AP Clubs Vote to Block Salary Cap Investigation!

First topic message reminder :

It's from The Times so only a snap shot:

Exclusive: Clubs block salary-cap investigation

Saracens and one other club had reportedly been under investigation for alleged breaches

John Westerby, Owen Slot Chief Rugby Correspondent

Leading clubs in England have voted in favour of suspending investigations into potential salary-cap breaches to protect the image of the Aviva Premiership.
At a time when Saracens and one other club had reportedly been under investigation for alleged breaches, The Times understands that a majority of clubs have voted for inquiries to be suspended, in part for fear of alienating sponsors and fans, and jeopardising their position in negotiations with the RFU over a new relationship governing the release of England players.

I can not see how this can mean anything other then Saracens were found to be in breach of the cap, and the clubs have decided to act amongst themselves and cover it up rather then it go further.

Is this good for the game in England?

SecretFly wrote:

That IS increasingly Happening!  What bloody planet are you on, Chunky?  Three European wins in three goes??!!!  With Harlem Globetrotting players slotted in scientifically?  And more to come after the WC?  

What part of 'Buying Success' can't you see there?  You can't 'see' it because you're all for it.  You want it.  You've bought into the idea of rugby following football.  Get the exotics in to help bring back the punters  Now what threads have I heard that on before.

Oh dear, you aint got a clue son

"they have a sugar-daddy buying up the world's best players for them"

Nope. They. Don't.

Fly, Boudjellal doesn't put money into Toulon anymore, does he? So, he's not a sugar-daddy as they're financially successful anyway.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:At least the French / English clubs with big budgets win things (Toulon, Clermont, Toulouse, Saints, Sarries). If you look at Ulster's budget compared to trophies won in the last 10 years they have to be the current biggest failure in professional rugby.

Hmmm...we haven't got ourselves into £40m debt. Anyway, what is Ulster's budget? How much of that massive budget did we splash out on new signings last year? You must know, unless you're just spouting nonsense as usual

I usually spout nonsense? Any evidence?

The new signing Piatau??. Piennar, plus the centrally contracted players. Tot all those up and it will give you a clue to what Ulster's budget is. It's huge compared to most uk pro teams and you god damn know it.

They are a failure.

Nevermind MOST Chunk.  Only four Irish Provinces. The top four or five AP sides.  Ulster outgun those top 4 or 5 hugely in real or Hidden player budgets?  Crap.  You don't even know what the budgets are for some of those top AP sides as the investigations that might have told you was closed down.

A 'Declared' budget isn't a budget if it isn't what players are being paid.  It doesn't matter what form it's on - if the players are getting more, then they're getting more.

So evidence - what is the true players salary budget per year for Saracens these last let's say four years?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:At least the French / English clubs with big budgets win things (Toulon, Clermont, Toulouse, Saints, Sarries). If you look at Ulster's budget compared to trophies won in the last 10 years they have to be the current biggest failure in professional rugby.

Hmmm...we haven't got ourselves into £40m debt. Anyway, what is Ulster's budget? How much of that massive budget did we splash out on new signings last year? You must know, unless you're just spouting nonsense as usual

I usually spout nonsense? Any evidence?

The new signing Piatau??. Piennar, plus the centrally contracted players. Tot all those up and it will give you a clue to what Ulster's budget is. It's huge compared to most uk pro teams and you god damn know it.

They are a failure.

You open your mouth, you spout nonsense. Fact

So we signed Pienaar and Piutau last season? News to me. How much did we re-sign Pienaar for? You must know. Yep we spent big on Piutau, but so what? If we can do that without busting the budget then it's not a problem.

I asked you how much did Ulster spend on new signings last year? So answer. How much, Chunky?

I also asked you what is Ulster's budget. What is it? You must know Chunky, unless you're just spouting nonsense again......

SecretFly wrote:Leinster pay their 'Big' money to keep their own ... and stop other teams profiting from them by buying them up

Toulon and Saracens pay their 'Big' money to buy in talent and somehow pretend its all about the locality of the team they're based in, and philosophy, and tradition, and great fan bases etc etc.  No it's about hovering up talent from competitors and using it to rub them out.

I much prefer a team to be populated mostly by players from the actual place they're based in.  I love it that Leinster tried and failed against Toulon using mostly Irish players.  I was proud of them.  I want that to stay.  Even to lose is better than becoming a Team that buys in all the talent it needs.  
I laugh at the logic here sometimes though - not talking about this thread or any recent comments by anyone - but I laugh when this New even more feverish Professional Rugby world that is creeping up on us suggests that a Club or Region or Province almost shouldn't be allowed hold onto their own players when those players would be better served (and paid) hopping over to the GREAT TOULON or the FANTASTIC CLERMONT to let their damn fans cheer for them instead.  Help perpetuate the Reputation of these and other teams by selling off all your best players to them.  Let the market decide that your future is oblivion and be happy about it.  "Why should you be allowed afford your own players???"

To hell with that Bullschit!

For now, Leinster can hold onto a lot of its players.  How long that lasts nobody knows - I hope a long, long time.  Resist, resist, resist.

Secretfly you do generally make some good points but in this case you're talking a load of rubbish.

I will now systematically destroy your misconception that Toulon and Saracens are the same.

Saracens' team is far younger than that of Toulon - just need to look at the ages of the packs.

The likes of Mako,George,Kruis,Itoje,Wray,Fraser and Billy - all young English forwards.

All of them through the Saracens academy bar the Vunipola bros.

Then there also players like Tompkins,Farrell and Goode who have come through the academy as backs. The likes of Earle and Stanley might be in the mix but have been unfortunate with injuries.

10 of the starting line up vs Clermont in the ERCC semi finals were EQ (11 if you include Du Plessis, also 2 Englishman - Hamilton and Wyles who play for different country would bring the figure up to 13). 4 from the Saracens academy.

Compare that to Toulon who had 4 Frenchman in their starting XV vs Clermont - also they have an ageing team.


Saracens' coaches have predominantly been picked from within - Kevin Sorrell, Paul Gustard and Alex Sanderson - all ex Sarries players. Also ex Saracens player, Andy Farrell was developed at Saracens.


Of course some of the talent is bought in but don't compare Saracens to Toulon - the core of Saracens is English these days. The academy has taken up the slack as the likes of Joubert, Brits and Burger have got older.

Can we change the title of this thread to:

"Chunky vs the Irish Pt 73"?

Cyril wrote:Fly, Boudjellal doesn't put money into Toulon anymore, does he? So, he's not a sugar-daddy as they're financially successful anyway.

No Wray don't either.....

Everyone tells the "truth" and have no Swiss bank accounts and creative accountants.

Grand.

Truth is Toulon pay for their titles by buying in the expertise to do it.  
Now for the moment English siders can't compete with the model, or they would do.  

So back to the Caps chat.  This is why some of you never wanted to attack the French system of over-spend during the European Rugby Civil war last year, because that ideally is where some in English rugby want to go (case in point being people like Wray who constantly now talk about the frustrations of a cap)

He's right.  I agreed with him last year, I still agree with him.  An imposed cap gives the French top teams an advantage - a clear advantage in buying power.  That buying power is winning titles.  Anyone who says different and that it's all about Toulon culture and their indigenous player base and their great support is deluding themselves.  It's about money and spending it.

But as soon as the English cap goes to compete with them - and it will! - it will at least be certainly less restrained - but as soon as that happens, even more pressure will come on the rest of us to hold onto our players.

Munchkin wrote:

I asked you how much did Ulster spend on new signings last year? So answer. How much, Chunky?

I also asked you what is Ulster's budget. What is it? You must know Chunky, unless you're just spouting nonsense again......

Why are you focusing on new signings? Piennar turned down 720,000 Euros with Toulon to stay at Ulster (according to the Irish press) . So I doubt he's short of a bob.

Piutau is on 700,000 Euros (according to the Irish press).

The IRFU spend 31,8m Euros on the 4 provincial teams. Do the maths. It's huge money. Huge wages.

So the bleating of the Irish towards "big money" spending of French and English clubs is rather amusing.

SecretFly wrote:

Truth is Toulon pay for their titles by buying in the expertise to do it.  
.

And the Irish teams rely on prayers and magic rainbows.

That's brilliant.

Munchkin wrote:

MichaelT wrote:

Munchkin wrote:".......A party to a civil suit generally must clearly state all relevant allegations of fact upon which a claim is based. The requisite level of precision and particularity of these allegations varies depending on the rules of civil procedure as well as the jurisdiction. Parties who face uncertainties regarding the facts and circumstances attendant to their side in a dispute may sometimes invoke alternative pleading.[38] In this situation, a party may plead separate sets of facts that (when considered together) may be contradictory or mutually exclusive. This (seemingly) logically-inconsistent presentation of facts may be necessary as a safeguard against contingencies (such as res judicata) that would otherwise preclude presenting a claim or defense that depends on a particular interpretation of the underlying facts.[39]"

So this quote is a description of how 'facts' are open to interpretation, which is how I imagine the offending clubs are presenting their side of the story. 'We believe it means this' 'No it doesn't, we can still do that'.

You have stated there is corruption, but also an acceptance that you can have separate sets of facts depending on interpretation of those facts.

Well done, you've confirmed a way out for offending teams.

All sorted here lads. Move on.

You haven't interpreted it correctly, and that's a fact.

Well done

Part 39 relates to the use of different interpretations of the same argument to review your case that has already been decided on. You can't present the same facts and say look at it again from this point of view. You need new facts/ evidence for an appeal for example. Part 38 is to do with saying they did it on purpose or by accident. The same fact. Different interpretations. Which is exactly what I said you have given - the ability to suggest different ways of looking at facts as a defense. Now, instead of just copying and pasting from the web, give me an explanation of how something that has not been proven is a fact.

Unless you're just taking the p!ss with your smiley face at the end there, in which case... touché

beshocked wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Leinster pay their 'Big' money to keep their own ... and stop other teams profiting from them by buying them up

Toulon and Saracens pay their 'Big' money to buy in talent and somehow pretend its all about the locality of the team they're based in, and philosophy, and tradition, and great fan bases etc etc.  No it's about hovering up talent from competitors and using it to rub them out.

I much prefer a team to be populated mostly by players from the actual place they're based in.  I love it that Leinster tried and failed against Toulon using mostly Irish players.  I was proud of them.  I want that to stay.  Even to lose is better than becoming a Team that buys in all the talent it needs.  
I laugh at the logic here sometimes though - not talking about this thread or any recent comments by anyone - but I laugh when this New even more feverish Professional Rugby world that is creeping up on us suggests that a Club or Region or Province almost shouldn't be allowed hold onto their own players when those players would be better served (and paid) hopping over to the GREAT TOULON or the FANTASTIC CLERMONT to let their damn fans cheer for them instead.  Help perpetuate the Reputation of these and other teams by selling off all your best players to them.  Let the market decide that your future is oblivion and be happy about it.  "Why should you be allowed afford your own players???"

To hell with that Bullschit!

For now, Leinster can hold onto a lot of its players.  How long that lasts nobody knows - I hope a long, long time.  Resist, resist, resist.

Secretfly you do generally make some good points but in this case you're talking a load of rubbish.

I will now systematically destroy your misconception that Toulon and Saracens are the same.

Saracens' team is far younger than that of Toulon - just need to look at the ages of the packs.

The likes of Mako,George,Kruis,Itoje,Wray,Fraser and Billy - all young English forwards.

All of them through the Saracens academy bar the Vunipola bros.

Then there also players like Tompkins,Farrell and Goode who have come through the academy as backs. The likes of Earle and Stanley might be in the mix but have been unfortunate with injuries.

10 of the starting line up vs Clermont in the ERCC semi finals were EQ (11 if you include Du Plessis, also 2 Englishman - Hamilton and Wyles who play for different country would bring the figure up to 13). 4 from the Saracens academy.

Compare that to Toulon who had 4 Frenchman in their starting XV vs Clermont - also they have an ageing team.


Saracens' coaches have predominantly been picked from within - Kevin Sorrell, Paul Gustard and Alex Sanderson - all ex Sarries players. Also ex Saracens player, Andy Farrell was developed at Saracens.


Of course some of the talent is bought in but don't compare Saracens to Toulon - the core of Saracens is English these days. The academy has taken up the slack as the likes of Joubert, Brits and Burger have got older.

Toulon provide the same number of players to the French squad, as Saracens do to the English squad.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

I asked you how much did Ulster spend on new signings last year? So answer. How much, Chunky?

I also asked you what is Ulster's budget. What is it? You must know Chunky, unless you're just spouting nonsense again......

Why are you focusing on new signings? Piennar turned down 720,000 Euros with Toulon to stay at Ulster (according to the Irish press) . So I doubt he's short of a bob.

Piutau is on 700,000 Euros (according to the Irish press).

The IRFU spend 31,8m Euros on the 4 provincial teams. Do the maths. It's huge money. Huge wages.

So the bleating of the Irish towards "big money" spending of French and English clubs is rather amusing.

You're not answering the questions, Chunky. What's wrong? Don't you know? Surely you must know, otherwise you're spouting nonsense.

So, again, what is Ulster's budget? How much did Ulster re-sign Pienaar for?

I'm patient. I can wait.

It isn't just about spending money, Fly. If it was Racing would be champions.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

the bleating of the Irish towards "big money" spending of French and English clubs is rather amusing.

It always would be for an Anglophile such as yourself.   'Chunky derides the Irish for deriding the English' - not exactly a new Headline?  I'm afraid its not going to move the Election from the front pages Chunky

Now - back to the AP Capping issue.

Munchkin wrote:

You're not answering the questions, Chunky. What's wrong? Don't you know? Surely you must know, otherwise you're spouting nonsense.

So, again, what is Ulster's budget? How much did Ulster re-sign Pienaar for?

I'm patient. I can wait.

Circa 8m- 10m Euros
Circa 550,000 Euros per annum

LondonTiger wrote:It isn't just about spending money, Fly. If it was Racing would be champions.

It's not JUST...but it IS about spending money. You know it, I know it, PRL know it, Wray knows it. It's not just about spending money but Toulon would have 'none' of their three titles without the money they Are spending on players. Other people can disagree - it won't change my view.
And to clarify again - I'm not against spending money for players. I agreed with Wray last year that the AP has one hand tied behind its back by the self-imposed cap. (He allegedly seems to have secretly untied his hands but that's another argument ) I agreed with him and said the French should have their budgets constrained for the European element at least. ----- No takers. Silence. Big bad Pro12 was the agenda then......

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

You're not answering the questions, Chunky. What's wrong? Don't you know? Surely you must know, otherwise you're spouting nonsense.

So, again, what is Ulster's budget? How much did Ulster re-sign Pienaar for?

I'm patient. I can wait.

Circa 8m- 10m Euros
Circa 550,000 Euros per annum

What does that mean, Chunky? What is your source for 8m-10m Euro's? And what exactly is the 550,000 Euro for, with source?

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

You're not answering the questions, Chunky. What's wrong? Don't you know? Surely you must know, otherwise you're spouting nonsense.

So, again, what is Ulster's budget? How much did Ulster re-sign Pienaar for?

I'm patient. I can wait.

Circa 8m- 10m Euros
Circa 550,000 Euros per annum

What does that mean, Chunky? What is your source for 8m-10m Euro's? And what exactly is the 550,000 Euro for, with source?

Looks fairly obvious to me. You asked two questions and got two answers.

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

You're not answering the questions, Chunky. What's wrong? Don't you know? Surely you must know, otherwise you're spouting nonsense.

So, again, what is Ulster's budget? How much did Ulster re-sign Pienaar for?

I'm patient. I can wait.

Circa 8m- 10m Euros
Circa 550,000 Euros per annum

What does that mean, Chunky? What is your source for 8m-10m Euro's? And what exactly is the 550,000 Euro for, with source?

You can work it out looking at the IRFU accounts.

Peinaars is more difficult to ascertain, but if you have half a brain you can work it out. I suppose because I can't scan and upload official Ulster documents to 606 this is all untrue right?

Chunky Norwich Toulon's academy is very poor. Far worse than that of Saracens.

Are any of the Toulon players in the French national side actually from the Toulon academy or system? Pretty sure it's 0.

Goode,Farrell and Kruis - all 3 from the Saracens academy.

The Vunipola bros might not be from the Saracens academy but they are young too.

Such a stark difference between Saracens and Toulon - Toulon have more galacticos than Saracens. Far more experience and far older players with most of their first XV being foreigners.

beshocked wrote:Chunky Norwich Toulon's academy is very poor. Far worse than that of Saracens.

Are any of the Toulon players in the French national side actually from the Toulon academy or system?  Pretty sure it's 0.

Goode,Farrell and Kruis - all 3 from the Saracens academy.

The Vunipola bros might not be from the Saracens academy but they are young too.

Such a stark difference between Saracens and Toulon - Toulon have more galacticos than Saracens. Far more experience and far older players with most of their first XV being foreigners.

I agree with much of that, I was just posting a fact.

I think Fickou is a Toulon graduate.Don't forget that Toulon were lower tiers until recently. Their academy is nowhere near as established as other pro teams. But now that it is - expect them to start producing big time in the next few years. Which is a scary thought.

SecretFly wrote:Boys, boys, boys

FACTS are not something that suddenly materialise when a jury finds Guilt or Innocence.  The Facts are always there.

Something that is known or proved to be true.

What we're doing here is simply speculating on what those facts are.  The Facts of the case are already there, an investigation either will or already has uncovered them.  All we're doing is trying to second guess what they may be.  But they already exist, whatever they are.

So it's wrong to say we have to wait until 'confirmation' before a fact is created or that something becomes a fact only when proven.  From the moment a side wilfully breaks a capping rule, that's a fact that they're breaking it - they know they're doing it.  If a side have never broken a capping rule, that's already a fact too.

All we do is contemplate on what the facts are.

You would have been mighty craic in an epistemology lecture fly

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

You're not answering the questions, Chunky. What's wrong? Don't you know? Surely you must know, otherwise you're spouting nonsense.

So, again, what is Ulster's budget? How much did Ulster re-sign Pienaar for?

I'm patient. I can wait.

Circa 8m- 10m Euros
Circa 550,000 Euros per annum

What does that mean, Chunky? What is your source for 8m-10m Euro's? And what exactly is the 550,000 Euro for, with source?

You can work it out looking at the IRFU accounts.

Peinaars is more difficult to ascertain, but if you have half a brain you can work it out. I suppose because I can't scan and upload official Ulster documents to 606 this is all untrue right?

What you're spouting is untrue. The alleged sum offered to Pienaar by Toulon was around the €600 mark. When BBNI interviewed Pienaar, and asked him about that figure, he laughed, and said it wasn't true.

As for the figure of between €8m - €10m Euro? That's buttons for running a club the size of Ulster, and Ulster would spend much more. Quoting the moneys from IRFU will not give you a true figure of Ulsters budget for various reasons, but not least because Ulster also add to that which comes from IRFU.

If Ulster had the massive budget you claim, which they don't, so what? Whatever the true budget is, they are not poor, and that's thanks to a good combination of great business management by IRFU and Ulster.

Lastly, No matter the size of budget Ulster has at their disposal, Ulster can't simply decide to splash it all out on big signings. We are limited by IRFU to 4 NIQ player, and 1 Marquee. And that is to be reduced by 1 in the following season.

You are constantly trying to put the boot into Ulster, but at least get your facts right when you do so.

Anyway, enough from me. Sorry to all others for my part in taking this of topic.

Chunky Norwich being a lower tier until recently hasn't stopped Exeter who have one of the best academies in England.

Sounds like a poor excuse for a team with the financial backing of Toulon. Toulon's stance has been towards ageing superstars who can play all year round instead of developing talented young Frenchmen.

Saracens in 2009-10 had a core of South Africans but in recent years have moved their stance towards recruiting top English talent and showing more faith in the academy.

Saracens still have a lot of foreigners but the emergence of young English like Kruis,Farrell,Goode,George and Itoje is pretty clear.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So Northampton are the biggest cheats then? Cool no need for an investigation.

How far did Northampon get ?

So budgets only impact Europe? Honestly I hope you're only acting this stupid!

Munchkin wrote:
As for the figure of between €8m - €10m Euro? That's buttons for running a club the size of Ulster, and Ulster would spend much more. .

Thatr's just their wage budget. It's all calculable from the IRFU accounts.

All of this really has jack all to do with this investigation.

beshocked wrote:Chunky Norwich being a lower tier until recently hasn't stopped Exeter who have one of the best academies in England.

Sounds like a poor excuse for a team with the financial backing of Toulon. Toulon's stance has been towards ageing superstars who can play all year round instead of developing talented young Frenchmen.

Nothing against the laws in that. They are able to draw in one of the biggest turnovers in European rugby. So they spend it on the here and now. And they win things.

As I said they have made strides in the last couple of seasons to address their academy issue.

No 7&1/2 wrote:All of this really has jack all to do with this investigation.

Exactly 7&1/2!!!!!

You tell them mudslinging Pro12 deadbeats to take their arguments back to the blasted Pro12 Catastrophe Threads!

Yeah, lets get back to the subject at hand.

An unsourced rumour, suggesting an unverified investigation into an unsubstantiated number of un-named sides that may, or may not have breached a rather opaque salary cap has been delayed.

And we wonder why this discussion has gone Pete Tong.

LondonTiger wrote:Yeah, lets get back to the subject at hand.

An unsourced rumour, suggesting an unverified investigation into an unsubstantiated number of un-named sides that may, or may not have breached a rather opaque salary cap has been delayed.

And we wonder why this discussion has gone Pete Tong.

At least two of those Un-Named sides are Guilty (though unsubstantiated) of breaking the opaque salary cap. At least that's the factual rumour.

Supposedly alleged factual rumour

Yes, my lawyers have just been on to me and told me to agree with your point quickly, Hammer.

I do concur because it might save me money.

Also the fractual rumour.

anyway we are led to believe that at least one of the un-named teams may actually not have broken the cap as defined by a bunch of again un-named Lady Gardens lawyers.

So.........................

em...........................

....that wraps up the discussion I suppose, you bunch of un-named unsubstantiated joy-killing bastards!

Back to accountancy then.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

beshocked wrote:Chunky Norwich being a lower tier until recently hasn't stopped Exeter who have one of the best academies in England.

Sounds like a poor excuse for a team with the financial backing of Toulon. Toulon's stance has been towards ageing superstars who can play all year round instead of developing talented young Frenchmen.

Nothing against the laws in that. They are able to draw in one of the biggest turnovers in European rugby. So they spend it on the here and now. And they win things.  

As I said they have made strides in the last couple of seasons to address their academy issue.

Nothing against it in the laws no but it's still not something that sides should aspire to.

Mourad is basically playing a rugby version of championship manager and has cobbled together a fantasy XV except he's turned it into reality.

He likes the look of a player then gets his cheque book out......

When you start at the bottom with one of the worst academies in Europe like Toulon have - the only way is up.

SecretFly wrote:So.........................

em...........................

....that wraps up the discussion I suppose, you bunch of un-named unsubstantiated joy-killing bastards!

I agree. I spent all night dealing with some whinging people complaining about broken legs and broken arms. I come home and I am tired and want some entertainment. And I find peace and love has broken out? The discussion is over? You un-named unsubstantiated joy-killing bastards!

Oh I doubt this one is over just yet ....

Strong words from Damian Hopley, boss of the RPA, about "salary cap cheating".

Interesting that the boss of the player's union seems to be supporting the need to publish salaries. Also mentions that his members liken breaking the cap to taking PEDs.

Hopley gets it. Most players get it. Fans get it. Most of the owners get it. I think almost everyone gets it. Almost everyone can see how the future has to be. And that future is coming one way or another. It all depends how much damage one or two ownership groups are willing to inflict beforehand.

beshocked wrote:Chunky Norwich being a lower tier until recently hasn't stopped Exeter who have one of the best academies in England.

Sounds like a poor excuse for a team with the financial backing of Toulon. Toulon's stance has been towards ageing superstars who can play all year round instead of developing talented young Frenchmen.

Saracens in 2009-10 had a core of South Africans but in recent years have moved their stance towards recruiting top English talent and showing more faith in the academy.

Saracens still have a lot of foreigners but the emergence of young English like Kruis,Farrell,Goode,George and Itoje is pretty clear.

But you've got to admit, some of those guys speak English with funny accents....

Jimpy wrote:

beshocked wrote:Chunky Norwich being a lower tier until recently hasn't stopped Exeter who have one of the best academies in England.

Sounds like a poor excuse for a team with the financial backing of Toulon. Toulon's stance has been towards ageing superstars who can play all year round instead of developing talented young Frenchmen.

Saracens in 2009-10 had a core of South Africans but in recent years have moved their stance towards recruiting top English talent and showing more faith in the academy.

Saracens still have a lot of foreigners but the emergence of young English like Kruis,Farrell,Goode,George and Itoje is pretty clear.

But you've got to admit, some of those guys speak English with funny accents....

I don't get it?

Perhaps it is the fact that good old Home Counties boys like Kruis and George now speak mockney?

Or Queen Vicney?

During the Ireland England game, Goode kicked the ball out and it ended up being an England line-out, but the way Goode says "it's our lineout" is the strangest English accent I have heard. Without knowing who it was I would have sworn it was an Aussie saying it.

Where is Goode from?

MichaelT wrote:During the Ireland England game, Goode kicked the ball out and it ended up being an England line-out, but the way Goode says "it's our lineout" is the strangest English accent I have heard. Without knowing who it was I would have sworn it was an Aussie saying it.

Where is Goode from?

Cambridge

But you've got to admit, some of those guys speak English with funny accents

They all speak funny doon sooth.

Unless of course they've ben pillaged from the Northern clubs and tark propa...

From the Times reporter Owen Slot



The off-field politics that may pave the way for London club to reach the Premiership play-offs

The Aviva Premiership is set for a thriller today with three teams — Leicester Tigers, Exeter Chiefs and Saracens — vying for the remaining two places in the semi-finals. Fans of Leicester and Exeter, however, may well wonder if Saracens have the right to be there.

Until February 23, Saracens were to have been the subject of an investigation into a salary cap breach. However, in an extraordinary turn of events at a meeting at a London hotel that day, the Premiership clubs voted for the investigation to be suspended.

If found guilty of a breach, the minimum penalty is a four-point deduction. If, therefore, the investigation had continued and found Saracens guilty, they would probably be out of the play-offs and would possibly not have qualified for a place in next season’s European Champions Cup.

Saracens insist that they are not guilty of a breach. Nevertheless, a considerable coup was staged to prevent the investigation from reaching that conclusion. Which raises the question: why did the other clubs unanimously agree? Indeed, some of them left a long and hotly contested meeting that day asking that very same question. How did we let that happen?

Some clubs — Harlequins, Wasps, Gloucester, Sale Sharks and London Irish — are adamant that the investigation should not be buried for good. Their last stand that day was to haggle over the timing of when it should be unearthed. Saracens and the clubs who supported them wanted to push the date as far back as possible. When their opposition would not budge on this, they were finally forced to agree on the end of June.

When the investigation recommences, it will have 60 days to report. If Saracens are found in breach, then it remains highly likely that they would contest the legality of the salary cap in the European courts. This was one of the threats that was made to Premier Rugby Limited (PRL) — the umbrella organisation that runs the Premiership — in February. The entire salary cap system could be in jeopardy.

This was dismissed as mere “bluster” by one owner, whose legal advice was that European law does not apply to this salary cap rule because it was a shareholders’ agreement to which they had all signed up. Nevertheless, the threat was clear.

It was not the only threat, although the minutes of February 23 do not reflect this because a lot of significant dealings were conducted at a dinner of the club owners the night before. At and around that dinner, it was made known that unofficial conversations had been conducted with leading Irish and Welsh teams about the possibility of the top English clubs joining them in a breakaway super league.

These are not fantasy conversations; Irish and Welsh administrators confirm that such talks have occasionally taken place. However, while it is completely wrong to suggest that any breakaway is remotely on the table, it was certainly in the air as a scare tactic on February 23. One source said: “The breakaway was not discussed in open meeting at all. You know how impossible it would be. It is fantasy. They were trying to scaremonger more than anything else.”

There was light as well as shade. At the dinner, a proposal was made for the setting up of an executive committee of owners, the suggestion being that a group of intelligent entrepreneurs could do a successful job with smoother running of PRL. This suggestion seemed to pamper a few egos; the next suggestion was the suspension of the investigation.

By the time the meeting convened officially the next morning, it was clear that a cabal had been formed. There were 15 clubs represented by their chairmen or their chief executives — the 12 Premiership clubs plus Bristol, Worcester Warriors and Yorkshire Carnegie. In a bloc with Saracens were Bath, Exeter and Northampton Saints.

At the meeting, a proposal was put forward by Bruce Craig, the Bath owner. Craig’s package was a wide-ranging vision of the future that included subjects not previously on the meeting agenda: the end of promotion and relegation, the expansion to a 14-team league. Clearly this vision would appeal to the weaker clubs, whose businesses are perpetually under the threat of life in the Championship.

The proposal also pushed for a fairer deal for the clubs such as Bath and Harlequins, who regularly lose their best players to England duty. Crucially, it also incorporated a relaxing of the Premiership spending restrictions — the very ruling of which Saracens may have fallen foul.

The proposal was sold as a deal for the future. With so many people clearly feeling so uncomfortable about it, Craig’s was the dominant voice. As an influence, Craig can carry people with him and push them too. He has some cachet because he was the lead negotiator for the clubs when European club competition was falling apart last year. When they are digging in their heels, he likes to remind them that he was the man who, last season, saved their European competition.

Most of the owners of Premiership clubs spend the majority of their time on their own business and a small part of it on their rugby club. Craig is the other way round. He is so well versed in the rugby business that he managed to buy Will Genia, the Australia scrum half, and sell him on to Stade Français for a profit without the player even having pulled on a Bath shirt.

Yet why include the suspension of the investigation into Saracens in all this? One conclusion could be that the other clubs were under investigation too. Bath have always insisted that they are not. In fact, even the stakeholders present on February 23 do not know who is and who is not. Salary breach investigations are kept completely confidential. They only knew that Saracens were being investigated because Edward Griffiths, the Saracens chief executive at the time, told them so.

Those in favour of suspending the investigation were of the view that, to move forward, it was unhelpful to be digging up the past. The clubs in opposition were not convinced why, to improve the future, the rules for the present should suddenly be overlooked. And why should this have to be voted on as a package? League expansion, no relegation and the salary cap investigation suspension were all separate issues. Why bundle them into one?

There thus unfolded a day of heated exchanges, adjournments, private discussions and re-engagements, all of it chaired by Quentin Smith, the PRL chairman, whose day job happens to be a professional mediator.

To get the proposal through, a unanimous vote was required. Initial debate showed a group standing against it. This was whittled down to just Wasps and Harlequins.

Derek Richardson, of Wasps, dug in his heels and demanded a date for the unfreezing of the investigation. The offer he was given was after the clubs had completed their Heads of Agreement negotiations with the RFU — which could have been more than a year. He agreed to giving his vote only on the condition that the investigation was reactivated at the end of June.

That left Harlequins. The owner was abroad and uncontactable. Harlequins refused to sign. Only days later did they officially agree not to stand against the other clubs.

Thus the vote went 15-0. Who knows whether Saracens would be in the play-offs this weekend if it had not.

Sounds like the famous meeting of ..... like minded sorts .... in the movie Some Like it Hot.

A collection of bosses of bosses deciding what rules they'd abide by and what rules they'd simply ignore in the interests of the 'future'.

"Thank you, fellow opera-lovers. It's been ten years since I elected myself president of dis organization... an' if I say so myself, you made duh right choice. Let's look at duh record: In duh lass fissel year we made a hundred an' twelve million dollars before taxes... only we didn't pay no taxes!"