AP Clubs Vote to Block Salary Cap Investigation!

First topic message reminder :

Or Saints keeping Ashton.

beshocked wrote:
Draw a line in the sand. Come to an agreement, work towards more transparency and accountability.

You do realise that is pretty much what was done 3 years ago.

A line was drawn in the sand, all clubs not already punished were forgiven past transactions, significant rolling increases in the cap were agreed and the introduction of marquee players. With two marquee players, the annual increases and extra academy allowances this seasons cap is effectively double that of 2012/13.

Every side agreed to the new line in the sand.

So why should we believe that certain clubs would not agree to any new line in the sand, then continue to blithely ignore it?

Londontiger fair points.

I guess the answer is you just don't know but I wouldn't want the rules to be ignored. It's why I am suggesting a punishment just as you are for breaking the rules.

What you can do is make it harder to break the rules with more transparency.

scottrf what is every wish of theirs? You talk about raising the cap to what I want - for all you know Saracens and Bath will want the cap much higher than I am suggesting.

I still struggle to understand what they would do with an even higher cap than the almost £7m it is for the upcoming season.

Really all they would be doing is hoovering up even more English players to the detriment of the overall league quality.

Londontiger well how much are Saracens allegedly spending?

Have Saracens really hoovered up that many English players compared to other teams?

To be honest I want to see an encouragement in player retention and strong academies.

So let me get this straight you want to change the system of getting change ie move away from a democratic one? What would this new system look like in your eyes?

Rugby Paper reporting there'll definitely be fines/point deductions for two clubs in the Prem.

Haven't read the article myself so don't know the details.

yappysnap wrote:Rugby Paper reporting there'll definitely be fines/point deductions for two clubs in the Prem.

Haven't read the article myself so don't know the details.

Interesting, hope that is correct

No 7&1/2 wrote:So let me get this straight you want to change the system of getting change ie move away from a democratic one? What would this new system look like in your eyes?

Look all I know is that in any new system, I'd instantly elect myself Exalted Shining Star Leader and immediately carry out a necessary purge of this here 606v2. We're letting too many nincompoops in!!!

It would be great if the investigation was completed as I was honestly starting to think it was under the carpet already. Also great to see that this was buried for so long to help the England team at the world cup, god knows how far we would ahve got without that!

no 7 & 1/2 you talk about democracy. IMO every system is flawed. Even our voting system is.

It's about what you want to achieve and how you do that. Also it's about who you want to benefit.

Punish Saracens and Bath by all means but it needs to be done for the right reasons and done in the right way. Though those are subjective.

With England making such a mess of the RWC, it's best to bring the punishment in now.

Swiftly done to try and mitigate the media circus panto.

Unfortunately I expect as much of a mess will be made of this as Lancaster and co made of the RWC.

So England crash out of their own party and my boyhood team is about to be docked points for cheating. All in all a pretty bad weekend for me personally as a rugby fan.

Bathman_in_London wrote:So England crash out of their own party and my boyhood team is about to be docked points for cheating. All in all a pretty bad weekend for me personally as a rugby fan.

to cheer you up, watch these on loop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HsKIDb3qfw
http://sport.bt.com/video/highlights-bath-47-10-leicester-91363982815870

Thanks mate, I will watch it listening to soothing music and whale song. Pretty unbelievable looking back at that score line really!

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 you talk about democracy. IMO every system is flawed. Even our voting system is.

It's about what you want to achieve and how you do that. Also it's about who you want to benefit.

Punish Saracens and Bath by all means but it needs to be done for the right reasons and done in the right way.  Though those are subjective.

With England making such a mess of the RWC, it's best to bring the punishment in now.

Swiftly done to try and mitigate the media circus panto.

Unfortunately I expect as much of a mess will be made of this as Lancaster and co made of the RWC.

1 vote for eacg club would I think be pretty fair. Punishment if they've broken the rules and by the rules already set out seems fair. It should have been done already. Now it is more likely to be used as a stick to beat with as its looks to be a cover up.

Fair? When does fairness come in?

It is fair that the RFU had ripped off English fans and they had to watch the incredibly disappointing England rugby campaign?

Is it fair that debenture holders couldn't get tickets for the RWC?

Is it fair that the English clubs have a restrictive salary cap whilst the Irish have no salary cap and the French one is much higher?

Is it only fair if you get your own way?

Was the qualification for the world cup which allowed the group of death fair?

Is it fair that the rules are flawed in the first place?

Is it fair that the rules can never be changed by those who disagree with them?

Greed and self interest is at the heart of it. It's just about who has control.

Just because something is in the rules doesn't mean it's perfect.


The media will turn this into a circus - you'll get your wish don't worry.

Just to answer one of those, yes it is fair for the clubs to vote democratically on the rules in place for the league.

no 7 & 1/2 which question did you supposedly answer?

so basically what you're saying is that it's your way or the high way.

Fair enough. That's what I thought. It's about bullying the minority into your way of thinking.

By your logic I guess you disagree with Britain's attitude to the EU?

Baically Britain does what it wants in its interest. Do you not think Britain should protect itself?

Would you have a similar view point if the rest of the EU voted against Britain on issues? Forcing it do things it doesn't want?

The way I see it as each club is selfish and wants what is best for them. Perhaps clubs will unite against a common foe like Saracens and Bath but it's done for self interest. Equally clubs like Saracens and Bath want what is best for them.

The way you get round this selfishness is working together, progressing. Not forcing and dictating to the likes of Bath and Saracens to do your bidding but involving them in the process of improving club rugby.

It's like in the RFU - there is too much greed and selfishness, if the RFU had spent a little less time on ripping off rugby fans and a little more time in helping the England team into a decent side then they might have escaped from criticism.

Not bothering with politics on a rugby forum but I'd agree with you that the likelihood is that each club is out to try and get the best deal for itself overall, some may have a broader vision. Completely agree again that the only way forward is working together. The only way you can get that fair way forward is for each club to vote.

It's not going forward if nothing changes and if no one works together.

Now quite clearly there are differing views but there needs to be a compromise.

You say it's democracy if you vote on something. Let's say a vote goes 10-2. You still have 2 clubs who disagree. You might say - tough but that disagreement is why there's a dispute in the first place. An agreement needs to be ironed out with those who disagree.

It's ultimately about who gets their own way.

There's no fairer way than a vote though. The clubs need to work together, and then vote on any potential changes. If there is a 10 2 split then fair enough that's how the league wants it. That means there's 10 clubs getting what they want and 2 who probably aren't. Democracy doesn't mean 100% agreement.

That's still 2 clubs in the league not being listened to. It's not working together if you work against me. If I had the power to get my own way, would I use it? Quite possibly.

Ultimately everyone wants what they want - fairness doesn't matter a lot of the time.

As I said the prices for the RWC wasn't fair but that was forced upon us.

Just because something is supposedly in the rules it doesn't make it right (especially when other countries like Ireland and France don't abide by these rules).

Just because someone doesn't get their own way doesn't mean they haven't been listened to, merely the majority in this case didn't want it.

Yes everyone wants what they want and with 20 clubs is it, you would need to vote on the leagues rules so they majority are in agreement. It's the only way to work it.

The rules are the rules beshocked. If Saracens and Bath wanted to change them they need to get majority backing.

There have been plenty of compromises by the less wealthy clubs. The salary cap has been consistently rising and 2 marquee players introduced. The very reason the marquee player was introduced was to allow the wealthy clubs (not bigger clubs) to spend more money in a way that would protect the AP clubs from having their better players poached.  The cap as it is this coming season is already higher than many of the clubs are able/would like to spend, but they've made the concessions. What more do you want?

I think each club should have the number of vote proportional to their debt. After all you need to speculate the accumulate. This will help the championship teams too, so they can load themselves up on players they can't afford to try and compete, gaining significant say in the running of the league. Also, those dinosaurs that try to live within heir means will be sidelines to allow progress to happen.

HammerofThunor wrote:I think each club should have the number of vote proportional to their debt. After all you need to speculate the accumulate.  This will help the championship teams too, so they can load themselves up on players they can't afford to try and compete, gaining significant say in the running of the league. Also, those dinosaurs that try to live within heir means will be sidelines to allow progress to happen.

I didn't realise you worked for Saracens Hammer?

Fuzzy Dunlop you say what more do I want. I want the salary cap to be more in line with France.

But the majority of clubs don't.

Ultimately it's about getting what you want.

So like I said a new system not based on democracy but based on what's best for Saracens.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So like I said a new system not based on democracy but based on what's best for Saracens.

I cannot see how raising the cap is even good for Saracens, unless they intend to leave the AP and set up a European Super League.

Sarries fans should be terrified as there is every chance that in 5 years the backers will have left and the club, a club with a long history, will go the way of Orrell, West Hartlepool, Richmond and London Scottish.

Do you think UK is being democratic when it refuses to let more Syrian refugees into the country?

I am sure if other countries voted on it, they would want the UK to take in more but the UK has the choice whether to listen to the EU or not.

In the case of Saracens they quite clearly disagree with the current situation as it is, I wouldn't blame Saracens wanting to see a change in the system. Just as Saracens desired a change in the European competition.

Leicester wants what is best for Leicester, Newcastle wants what is best for Newcastle,Harlequins wants what is best for Harlequins and Saracens want what is best for them.

There needs to be a meeting of minds.

Fuzzy Dunlop you might well say that compromises have been made by less wealthy clubs but the wealthier ones have too. Need to carry on with those compromises.

As I said my solution is punishment for the guilty parties then a raise in the cap but also other issues sorted out like more transparency in salaries and a concerted effort to get teams to increase their revenue which will bring down the debt.

I bet you this - raising the cap will not increase the quality of players within the AP.

It will however reduce the overall quality of the competition.

Londontiger at the moment Saracens have Allianz Park.

The other teams struggled because they didn't have a sufficiently strong enough powerbase.

, all I am saying is that the AP needs to move discuss things like salary transparency, the salary cap and being more competitive. Perhaps increasing the salary cap to French levels is too much at the moment but it needs to be discussed.

How would you raise the overall quality of the competition but not make it detrimental to English club's efforts in the ERCC?

You said on another thread that you thought English players weren't skilled enough in Europe. How do you fix that too?

I don't have the figures in front of m.

Like I said it's not a politics forum. And as agreed already clubs will want a good deal for them. Anything to do with changing the rules needs a vote. I'm sure someone will come up with something similar to your proposals but they again should be voted on. It's not that hard.

It's not a politics forum no but the same principles are there. You want to get the best deal for you.

Did the RFU vote on the ticket prices of the world cup? Did they give us ordinary rugby fans an opinion? No of course not.

There is greed everywhere. I am not saying Saracens are any different. They want what they want. Just like everyone else.

Yes, not really sure what we're discussing here! There's current rules in place. Some clubs will want some changes, some won't. Vote on any proposed changes after discussion. Done.

If the only way to compete in the ERCC is to either:

A) Fill the team with overseas superstars

or

B) Concentrate the best English players into just one club


Well then the ERCC can go feck itself.

One compromise I'd love to see the wealthy clubs make is actually sticking to the agreed cap. It's a big one, I know.

The salary cap will match the French one if, and only if, the money distributed by PRL covers most of it alone. Clubs who share football grounds aren't ever going to be able to seriously look at getting a stadium of their own when all the money they generate has to be spent on player wages. If anything I'd like to see the cap remain in place even as central revenue increases so that more money can be invested off the field.

EXCLUSIVE: Salary cap cheats will be hammered to protect league’s integrity

Posted on October 6, 2015 by Nick Verdier in Aviva Premiership, Featured with 0 Comments
By NEALE HARVEY

Two Premiership clubs are set to be fined and deducted points for the 2015-16 campaign as top-flight rugby bosses prepare to clampdown on salary cap cheats.

The Rugby Paper understands investigations into salary cap abuse are nearing a conclusion and two clubs – one in London, the other a West Country side – are to be hit with sanctions aimed to protect the league’s integrity.

Premiership Rugby’s £5.5m salary cap has been the subject of fierce debate, with some clubs calling for it to be scrapped while others value the level playing field it is intended to provide, but one league insider described the two clubs as, “bang to rights”.

Despite threats by clubs under suspicion to challenge the legality of the cap under European Law, attempts to suppress the investigation have proved futile, with rival clubs insisting any side found guilty must be brought to book in line with regulations.

Sanctions of between £3 and £10 for every pound a club is found over the cap can be applied, along with a scale of points deductions up to a maximum of 40. It is thought a settlement could be reached if the two clubs involved accept their punishments.It is believed the alleged breaches do not to relate to last season.

A senior top-flight insider told The Rugby Paper: “Clubs are bang to rights, we all know it, and something has to happen because how can you look supporters, sponsors, coaches, players and staff in the eye if you know the game is tainted in this way?

“It has to be done before the start of the season and it will be a combination of cash and points for this season. It has to have teeth otherwise we’re in trouble.“What integrity will we have if we can’t say our championship is clean? There’ll be compromise but it’ll be a big step forward because there’s a lot of anger.”

Meanwhile, TRP understands Premiership Rugby chairman Quentin Smith has survived a recent coup attempt led be a cabal of senior clubs who had sought his removal from the board in a bid to gain greater control of league affairs.

It is believed the name of former Saracens chief executive Edward Griffiths was put forward as a potential replacement, but that failed to find favour with a majority of clubs voting to retain Smith, who they consider to be a safe pair of hands.A source revealed:

“Some of them definitely wanted Quentin out and (chief executive) Mark McCafferty is probably under pressure as well.“There’s been talk of a ‘commissioner’ role to replace the CEO, as they have in NFL, but it’s really about individuals who want to grab power.”

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/24062/exclusive-salary-cap-cheats-will-be-hammered-to-protect-leagues-integrity/

Well we've got to the right decision in the end

Nothing confirmed yet, I thought.

They are going to have to announce the full results soon then!

Given the rugby paper's tendency to talk a load of Poopie I'll be waiting on the official outcome.

I'm sure our celtic brethren will be pleased to here that Saracens et al wanted to replace Smith/McCafferty with someone MORE aligned to Saracens.

Interesting that it says there will compromises. I'm guessing that means they won't be 'punished' as much as they should.

Probably only a token fine and points deduction.


There is precedent as London Welsh were only docked 1pt per game for fielding ineligible player, when the minimum penalty is 3 per game.

HammerofThunor wrote:Given the rugby paper's tendency to talk a load of Poopie I'll be waiting on the official outcome.

I'm sure our celtic brethren will be pleased to here that Saracens et al wanted to replace Smith/McCafferty with someone MORE aligned to Saracens.

Interesting that it says there will compromises. I'm guessing that means they won't be 'punished' as much as they should.

No not pleased. It's just another Animal Farm. If that rag is to be believed, then things are worse than I understood. The top clubs trying to oust PRL leadership? And why would they want to do that? If it's true, I agree with the comment at the bottom of that article; it's all about power.

Hopefully, as the article also states, this mess is sorted quickly, and for the good of AP.

If Saracens wanted to replace McCafferty it would be as predicted.  McCafferty used to do one job (Europe) then usurped to put someone else in to do the next job (Domestic dictatorship of the richest few clubs).

The job ain't over.  Premiership Football Rugby.  No caps.  Rich get richer.  To hell with the small fry AP sides in the middle and the bottom.  Let them live on scraps.  That's the goal.  The domination of four or five European superclubs, pushing Global Brand identities into new markets.

SecretFly wrote:If Saracens wanted to replace McCafferty it would be as predicted.  McCafferty used to do one job (Europe) then usurped to put someone else in to do the next job (Domestic dictatorship of the richest few clubs).

The job ain't over.  Premiership Football Rugby.  No caps.  Rich get richer.  To hell with the small fry AP sides in the middle and the bottom.  Let them live on scraps.  That's the goal.  The domination of four or five European superclubs, pushing Global Brand identities into new markets.

I am pretty sure that Saracens would like to see a 14 team competition with teams from:

London, Cardiff, Dublin, Belfast, Glasgow, Paris, Toulouse, Toulon, Bath, Cape Town, Jo'burh, Durban, Pretoria and New York

I thought we were going to hear some results before the start of the season!!

Sin é wrote:EXCLUSIVE: Salary cap cheats will be hammered to protect league’s integrity

Posted on October 6, 2015 by Nick Verdier in Aviva Premiership, Featured with 0 Comments
By NEALE HARVEY

Two Premiership clubs are set to be fined and deducted points for the 2015-16 campaign as top-flight rugby bosses prepare to clampdown on salary cap cheats.

The Rugby Paper understands investigations into salary cap abuse are nearing a conclusion and two clubs – one in London, the other a West Country side – are to be hit with sanctions aimed to protect the league’s integrity.

A London side and a West Country side. Don't you all hate Quins and Exeter!

Premiership Rugby salary cap investigation: "resolved the issues identified & have entered into appropriate confidential settlements"

So that's that then

Base level sal cap rising from £5.5m this season to £6.5m in 2016/17 & onto £7m in 2017/18 as well as new Eng Senior EPS Int'l Player credit

From here. Slap on the wrists and room to spend more in the coming seasons - congratulations to the winners of the power struggle   .