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?

beshocked - I'll commend you on your admirable defense.

I don't think a fan forum could survive if you couldn't use 'hearsay'.

I think we would all love to know if more than 2 clubs were breaking the rules.

Choosing to ignore wrongdoing for the good of the establishment (be it a club, Union, police force, banks, plcs, church, government) can be a very dangerous precedent that allows bigger infringements to fester down the line.

You're saying investigate, report, punish (if necessary) after the RWC. The actions seem to be to permanently close this issue. Surely that means, by inference, there is no longer a salary cap within the PRL/Jeff/Aviva Prem. Is that not what you want to happen though? Big clubs don't like the rule, ignore the rule?

secretfly I agree. I will wait for that.

thebandwagonsociety I would say I am giving a different point of view. Not necessarily defending. If they are found guilty then they should be punished.

I want the wrongdoing to be addressed after the RWC. Not now.

What I want is a salary cap more in line with the top 14.

Ignoring the rules is not right but neither is a low salary cap which means that sides can't compete with the French.

There is a pressure on salaries to compete with French clubs. If you don't give competitive salaries to players then they will move abroad.

I want that balance.

Personally I want to see a punishment for Saracens and Bath if found guilty but also a raise in the salary cap.

You could also make even harsher punishments for a 2nd offence to discourage Bath and Saracens from breaking the rules again.

There has to be some compromise.

Oh and I don't think Saracens and Bath getting no punishment is compromise.

What they allegedly did is wrong but the underlying issue is this salary cap question.

Why do you have to compete with the French?

If you don't compete with the French then they'll continue to dominate both in terms of European club rugby and domestic club rugby (Top 14 being more popular than the AP).

They' are commercially bigger than the AP and eventually the top talent even from England would go to France.

Talking about a level playing field with the AP and Top 14- there isn't one in European rugby at the moment.

Irish have no cap, French salary cap is far bigger than that of the English.

If the best players want to play for England they will stay. If they want the money they will go

beshocked wrote:If you don't compete with the French then they'll continue to dominate both in terms of European club rugby and domestic club rugby (Top 14 being more popular than the AP).

They' are commercially bigger than the AP and eventually the top talent even from England would go to France.

Talking about a level playing field with the AP and Top 14- there isn't one in European rugby at the moment.

Irish have no cap, French salary cap is far bigger than that of the English.

By what measure is Top 14 more popular?

I'm sure it is in France, but across Europe?

And personally watching g the French league is not that great what with the away side sending the second string 80% of the time.

Bambam Attendances. Think The Top 14 have a bigger commercial deal and I think the French clubs generate more revenue.

carpet baboon Top 14 might not be the best product in the world but it's more popular than the AP.

There's an extra 10m people in France compared to England. There are also 4 more teams, so you'd expect more attendance

And? I fail to see why that matters? American football makes billions each year shall we compete with them too?

beshocked wrote:secretfly I agree. I will wait for that.

thebandwagonsociety I would say I am giving a different point of view. Not necessarily defending. If they are found guilty then they should be punished.

I want the wrongdoing to be addressed after the RWC. Not now.

What I want is a salary cap more in line with the top 14.

Ignoring the rules is not right but neither is a low salary cap which means that sides can't compete with the French.

There is a pressure on salaries to compete with French clubs. If you don't give competitive salaries to players then they will move abroad.

I want that balance.

Personally I want to see a punishment for Saracens and Bath if found guilty but also a raise in the salary cap.

You could also make even harsher punishments for a 2nd offence to discourage Bath and Saracens from breaking the rules again.

There has to be some compromise.

Oh and I don't think Saracens and Bath getting no punishment is compromise.

What they allegedly did is wrong but the underlying issue is this salary cap question.

I can understand why some would want a higher cap etc as they re being held back artificially in a way and the temptation to cheat rather than change the rules through proper process. Dont condone but understand. What I really dont get is why there should be compromise on what I assume is punishment? Or is that bit around increasing the cap to ensure fewer teams in England can compete?

You say you want an increase so you can compete with the French clubs,but wouldn't an increase mean fewer English clubs could compete domestically?

He obviously doesn't care about that. It's perfectly reasonable that teams would cheat in the domestic competition as long as it's only because they want to compete against the French apparently.

Don't think I've seen it anywhere else so I'll post it here, Fissler now saying quite clearly on Twitter that only 3 teams broke the cap (or were caught doing so). Saints being the third but 'not by much', whatever that means.

Can you please share the twitter post? To me, it doesn't matter who broke the cap. Fine them and punish them as specified in the agreement. NOt sure what is so difficult here.

A couple of years ago in the NFL, there was no salary cap for a single season because the agreement governing the cap and all other aspects of player welfare hadn't been formally signed

Despite there being no official salary cap, the owners of the teams collectively decided to limit salary spend in that season to a certain amount

It was later found that the Dallas Cowboys and Washington Redskins, the two most valuable, arguably most famous franchises in the league, had spent in excess of that agreed upon amount

The Cowboys were fined $10m and Redskins $36m in cap space for the 2012 and 2013 seasons, out of an eventually agreed salary cap of around $120m.

That is how to deal with teams breaking rules essential to the competition of a league. No one gave a Damn how powerful and important the teams or their owners were, and that was only the agreed upon limit, not an actual hard, contracted cap!

Coincidentally, there's been no hint of cap breaches before or after in the 10 years or so I've been following the NFL

no 7 & 1/2 the compromise would be a higher salary cap.

Fuzzy Dunlop no what I am saying is that these clubs obviously disagreed with the lower salary cap because a lower salary cap is not beneficial to clubs like Saracens and Bath.

Each club cares about themselves and will do what is best in their own interest. A higher cap is not beneficial to Newcastle,LI,Worcester etc. A lower cap is not beneficial to the likes of Bath,Leicester,Saracens and Saints. Two opposing beliefs.

If you get your own way - it's fine but if someone else does it's bullying? Sounds like double standards to me.

You have to look at both sides of the argument as I do. Leicester cannot retain their players, probably because they adhereing to the salary cap. Leicester has gone from a predominantly English club to many foreigners. Quins have also recruited more foreigners.

I think that's wrong. That shows that there is an issue with the current system.

The likes of London Irish and Newcastle have been able to play the likes of Saracens and Bath when they have had weakened sides. You can argue about the fairness of that....


Punish Bath and Saracens by all means but I still believe the current salary system is flawed.

Interesting you talk about the NFL they are an emerging competitor in the UK.

With BBC losing half of their rights to the 6 nations and with them increasing their interest in NFL I do see NFL as becoming a genuine competitor in the future.

Rugby union will be need to be prepared to fight NFL as it grows a foothold in the UK thanks to the BBC.

It's disappointing when you think about it - BBC will promote NFL, an American sport but have lost The Open in golf, half the rights to 6 nations, half the rights to formula one.

https://twitter.com/neilfissler/status/641286529856471040

beshocked, the salary cap is not there to 'benefit' a select group of clubs containing Irish, Sale, falcons and others.  It is not there to hinder the likes of Bath and saracens.  It is there to ensure that in 5, 10, 15 years time, we still have a product.  Remove the cap and let Saracens and Bath go wild in the aisles with their multi millionaire backers, and watch as half the clubs also in the Premiership go bust over the next 5 years as the stretch themselves to try to not even compete, merely to keep up.

I couldn't give a flying ferret about whether an English club wins the European Cup in the next 5 years.  I get that it's the holy grail for the so called 'bug' clubs (Saracens and Bath), but this is not about Europe, it's about protecting our domestic product.  If the the salary cap is done away with, we won't have to worry about whether it's a 12, 14 or 20 team Premiership, as it will be a year on year two horse race which may suit Wray, Craig and their cronies, but will do absolutely feck all for the game of rugby in this country.

The bottom line in any case is that they have cheated.  Like it or not, the rules were there and they have broken them and and should be punished in line with what was agreed contractually.

I'm glad thought you were going down the route of compromising punishment! Hasn't there been an agreement to raise the cap already?

Allied to the no overseas selection policy I also believe that the salary cap helps the England Rugby team. A truly competitive league with teams based on English talent is much better for the England coach than one where a select group of teams either hoard all the players or are built like Toulon.

Ozzy3213 that's your opinion fair enough.

I never said remove the cap. I said that it needs to be increased to be more in line with the French to compete. Also a deal needs to be done with the French to make sure that the cap doesn't increase out of control.

I am not suggesting that Saracens and Bath go wild but they need to be accomodated as do the smaller clubs. What I mean is that their views shouldn't be dismissed.

The cap benefits the smaller clubs and hinders the likes of Bath and Saracens as well as the likes of Tigers and Quins.

Not suggesting that I want clubs to go bust but to become more commercially viable and attract the best players plus protect your own you need to be able to compete with the French clubs.

You talk about protecting the domestic product -if you need to be able to protect players and retain players. Leicester can't retain their own players.

Perhaps the whole system needs to be looked at. Including helping Newcastle and LI protect their academy players.

If they cheated they should be punished but this doesn't make the problems that exist in the AP go away. Doesn't make the divisions go away.

Smaller clubs shouldn't be imposing their will on their bigger ones and the bigger ones shouldn't be imposing their will on the smaller ones. I want harmony and unity just as much as you.

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 the compromise would be a higher salary cap.

Fuzzy Dunlop no what I am saying is that these clubs obviously disagreed with the lower salary cap because a lower salary cap is not beneficial to clubs like Saracens and Bath.

Each club cares about themselves and will do what is best in their own interest. A higher cap is not beneficial to Newcastle,LI,Worcester etc. A lower cap is not beneficial to the likes of Bath,Leicester,Saracens and Saints. Two opposing beliefs.

If you get your own way - it's fine but if someone else does it's bullying? Sounds like double standards to me.

You have to look at both sides of the argument as I do. Leicester cannot retain their players, probably because they adhereing to the salary cap. Leicester has gone from a predominantly English club to many foreigners. Quins have also recruited more foreigners.

I think that's wrong.  That shows that there is an issue with the current system.

The likes of London Irish and Newcastle have been able to play the likes of Saracens and Bath when they have had weakened sides. You can argue about the fairness of that....


Punish Bath and Saracens by all means but I still believe the current salary system is flawed.

Interesting you talk about the NFL they are an emerging competitor in the UK.

With BBC losing half of their rights to the 6 nations and with them increasing their interest in NFL I do see NFL as becoming a genuine competitor in the future.

Rugby union will be need to be prepared to fight NFL as it grows a foothold in the UK thanks to the BBC.

It's disappointing when you think about it - BBC will promote NFL, an American sport but have lost The Open in golf, half the rights to 6 nations, half the rights to formula one.

The BBC is being made a mockery of by a right wing ideology fed by foreigners with vested interests in alternative media, I'm shocked it can show any sport at all at the moment. The NFL makes enough money domestically to be able to give rights to the BBC in order to spread their sport, which is why I think they've been given a few games.

So the best way to fight the NFL is to let teams cheat and spend what they want? We've already got football for that, with oil and gas money which may have been illegally obtained already flowing through the game and destroying competition.

If we want rugby to compete, follow the NFL model which is competition above all else.

Some of you may find this an interesting read

http://economia.icaew.com/business/september-2014/nfl-v-epl-a-league-of-their-own

beshocked wrote:

Smaller clubs shouldn't be imposing their will on their bigger ones and the bigger ones shouldn't be imposing their will on the smaller ones. I want harmony and unity just as much as you.

How the hell do you achieve harmony with that condition laid down as a starter?

Ozzy3213 wrote:beshocked,

The bottom line in any case is that they have cheated.  Like it or not, the rules were there and they have broken them and and should be punished in line with what was agreed contractually.

This entirely.

There are no excuses, arguments or justifications. They cheated, they were caught. They should be punished.

yappysnap wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:beshocked,

The bottom line in any case is that they have cheated.  Like it or not, the rules were there and they have broken them and and should be punished in line with what was agreed contractually.

This entirely.

There are no excuses, arguments or justifications. They cheated, they were caught. They should be punished.

Seems there are multiple discussions at the same time here. Firstly, the question about what happens to the teams which violate the cap. Clearly, an agreement signed by all teams is valid and enforceable. Teams that violate the cap, and therefore the agreement agreed by all teams, should be punished as agreed by all clubs. I cannot see how there is a question about this. Like it or not, all teams signed up for it.

The second question is whether the cap or cap structure is right for the Premiership. That is a completely different discussion. I personally believe the NFL approach is the right one: a hard cap with total visibility, contracts registered with the League, independently audited, status completely open. Baseball has an interesting approach. They use a cap, but teams which go over the cap must pay a luxury tax based upon how far they go over. And those funds go to the other teams which are not over the cap.

NFL model.... which has a salary cap far bigger than ours.....

Yes the NFL with their adverts,adverts and more adverts..... great model....

BBC made a mockery of? They need to justify the licence fee or what's the point?

Replacing rugby rights with NFL rights is not going to win hearts and minds.

yappysnap no arguments? Might as well lock the thread then. No arguing with you....

Secretfly it's difficult I agree.

It'll win hearts and minds of people who like American Football!

To be fair the discussions around raising the cap are slightly adrift of this topic. You play to the rules until they're changed.

No 7&1/2 wrote: You play to the rules until they're changed.

Well........................ some do. Thus the discussion.

Beshocked I think there would be more sympathy if you actually admitted that teams who breached the cap should be punished - we all get it that Saracens, Bath,etc. are not overly happy with the cap and feel that it should be increased to give them a better chance of competing in Europe and against the French teams.
Personally I don't think increasing the cap is actually going to affect who comes where in the Aviva too much, the rich will be richer and the rest will scrap for the crumbs - in a sense we are already at the football position of a fixed top four or five clubs and the remainder trying to aviod relegation and maybe get a HEC place as a bonus.
Longer term there may be problems as fans (and investors) in the smaller clubs lose interest but at the moment all relaxing the salary cap does domestically is mean that Saracens or Bath will be able to rest players more and still have the firepower to put bonus point wins past the bottom half teams.
It could be argued that this may be seen on the future as the jump off point for Chunky's much hoped for B & I league where the top five or six English clubs pull in the big Irish provinces plus a couple of Welsh and Scots and become in effect a "Super Premiership", leaving the rest of the Avivia to form an equivalent of the football Championship division where there is less money but arguably closer and more exciting games.
However that is not the argument here, some clubs are alleged to have broken the rules that they themsleves drafted and agreed to and now appear to want to walk away with impunity.

Quite fly! There's a discussion to be had on when the investigation should have taken place but theres no rule as far as I know which says it had to take place when an allegation was made or a suspician raised. For me it damages the WC more for having allegations hanging some disagree.

Not sure there's any real discussion to be had on punishment when and if it comes as the rules are there in black and white. Any team breaking the rules knew what they were risking, unforntuately now the risk has paid off as last seasons results can't be changed. Language like the clubs will be destroyed don't bother me, apply the rules and see them go extinct if it happens.

Fair enough about a future discussion about changing the cap but really a separate issue.

American football is an American sport, the clue is in the name....

BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation championing American sport not British......

doctor grey the two discussions are strongly linked though.

Not saying I disagree on a punishment, it's the timing I have had an issue with and the exact details of the punishment. Cannot really discuss the exact punishment when we don't know all the details of the alleged breaking of the rules.

As for the cap - I don't think it should be based on the American model as surely you are rewarding failure? Failure whether it's from not having good enough coaches,organisation or a good enough academy?

I can understand not wanting the team simply with the most money winning but making it so any team can win by taking away some team's advantages that they've earnt - is that fair too?

You can throw money at something but if it's not thought out or spent sensibly it will be wasted.

Oh right apologies then. I assume you hate all those HBO productions or showing any american shows or hollywood films. The BBC aren't there to promote rugby.

Punishment is there agreed and signed up to. However much they've broken the cap is how much they can be punished. No real questions.

Irish Londoner how many times do I need to say they should be punished? I have said it numerous times.

Sympathy? Ha ha. Doesn't seem to much of that. It's judge,jury and executioner.

no 7 & 1/2 changing the salary cap isn't really a separate issue because it's strongly linked to the issue at hand.

The BBC aren't there to show British sport?

Surely the British Broadcast Corporation should do that. The licence fee isn't a choice.

If the service isn't good enough then they deserve criticism.

Hollywood films and HBO shows aren't direct competitors of rugby union! NFL is.

Yes and no beshocked. It's a possible reason for cheating. They're not going to be using it to try and reduce punishment. If anything it confirms a premeditation and not incompetance; not actually better!

beshocked wrote:

Hollywood films and HBO shows aren't direct competitors of rugby union! NFL is.

Really now are you doing this deliberately?

Both American football and rugby union come from the same source, Rugby Football. One was American rules football and the other was developed internationally. Most of the changes in rugby union were driven by the Southern Hemisphere nations. The changes in American football driven by the Americans. They're both just sports.

As for the BBC showing 6 nations, in my opinion they shouldn't. We're forced to pay the license fee and they shouldn't use that to produce programmes that can easily generate revenue through advertisement. They should be showing things that 'should' be available but cannot generate enough interest for another channel to pay them.

If Saracens and Bath were making profit I could understand the argument for increasing the cap. I still wouldn't agree but I'd understand it. But they're both making big loses so it's pure greed. And before you carry on banging on about teams losing their players have a refresh on where a lot of them are going. Not many go to France. They got bought up by those teams cheating the cap.

beshocked wrote:American football is an American sport, the clue is in the name....

BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation championing American sport not British......

doctor grey the two discussions are strongly linked though.

Not saying I disagree on a punishment, it's the timing I have had an issue with and the exact details of the punishment. Cannot really discuss the exact punishment when we don't know all the details of the alleged breaking of the rules.

As for the cap - I don't think it should be based on the American model as surely you are rewarding failure? Failure whether it's from not having good enough coaches,organisation or a good enough academy?

I can understand not wanting the team simply with the most money winning but making it so any team can win by taking away some team's advantages that they've earnt - is that fair too?

You can throw money at something but if it's not thought out or spent sensibly it will be wasted.

Mate, not sure what your comment about 'American Sport' means.

I understand the linkage between the cap violation/punishment discussion and the desire to increase or eliminate the cap.  Even in that context, however, I think it is unacceptable to violate the cap.  The NFL teams, especially the local ones here, are very clear the cap is the key to long term stability and success.  And the NY area teams could easily spend a lot more than the cap if they were allowed.  

In the Premiership, there was a clear agreement amongst the clubs regarding the current cap, and if violated, the agreed punishments should should be enforced.  And that should be as soon as the violation(s) are proven.   I believe it is a bad idea to wait simply because of timing.  The ultimate measure of the league is if people have the strength and confidence to face the music and keep moving forwards.  Even if the cap increases, the violation already happened and the punishment(s) should be enforced consistent with the agreement.  

I know your club is at the centre of this.  But now my club has been mentioned as well.  If Saints violated, then they need to be dealt with too.  

Regarding the cap structure itself, which 'American' cap model are you referring to?  To me, and as I have said many times, the NFL model is the best from the 4 major American sports, partially because of the relatively simple rules, partially because of the linkage to overall league revenue, partially because of the transparency.  I doubt anyone can refer to Rugby contracts and club salary structure as transparent.  Ultimately, the transparency is key.  You disagree?

Few highlights from today's Rugby Paper:

Salary cap investigation is now back on after a fiery meeting on Wednesday.
Bruce Craig stepping down as vice chairman of the PRL.
Weight of evidence against some clubs is 'enormous'.
One club said to be £1m over the cap.

Positive news for sure but it also states nothing will be done until they meet at the end of the year. I suspect we'll be in the same position then as we are now and they'll keep pushing it back.

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:Few highlights from today's Rugby Paper:

Salary cap investigation is now back on after a fiery meeting on Wednesday.
Bruce Craig stepping down as vice chairman of the PRL.
Weight of evidence against some clubs is 'enormous'.
One club said to be £1m over the cap.

Positive news for sure but it also states nothing will be done until they meet at the end of the year. I suspect we'll be in the same position then as we are now and they'll keep pushing it back.

An unnamed club is over the cap by £1 million?  I suppose the expression 'in for a penny, in for a pound' applies?

Pushing the punishment actions back to the end of the year would seem to satisfy the detractors of immediate punishment on here.  

I wonder what mechanism is in place, if any, to guide the clubs over the cap to reduce salaries to be compliant?  Anyone have an idea about this? If clubs have binding contracts with players, can they simply tear up contracts or dismiss certain players under contract to get under the cap?  Seems unlikely.

doctor grey it's pretty self explanatory. NFL is an American sport. The BBC should be supporting British sports,teams and traditions - not become a cheerleader for USA.

Stability and sustainibility I can understand but success? A cap hampers those who are successful.

NFL have a massive cap. The AP cap is paltry in comparison.

You deal with a problem by going to the source. You look at the reasons why this cap violation (if it's proven) happened in the first place. It's because there are issues with the system. You can punish the teams and they probably should do but that doesn't solve the reasons why the alleged cap violation happened.

You talk about transparency -is it fair that every man and their dog can see a player's salary? Would you like it every man and their dog's salary in the country was announced?

Where do you stop?

So it should also exclude all non British acting and prgrammes, no hollywood films etc. Ignore the growing interest in American football and the facts there are teams based here albeit obviously not in the NFL.

We don't know if the cap would hamper those who are successful as we don't know whos got at a cap at present!

The reason for the breach is some people want to win at all costs and have started cheating. Not 'should probably punish them', punish them to what they agreed to.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The reason for the breach is some people want to win at all costs to feed their own egos and have started cheating.

Corrected slightly


I would have more sympathy with their demands to increase the cap if they were even close to generating the income they need to support that.

Interestingley if you google images for Ashley Levett, the man who bankrupted Richmond (and effectively London Scottish) the third picture is actually Nigel Wray. A cautionary tale for any fan whose club is over-reliant on a sugar daddy.

I'm not overly bothered by the sugar daddy thing, I support Boro in football and we've relied on Steve Gibson for a long long time and the guy has been absolutely brilliant for us. He, as far as I'm aware, doesn't try to cheat other teams though.

Back in the Ayresome park days things were bleak at boro, and Gibson helped turn that around - but a big difference between his expenditure (and boros's reliance on him) than say Chelsea.

Talking about Boro (and Chelsea) many, many moons ago the grandfather of a friend was honorary chairmen of Boro. We went to Stamford Bridge to watch a play-off game (back when it was 1 from top flight and 3 from second). God that was scary. Players families were bombarded by bottles of urine from stand above, while us in the away pen truly were treated like cattle. The mass pitch invasion at the end from Chelsea fans when they lost, and were thus relegated was illuminating. For a while they were not people just a feral mob, and without the police mounted division they would have broken down the fence and killed someone. Sadly that happened later as we were stoned (literally) on the way to the tube station and while on the train.

I can believe it. Things have improved a bit but you still get that, to a less extent, when we play a Leeds or a Sunderland.

no 7 & 1/2 what have hollywood films got to do with anything?

Don't say ignore American football but don't promote it to the detriment of British sports.

Losing the rights to the open, losing half the rights to F1 (happened a while ago admittedly), losing half the rights to the 6 nations.

Instead of holding onto these they are promoting an American sport.

Londontiger I have said this many a time - will do it in capslock for your benefit - A CLUB NEEDS THEIR OWN STADIUM.

YOU CANNOT EXPECT A CLUB TO BE SUSTAINABLE IF THEY DON'T HAVE THEIR OWN STADIUM. A CLUB WILL MAKE MOST OF THEIR REVENUE DUE TO THE STADIUM. THEY CAN SELL BOXES, HOSPITALITY PACKAGES,SEASON TICKETS. THEY CAN HAVE A SHOP WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY VITAL TO SELL BRANDED MERCHANDISE. THEY CAN ALSO GENERATE REVENUE BY HIRING THE SPACE FOR THE LIKES OF WEDDINGS,CONFERENCES,EVENTS IN GENERAL ETC.

THERE IS ALSO THE COST OF THE STADIUM ITSELF.

YOU HAVE A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING ON THIS BECAUSE LEICESTER HAVE HAD A STADIUM THEY CAN CALL THEIR OWN FOR A LONG TIME.

COMPARE THIS TO SARACENS WHO HAVE ONLY HAD THEIR STADIUM FOR A VERY SMALL PERIOD OF TIME.

You don't understand the situation - that's the problem.

The situation is simple. They cheated. They willfully, knowingly premeditatedly cheated. There is no let's look at why, but ifs, but we need to be competitive bullspit
They are cheats.
Cheats
Caps lock to help you
CHEATS WHO NEED TO BE PUNISHED.
Understand?

Just in caps lock for your benefit

IF A TEAM IS MAKING LOSSES AND NEEDS TO BUILD A STADIUM TO HELP ITS SUSTAINABILITY IN THE FUTURE IT STILL MUST LIVE WITHIN ITS MEANS.

ARSENAL FOOTBALL CLUB AND THEIR MANAGER HAVE BEEN CRITICISED FROM ALL CORNERS OF THEIR FANBASE AND THE MEDIA FOR NOT SPENDING ENOUGH ON PLAYERS, THEIR RESPONSE HAS BEEN THAT WE CAN'T AFFORD TO WHILE WE NEED TO GET THE STADIUM SORTED

SARACENS AND BATH AND SAINTS AND THE OTHER 9 PREMIERSHIP SIDES HAVE SIGNED UP TO A CAP GOVERNING HOW MUCH THEY ARE ALLOWED TO SPEND, AND THE SANCTIONS THAT WOULD BE ENFORCED IF THEY BROKE THAT CAP

WHICHEVER SIDE THEN DECIDED TO BREAK THAT CAP SHOULD BE PUNISHED IN LINE WITH THOSE SANCTIONS

I hope thats clear enough

carpet baboon of course you need to look at why.

Same with every issue.

Ignore the reasons just makes you look foolish.

Punish the guilty parties by all means but solve the underlying issues so it doesn't happen in the future.

It's you who doesnt understand.