AP Clubs Vote to Block Salary Cap Investigation!

by yappysnap Wed 29 Apr 2015, 10:44 am

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?

by SecretFly Wed 09 Sep 2015, 2:55 pm

beshocked wrote:secretfly that's your business, this is our business.... You tell me to butt out, seems a bit hypocritical..... Preaching from a country that doesn't have a salary cap....

God, Shocked, that was all so very much tongue-in-cheek from me. You have to be more alert to when people are messing around in here. Not everything I say is 100% serious. Indeed, some people here would say a damn sight most of it isn't! Wink

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 2:56 pm

I know you said something serious once. I remember it as it was the same day as my annual bath.

by beshocked Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:10 pm

no 7 & 1/2 so basically what you're saying is that you'll never be satisfied?

Wouldn't be happy no, do I think they would warrant being destroyed either? No.

Enforce the rules yes but is there a time scale?

Londontiger fair enough if that's how you feel though I doubt you would if it was Tigers.

Are you telling me you won't be a little disappointed if Tigers went bankrupt and were no longer a club?

As for being unfair? Difficult to say. Depends what you compare it to. You could say it's fair but other clubs and individuals have got away with little to no punishment.

Even Quins punishment was light - no ban from the European tournament, only Tom Williams and Dean Richards were given bans but that hasn't affected them much at all.

Tigers never got punished when Back cheated in the HC final vs Munster

Maradona never got punished with his hand ball goal vs England.

These cheats escaped punishment.

Now you might say they are different incidents. Yes they are but still quite serious indeed.

by SecretFly Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:11 pm

That's the spirit Tiger. Deprecate the self-deprecator. Wink

You need that yearly bath...it's overdue. Whistle

by No 7&1/2 Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:16 pm

I'm saying I'm very dissatisfied with how it's been dealt with to date as they should have done it when they had suspicians. Now we can have cheats prosper. Why destroyed? You mean fairly penalised for cheating?

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:18 pm

I would like 2 things.
The first is if they have broken the salary cap then the punishment that they all agreed to is delivered.

Second is an explanation as to why it was not dealt with sooner

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:22 pm

beshocked wrote:Londontiger fair enough if that's how you feel though I doubt you would if it was Tigers.

Are you telling me you won't be a little disappointed if Tigers went bankrupt and were no longer a club?

I would be disappointed and angry. But my disappointment would be for the loss I would have suffered (My visits to Welford Road are a large part of my life with tigers results meaning far more to me than England, and losing that would leave a massive hole) - and my anger would be aimed at the management of the club that had created such a situation. I would not be angry with the organisers of the competition, or fans of other clubs. Only at my own club.

As to Neil Back - I was angry with him as it was stupid and pointless. Munster had looked as if they could have played till the start of the next season without creating a try scoring opportunity. Back risked gifting Munster 3 more points and moving to within just a kick of us if he had been caught. He wasn''t, but his pathetic action means that instead of being hailed as worthy winners which we were, we were castigated and suddenly Munster were moral victors.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:23 pm

SecretFly wrote:That's the spirit Tiger. Deprecate the self-deprecator. You need that yearly bath...it's overdue.

not my birthday yet.

by beshocked Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:34 pm

no 7 & 1/2 the issue is you'll never be satisfied.

We don't know what the consequences of "fairly" penalising them would be.

carpet baboon so what's that then? A 40 point deduction? What else? A large fine?

Could use the explanation of the RWC.

Fair enough Londontiger if that's how you feel.

Personally I am going to wait and see what happens. If Saracens and Bath get punished then fair enough but if not then I am not going to be as upset as the rest of you because I don't know the whole picture. Don't know what's happening behind closed doors.

I have got the impression that Bath and Saracens must have some support from some clubs because 2 vs 10 doesn't work.

by yappysnap Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:37 pm

LT, where did you get the information that Quins were possibly one of the other clubs to be over the cap? As the last I'd heard was that we were one of the two clubs that the other ten bullied into agreeing to bury this, up until then we'd been all for exposing people. It just seems odd that we'd do that if we had breached the cap ourselves.

I'd be doubly disappointed by Harlequins if they had broken the cap as not only would it be another horrible cheating incident in our recent history. But also our squad does not justify going over the cap!

by No 7&1/2 Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:39 pm

Yeah we do beshocked. If they get any points deductions this year because they are cheats it would have meant they wouldn't have won the title last year. Why say 'fairly'? The punishments for various severities of cheating are set out? Why say destroyed?

The issue isn't the media, it's not other fans, it's potential cheats making a mockery of the league.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 09 Sep 2015, 3:40 pm

You could also say it affects England. You're keen to point out that people like Itoje deserve a chance as they are LV cup winning captains and won the league etc. that's directly affected by this instance.

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:16 pm

What is the punishment for breaking the cap?

by SecretFly Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:19 pm

None supposedly.

by HammerofThunor Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:22 pm

Depends by how much. Seems like it's the "kill one person you're a murderer, kill 100 you're a mass murderer, kill 1,000,000 and you're a conqueror".

Too Frak off to comment on this too much. Either scrap it or stick to it. Frak about like this makes them look like a bunch of Tinkywinky (I hope the swear filter works)

by HongKongCherry Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:26 pm

yappysnap wrote:LT, where did you get the information that Quins were possibly one of the other clubs to be over the cap? As the last I'd heard was that we were one of the two clubs that the other ten bullied into agreeing to bury this, up until then we'd been all for exposing people. It just seems odd that we'd do that if we had breached the cap ourselves.

I'd be doubly disappointed by Harlequins if they had broken the cap as not only would it be another horrible cheating incident in our recent history. But also our squad does not justify going over the cap!

I'd be amazed if Quins were breaking the cap. As you rightly point out, you were quite vocal at exposing the cheats. It is being suggested that Saints are the 3rd side to be in breach.

by SecretFly Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:27 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Depends by how much. Seems like it's the "kill one person you're a murderer, kill 100 you're a mass murderer, kill 1,000,000 and you're a conqueror".

Too Frak off to comment on this too much. Either scrap it or stick to it. Frak about like this makes them look like a bunch of Tinkywinky (I hope the swear filter works)

unfortunately it does, and makes you sound like a Frak Cat assed Kumquat

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:30 pm

Is there a maximum penalty?

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:52 pm

yappysnap wrote:LT, where did you get the information that Quins were possibly one of the other clubs to be over the cap?

I never said they were. Someone suggested Saints may have been implicated, however my "informant" says that currently only two clubs have been investigated, and sufficient evidence found of malpractice to haul them up before the beaks. Others may be over the cap, but no evidence has yet come to light to spark an investigation.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 4:58 pm

carpet baboon wrote:Is there a maximum penalty?

Points deduction is capped at 40:

Level of breach.......................Points Sanction
£0 to £75,000................................4
£75,000.01 to £125,000..................10
£125,000.01 to £175,000................20
£175,000.01 to £250,000................30
Over £250,000..............................40

Financial sanction of £3 for every £1 over the cap - no maximum as far as I know.

There is a precedent for reducing minimum sanctions however. By the rules LW should have been docked 2pts per game for the Tyson Keats affair.

by Guest Wed 09 Sep 2015, 5:01 pm

This would be terribly depressing if it wasn't also the most entertaining thread I've read for some time. Despite claiming to not have much affection for Saracens any more Beshocked, your attempts to defend them have gradually shifted from cute and endearing to downright bewildering.

Not sure what was my personal favourite - that the blame for teams breaking the cap should fall on the cap itself for being lower than the French or your attempts to deflect attention away from Saracens becoming so desperate you drift in to media exploitation of a picture of a dead Syrian child.

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 5:05 pm

What really gets my goat is that not long ago some AP folk kept banging on about fairness, level playing fields, all having the same rules. But now if they do nothing about this cheating, flagrant premeditated cheating is what it seems to be, or they fudge the punishment, then it shows them to be nothing other than cowards who are scared of a few men with deep pockets and lawyers on tap.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 5:13 pm

What they are most scared of is not receiving this season's BT money - which is released on all clubs signing the relevant documents at today's meeting.

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 5:17 pm

So could we guess that maybe two clubs possible said they wouldn't sign if they were punished for cheating?

by **LondonTiger** Wed 09 Sep 2015, 5:57 pm

carpet baboon wrote:So could we guess that maybe two clubs possible said they wouldn't sign if they were punished for cheating?

You may say that, I could not possibly comment.

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 6:04 pm

Well in the interest of balance can I say no clubs did may not will have threatened to not will may never sign anything.

Hope that clears it all up

by doctor_grey Wed 09 Sep 2015, 6:23 pm

LondonTiger wrote:Any club found guilty of breaking the salary cap should suffer the punishment that club agreed to when the new rules were put in place. How is that unfair?

It's not unfair. It's agreed. It should happen.

With the lack of treansparency in most Rugby organisations, I wonder what other forms of skulldugery were uncovered. We will likely never know, but that is the only possible explanation I can see as to why somehting might not be shared openly. Surely the clubs understand the negative publicity which would accompany a whitewash?

by MarcusHalberstram Wed 09 Sep 2015, 9:06 pm

Sorry, posted in the international thread before I saw this over here. Seemingly nothing about this in most of the media yet - but found this:
http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/latest-news/23464/exclusive-premiership-salary-cap-breaches-will-go-unpunished/
Seems like a huge scandal being brushed under the carpet by not only PRL but the media. Almost difficult to believe in fact. How is this not front page sports news?

by carpet baboon Wed 09 Sep 2015, 9:24 pm

Hhhhmmm could Craig or Bruce have any freinds in the press? It's not like they are very rich men

by doctor_grey Wed 09 Sep 2015, 11:31 pm

People need to be careful. Very careful.
As the Americans found out many years ago with their Watergate mess: What is worse? The crime or the cover-up?
All it takes is for one little person who may or may not forget to shred a document, erase an email, delete a file......

by **Rugby Fan** Thu 10 Sep 2015, 1:11 am

I think the Rugby Players Association ought to take a long hard look at this matter.

I'm sure many professional players have been told by clubs that there's no more money in the bank because of the cap. If the employers have now decided the cap was meaningless all along, and will not take action against those who ignored it, then there might be grounds for action

by Jimpy Thu 10 Sep 2015, 7:57 am

beshocked wrote:secretfly that's your business, this is our business.... You tell me to butt out, seems a bit hypocritical..... Preaching from a country that doesn't have a salary cap....

no 7 & 1/2 it's a story whether you like it or not.

Jimpy it's rubbish is it? Any evidence or logic to back up that claim?

Immediately? Can't really use that word in regards to the investigation.....

carpet baboon surely the current discussion is about Bath and Saracens getting their houses in order so they are no longer over the cap? We honestly don't know what's happening behind the close doors.

You say what's to stop London Irish? Don't know. I guess LI could try it and find out!

We can all speculate - we can say what should happen but will have to wait and see what will happen. As it stands Bath and Saracens are not going to be punished, perhaps that will change, we'll see.

no 7 & 1/2 what would satisfy you?

Saracens stripped of the 2015 title? Saints made the 2015 champions? Saracens and Bath kicked out of Europe for a number of seasons? Instant relegation?

What's the sentence your honour?

What would sate your appetite?

Would it be enough to placate others?

The problem is I doubt that if they do get punished the punishment will be deemed harsh enough for some.

Don't really need to. On the other hand you might provide evidence or logic to back up your claim that it would couldn't you?

The rest of the world wont care what happens. as far as they're concerned, it's an internal matter that requires resolution. There's plenty of precedent in world rugby that suggests that internal disputes/scandals raise little more than eyebrows elsewhere. The individual players may be distracted, but hey, they'll get paid anyway (especially since we're talking about Saracens and Barf here) and it won't affect their WC. One would hope that their minds are focussed on other, more pressing matters.

As far as punishment goes, ALL clubs found guilty should be punished to the fullest extent that sanctions allow. Personally, I'd disqualify them from Europe, fine them into the stone age and start them off next season on -40 points.

That would 'sate' my appetite (1).

(1) Seriously, have you swallowed a Thesaurus of annoying clichés?

by Jimpy Thu 10 Sep 2015, 8:12 am

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:This would be terribly depressing if it wasn't also the most entertaining thread I've read for some time. Despite claiming to not have much affection for Saracens any more Beshocked, your attempts to defend them have gradually shifted from cute and endearing to downright bewildering.

Not sure what was my personal favourite - that the blame for teams breaking the cap should fall on the cap itself for being lower than the French or your attempts to deflect attention away from Saracens becoming so desperate you drift in to media exploitation of a picture of a dead Syrian child.

Don't worry, it'll be repeated so often that eventually, you'll be expected to believe its true.

by HongKongCherry Thu 10 Sep 2015, 12:58 pm

doctor_grey wrote:People need to be careful. Very careful.
As the Americans found out many years ago with their Watergate mess: What is worse? The crime or the cover-up?
All it takes is for one little person who may or may not forget to shred a document, erase an email, delete a file......

That is a very good point. As is widely known Glaws are up for sale and Ryan Walkinshaw has made it very clear he is extremely unhappy with proceedings, but that he is bound not to comment. Should the club be sold and there isn't a water tight agreement in place with him, I really wouldn't be surprised to see Walkinshaw spill the beans on this whole sorry affair.

by SecretFly Thu 10 Sep 2015, 1:04 pm

We also have to remember that the only reason we're talking about this now, and have talked about it months ago is because there is already deepthroats emerging from all the document shredding parties that have supposedly taken place or are allegedly to take place.

We have an idea what's going on because people are emerging and wink, wink, nod, nodding what is going on. It's very naïve indeed if anyone thinks you're going to get a roomful of people shredding documents and none of them choose to hold onto the memory for future reference and for opportune times.

Coming clean, putting hands up and white flags up would have been the better deal all round. That negates the guy who came into the room with the hidden camera and microphone.

by SecretFly Thu 10 Sep 2015, 1:12 pm

BTW...the sponsors themselves are in iffy waters here.

If the dog on the street is hearing that things were decidedly dodgy on a number of fronts, then it's obvious that sponsors have been hearing the rumours too.

But they are in the tough position of probably being observers and advisors at the very same time...which is very dangerous!
They might find themselves in the position of having to inform the PRL that if talk of wrong doing gets out then they may have to pull the plug on their contributions as their customers might negatively react if it looked like they were turning a blind eye.
So sponsors might have had to advise the PRL that they shouldn't be forced into the position of turning a blind eye.... meaning they themselves might have been involved directly in the alleged burying. If the public don't know then we can all pretend nothing happened.

But if the public find out that sponsors knew ..................................... dangerous territory for many here. We go back to US Postal. What did they know and what didn't they know about Lance?

by beshocked Thu 10 Sep 2015, 2:48 pm

no 7 & 1/2 not sure what Itoje has to do with this unless you think he's one of the players being paid too much. As an academy player I doubt he's on that much.

Fuzzy Dunlop just adding a bit of differing view point to the hang them, draw them then quarter them brigade.... Plus there is truth in what I say.

Doesn't change that the salary cap is a disputed topic with some clubs wanting it to be in line with the French.

These clubs wouldn't be breaking the rules if the salary cap was in line with the Irish (no cap) and the French. You could say to me - it doesn't matter, they still broke the rules. I disagree, you have to look at the motives and the overall picture.

Desperate? Hardly, I don't disagree that the clubs need punishing if found to be guilty. It's the time and punishment itself I differ on.

Londontiger if you feel so strongly about the story coming out why don't you persuade your "informant" to begin the media circus? It would do what you want to do which is to bring out this information during the RWC. You have the opportunity if that's what you really want.

Jimpy I have already said why it's bad to have this going on during the RWC. There is no point repeating it again as you'll just ignore it.

Would you include Tigers too or is it anyone but Tigers? If Tigers are found guilty of pressurising Saracens into dropping interest in Manu would you support punishing Tigers on the grounds of blackmail? Of course that's just alleged too but there's a lot of murkiness.

We don't know all the facts. Don't pretend you do. I doubt even Londontiger with his "informant" does either.

Oh and by the way who knows if some of the media don't know more than they are letting on anyway?

by carpet baboon Thu 10 Sep 2015, 2:54 pm

Beshocked. They agreed to the cap. They agreed to the punishment for breaking them. The cap was set and they agreed to abide by it.
They play in the Aviva Premiership. Not the top 14 or pro12. The rules of their league are the rules they must work by.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 10 Sep 2015, 2:55 pm

If you've been cheating Itojes salary will be part of it. The point around Itoje was though that you have placed him higher up than others such as Clifford say in part because he was the captain of the winning LV side and part of the champions side. This becomes dubious if saracens cheated their way to these titles.

by **LondonTiger** Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:09 pm

Can anyone please explain to me how the World cup would be affected.

The tickets are sold, the commercial deal paid up etc.

Most pathetic argument I have seen for hiding the truth.

by Guest Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:19 pm

beshocked wrote:
Fuzzy Dunlop just adding a bit of differing view point to the hang them, draw them then quarter them brigade.... Plus there is truth in what I say.

From what I can see the 'hang them, draw them then quarter them brigade' are only asking for the punishments which all teams agreed upon.

Doesn't change that the salary cap is a disputed topic with some clubs wanting it to be in line with the French.

Well two clubs certainly do.

These clubs wouldn't be breaking the rules if the salary cap was in line with the Irish (no cap) and the French.

Thats some fantastic foresight I have to admit. Considering they were willing (if indeed this all turns out to be true) to cheat to have a competitive advantage over the premiership teams you'll have to forgive me for not having enough faith in them to believe they wouldn't want the same advantage in European competitions if they could. Unless I'm missing something and these 2 teams had players on the books that they only used against French and Irish teams?

Desperate? Hardly, I don't disagree that the clubs need punishing if found to be guilty. It's the time and punishment itself I differ on.

We'll have to agree to disagree, of course, but I'd say desperation is the overwhelming theme of your posts.

And before you ask - yes. Should it emerge that Tigers are in on this I wouldn't want it delayed or brushed under the carpet. Despite your insistence that it will somehow destroy the world cup.

by beshocked Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:23 pm

no 7 & 1/2 doesn't change that I think he's a better player than Clifford at the moment.

As of now he's still got those titles. You can challenge me if Saracens are indeed stripped of their titles.

carpet baboon correct. They are the rules and punishments. Not being enforced though. Also the cap was put in place to help the smaller clubs, when you think about it, it's not that surprising a couple of the bigger clubs wanted a bigger salary cap and took matters into their own hands. It's essentially a battle of the smaller clubs vs the bigger clubs.

With the salary cap in place - round 1 to the smaller clubs. With this alleged cover up - round 2 to the bigger clubs.

Who knows who will win round 3? Probably the media actually....

Londontiger I have said it numerous times. Not going to go over it again about the RWC.

Fuzzy Dunlop agreed on but obviously not agreed upon. Being outvoted on something doesn't mean you agree.

by carpet baboon Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:27 pm

So you agree they cheated. Do you agree the rules need to be enforced?

by SecretFly Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:34 pm

beshocked wrote: it's not that surprising a couple of the bigger clubs wanted a bigger salary cap and took matters into their own hands. It's essentially a battle of the smaller clubs vs the bigger clubs.

So what would your personal take be on some bigger clubs taking it upon themselves to secretly buy out a few Pharmacists shops and use them to run through perhaps PEDS to their players under a cloak of respectability? After all, it would be taking matters into their own hands to compete with sides they perhaps see out there that they might potentially suspect are doing something similar?

When does cheating to gain the edge become something you'd despise rather than just casually shrug your shoulders at?

by beshocked Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:35 pm

carpet baboon we are all assuming they cheated. Guilty before a guilty verdict has been given but we don't have the facts at the moment.

I think the rules should be enforced but I would try and mitigate the damage to the AP,sponsors, the RWC etc, also try and make sure Saracens and Bath don't go bankrupt and be destroyed.

Punished yes but not obiliterated.

40 point deduction fine.
Ban from Europe for a year fine.

Fuzzy Dunlop I want it to happen after the RWC though. Just a temporarily delay.

by beshocked Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:42 pm

SecretFly wrote:
beshocked wrote: it's not that surprising a couple of the bigger clubs wanted a bigger salary cap and took matters into their own hands. It's essentially a battle of the smaller clubs vs the bigger clubs.

So what would your personal take be on some bigger clubs taking it upon themselves to secretly buy out a few Pharmacists shops and use them to run through perhaps PEDS to their players under a cloak of respectability? After all, it would be taking matters into their own hands to compete with sides they perhaps see out there that they might potentially suspect are doing something similar?

When does cheating to gain the edge become something you'd despise rather than just casually shrug your shoulders at?

Hardly casually shrugging my shoulders when I agree that Saracens and Bath should be punished if found to be guilty by evidence. I just differ on when it should happen and how harsh the punishment should be.

If bigger clubs are found to be cheating they should be punished but proof and evidence are important.

by SecretFly Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:45 pm

Yeah, well none of us are saying clubs should be punished on the evidence of a hunch.
But I think you know we seem to have stepped past the hunch bit in the last number of days. It seems people know decisions have been made and those decisions 'seem to be' cover it all up like a Nuclear Plant that melted. Bury it and protect us all from the radiation.

by beshocked Thu 10 Sep 2015, 3:50 pm

secretfly still too many unanswered questions though. Is there another club involved in allegedly breaking the salary cap?

We can speculate but till we know the full facts we can't really be judge,jury and executioner.

I might well change my stance and opinion if more "facts" rather than hearsay comes out.

by SecretFly Thu 10 Sep 2015, 4:00 pm

Well facts come with declarations. Someone has to publically declare a finding and an outcome. But if the actual design is to keep it all under wraps then I assume 'hearsay' is all anyone will have, unless and until someone else takes on an investigation from the outside.

by No 7&1/2 Thu 10 Sep 2015, 4:00 pm

Can't challenge you beshocked in that case as it's now too late for last year to be affected. Whatever punishment they get now they can hardly complain as they knew exactly what the punshment would be. If they are 'destroyed' so be it another club who can play by the rules will take their place.

by Sponsored content