that at Wigan many years ago) or have a sponser to hire the player to give after dinner speeches etc.

Why don't the other clubs just accuse us directly? Do they have the balls?

Ever heard of innocent till proven guilty? It is not guilty till proven innocent.

http://www.espnscrum.com/premiership-2010-11/rugby/story/140449.html

Saracens will benefit from the academy credit and the credit of £30,000 for each international player participating in the world cup.

The likes of Chris Wyles,Hayden Smith,Justin Melck and Rhys Gill are hardly household names.

The likes of Short,Farrell etc won't be on much.

We haven't broken the rules. If we have we will be taken to the cleaners.

The likes of Barritt,Goode etc are still largely ignored. Plus there is the added incentive to stay at a winning club.

You constantly repeat your argument that if you had broken the rules then you would have been found out already. Do you honestly think a club would simply just break the rules and not try to cover it up?

The other clubs don't accuse you directly because it is extremely hard to prove. That does not mean it doesn't happen. With speculation from different sources you really can't deny that something is going on.

DKmax what exactly would be breaking the rules?

Do you not think that if everyone was so sure that Saracens and Leicester had broken the salary cap there would be incredible efforts to prove they had?

Do you not think there is intense scrutiny on Saracens in particular? Do you not think the questions have been asked?

It is a very bold accusation to insult two clubs with no proof. That is why the clubs haven't come out with anything.

You can speculate we are over the salary cap all you want but until you have proof it's all hypothetical.

"Saracens, and to a degree Leicester, spend significantly over the salary cap."

You can't prove it. If you can't prove it then it's simply your word. You can say that in your opinion you think these two clubs spend over the salary cap but without evidence it's just rumours and hot air.

Speculation. That's all it is.

To be fair, IF Saracens and Tigers are spending over the salary cap, I don't really care.

My understanding is that we are nowhere near it as we do not generate enough income to be, so whether it is there or not, or gets raised or doesn't matters little in terms of impact on my club.

In fairness to Saracens, I can't imagine there are many in the squad on massive money, as their status when they signed their last contracts would not have justified. Their issue will be keeping hold of players when their next contract comes up, as many of the youngsters who have come through are likely to want an increase, which they may not be able to offer and remain under the cap limits.

Three different Directors of Rugby/Head Coaches have identified that "a" club is spending over the salary cap. Griffith's comes out and defends Saracens when no one was attacking them specifically.

You seem to be saying that if a club were to spend over the cap then they would just put it down on the accounts and anyone would plainly see it. Unfortunately it does not work like that. Yes it is currently speculation but do you really think three DoRs/Head Coaches would be bringing it up if they didn't think something was going on?

You constantly repeat your argument that if you had broken the rules then you would have been found out already. Do you honestly think a club would simply just break the rules and not try to cover it up?

Due you honestly think the PRL doesn't pay forensic accountants to check the clubs and make sure they are under the salary cap. The clubs as part of the agreement with the PRL would have to disclose all the financial information the accountants would want to view and it's not like clubs have huge financial arms in which to cover these things up. Tigers has small offices at Oval Park and Welford Rd and neither has more than ten people in them, they are pretty small and most of the work is probabley done by external accountants whose firms would disappear over night if they were found to have given false information.

[quote="formerly known as Sam"]

It's not like clubs have huge financial arms in which to cover these things up.

One club does...

Surely DK Max there has to be an excuse for Leicester and Saracens to have such good strength in depth and for Northampton Saints to have such poor back up. Nothing to do with the coaching setup or management.

Nope Leicester and Saracens must be breaking the rules.

It is extremely hard to prove. It can't be because possibly Leicester and Saracens are innocent? They must be guilty guilty guilty!


I didn't realise that the DOR's had experience in finance and accounting. If they do then by all means they should speak up. Is Griffiths not allowed to speak? The DOR's might think something is going on but it's simply speculation. It is as factually correct as me saying that in Area 51 the Americans are experimenting on Alien's. For all we know I might be right but without evidence......


You might be well be found out to be correct in the future but till you have cold hard evidence it is simply speculation.

Also it's the equivalent of thinking someone looks suspicious but until you have actually uncovered any proof of crime or breaking the rules Saracens and Leicester have done nothing wrong.

DK Max you speak as if you are someone who has vast knowledge about how Saracens operates. You are a liar until you prove otherwise. Such slander should not be tolerated.

Mods! Take this gent away and clap him in irons till he repents for his sins.

I am agreeing with you that it is currently speculation. However, you are dismissing the fact that three coaches have brought this up on three separate occasions. I have already told you why Saints don't have very good replacements, our chairman has stated this before when asked why we don't have the required back up. He refuses to spend over the salary cap and so applies the vast majority to a 1st XV in the hopes they can last the length of the season. No one is saying Griffiths isn't allowed to speak but it seems quite suspicous that he goes on the defensive when Saracens haven't been accused of anything.

Key figures in three premiership clubs have aroused suspicion that a premiership club is flouting the salary cap rules. No specific club was named. Griffiths jumps in and defends Saracens. Coincidence?

It's not like clubs have huge financial arms in which to cover these things up.

One club does....

I'd be very interested to know which one could afford a vast financial arm, financial services don't come cheap especially when you consider that the bodies to which the financial representitives belong (accountants etc will have an authority such as the ACCA or ACA which they will belong to) would end their careers (fine them and throw them out) if they found them to be carrying out unethical practices.

Of course my last post is slightly tongue in cheek but in all seriousness you have to be careful with your wording. Saying that in your opinion and many others that Saracens are breaking the salary cap. That's fine.

You need to back it up though. How?

Saying Saracens are breaking the salary cap as if it's a fact is wrong because you simply cannot prove it. Saying that it is Saracen's accountants fooling the RFU as a fact is wrong. Speculating is fine but no more than that.

Does it really matter if Griffiths jumps in or not? He is a combatitive CEO.

It's as if you are saying that Griffiths defending his club is evidence of Saracen's guilt.

If key figures in three clubs have aroused suspicion that a premiership club has flouted the salary cap rules why have charges not been brought?

You don't think Saracens have been under the most intense scrutiny of all the clubs?

It's the equivalent of accusing someone of a crime with no evidence. Saracens might be the chief suspect but we are innocent till proven guilty.

As far as I am concerned till proved otherwise Saracens are playing to the rules. So are Leicester and every other club in the AP.

Sam - I'm sure no club can afford a complete financial department to work full time. It was more a dig at clubs that can spend a ridiculous amount of money and not worry about the losses.

beshocked - There are obvious ways around the salary cap, perhaps I was not entirely clear on my wording. By 'breaking' I'm alluding to any way of giving your players more money that is set out in the cap. Be this through sponsorships, gifts, employing family members or good accountancy. The problem with these ways is that they are very hard to tie to players and their salary at their respective club.