AP Clubs Vote to Block Salary Cap Investigation!

First topic message reminder :

Or Saints keeping Ashton.

Problem with the salary cap is that you should also have a salary floor (not sure if we do or not at the moment). If we do, and clubs can't afford to spend much more than the floor, then we shouldn't be raising the cap, or we'll make the gap between the haves and the have nots ever wider

I know you think this means the lower ranked clubs are dictating to the big names, but I'd rather that than there effectively be a divide between top 6 and bottom 6.

One of the other issues is that the teams breaking the cap are doing so through their owners not through ticket sales or commercial deals. The biggest spenders have no fans, it's not sustainable.

Heaf -the difficulty with that is who do you award the title to then? Saints,Bath and Sarries are all alleged to have cheated. Does this mean that Tigers get it by default?


that's tough. I guess you raise it to 7 or 8m.

That would be lower than what Saracens and Bath would want but higher than what most other clubs would want.

Bambam you don't think that the lower ranked clubs already have advantages like less international players meaning during the IW they play against weakened sides? Also not having to try and fight on 3 fronts?

If the investigation is done post season it does seem a bit pointless.

Instead of finishing 11th you've won the title, and even if that's erased the true winners don't get the joy of a title win and you do.

beshocked wrote:Heaf -the difficulty with that is who do you award the title to then? Saints,Bath and Sarries are all alleged to have cheated. Does this mean that Tigers get it by default?


that's tough. I guess you raise it to 7 or 8m.

That would be lower than what Saracens and Bath would want but higher than what most other clubs would want.

Bambam you don't think that the lower ranked clubs already have advantages like less international players meaning during the IW they play against weakened sides? Also not having to try and fight on 3 fronts?

I'd elect it to nobody - that's fairest.  Too many games in a season, too many parameters.  The eventual runner-up mightn't have been even there either.  A gap year like the gap years in the Tour de France.

On the lower ranked sides I think they have to fight to get to a comfortable top and fight to stay away from an uncomfortable bottom - so that's two fronts.  Then they have to fight against teams that for most of the year DO have the much better players - third front.

Shocked, it's just very difficult to argue that teams at the bottom of a League have all the advantages.  They're trying to get to the top where the Top guys are.  They want those same '3 front' headaches that the Top guys already have.

beshocked wrote:Heaf -the difficulty with that is who do you award the title to then? Saints,Bath and Sarries are all alleged to have cheated. Does this mean that Tigers get it by default?


that's tough. I guess you raise it to 7 or 8m.

That would be lower than what Saracens and Bath would want but higher than what most other clubs would want.

Bambam you don't think that the lower ranked clubs already have advantages like less international players meaning during the IW they play against weakened sides? Also not having to try and fight on 3 fronts?

Nobody would get it - as Fly says, too many variables.  

The bold bit would be that compromise I was talking about ... just like what probably happened when they set the current level.  Does this mean Sarries and Bath would feel entitled to cheat again as they didn't get what they wanted?

Sorry Beshocked, but in what way are Leicester losers in the salary cap? The club have said it wasn't easy to find next season's 500k cap increase and for months they've been softening fans up to the idea that they probably won't be taking advantage of the second marquee player yet.

They could find the money, of course, but it would mean sacrificing improvements they want to make off the field.

I'm sorry but comparing the persecution and state sanction murder of homosexuals around the world to Saracens and Bath being constrained by the salary means you're going on my ignore list Beshocked. We are clearly so clearly apart in thought that there no point, and I'll end up saying sometching that will get me banned.

Bathman_in_London wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:I hope I'm wrong but by keeping a lid on this until after the world cup I think a can of worms will be opened at just the time when there will be public interest in the sport and thereby undoing the good work of the tournament.

Sadly I bet we will end up with an amnesty again like in 2008(?),everyone promises not to do it again and then we will be back here in a few years time.

The investigation should continue regardless of fixtures. Its a joke (nay, an embarrassment) that its been put on hold. The guilty teams should be punished severely.

Agree completely.  There will always be a reason to delay publishing the names of the clubs in violation, the scope of the violation, and the punishment.  Now it's the World Cup.  next is Euro Rugby, after that is Christmas, and so on.  

I look at it the opposite way:  To me, being open with the process actually puts Rugby in a good light.  Shows our sport and our league as not tolerating soccer-type spending and behaviour, nor the shady back room nonsense and shady deals we see in soccer.  To go public when more of the global spotlight is on Rugby is almost a no-brainer.  The longer this goes on, the more of the high moral ground we lose.

I think you both misunderstand me, I think this should have been dealt with already and anyone a penny over should be punished harshly. Frankly if Bath are found guilty I will be annoyed with the management, not the system.

What I meant was, the process should have been finished over the summer, rather than dragging on into the new season.

Sorry if I misunderstood. I agree with you, and in fact, I suppose most people do as well. This process should have run its course already. My comments have been from where we are now going forwards. I was saying there could always be an excuse to avoid going public and starting the punishments. Not saying I want that to happen. Just the opposite.

I wouldn't remove the title from a winning team that broke the cap but would add an astrix to indicate that it was won while breaking the cap with a note of by how much & possble reasons

???

Nobody would give a damn about the astrix broadbandboy.  I think some teams wouldn't mind getting five or six years of astrixes as long as the Titles were still legally theirs.
"You broke the rules!"
"Oh yeah big boy?  Go look at the records...we still won..the titles are ours, nobody took them off us so legit wins."

Not really much punishment is it, an astrix?

Sod the punishment to the team itself, sod not giving it to anyone. The annoying thing is there was the potential there for Exeter to have won the big one, denied to them through cheating. When we discuss the potential impact on clubs and fans think about them and the impact the cheating has had.

beshocked wrote:

Jimpy how many times do I need to say I think they should be punished if found guilty?

I didn't say that I think that Bath and Saracens should escape punishment.

I'm not disputing that.

What I'm really hacked off with is that on the one hand you're saying the teams should be punished and on the other you're saying that breaking the rules was alright, because the teams in question just didn't like the rules.

That's utter carp.

They broke the rules, anybody defending their right to break the rules on the basis that they simply didn't suit, should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

You probably already know this: According to the Rugby Paper, Craig is to step down as VC at PRL, whatever punishment is due the offending clubs wont be voted on until the end of year, and there will be no action taken against any club unless ALL vote in favour. Will Turkeys vote for Christmas? Will they be allowed?

This is an online petition calling for action against the offending clubs: DontSweepItUnderTheCarpet.

It's just disgusting.

That's be a big day for offending clubs when they are asked to vote to punish themselves and know they have a casting vote on whether or not they get punished at all.

God, that'll be a strange day.

But I reckon if given time enough to think about it, they'll do what's least expected and actually vote to punish themselves - showing once again that they're sorry and want to start fresh - but, condition attached! Craig back as VC.

If the Rugby Paper is right then it shows that at least some clubs are still fighting for action to be taken, and so much so that it has ousted Craig from his position as VC. That's a real positive, but it's not enough. Will those offending clubs get a vote?

If the offending clubs do get punished, I think this could a real positive for the AP, and all professional leagues. It will show that the big clubs, the big money, don't always have to get their way. I don't think the petition will have much of an effect, but if it did it would also show that fans have at least some say in the governance of our leagues.

Fuzzy Dunlop

Surely you can see the make up of the Leicester squad to see how the salary cap has hurt Leicester. From a predominantly English club to one of the highest foreign numbers in the league. Inability to hold onto players like Waldrom,Salvi,Parling,Castro,Ford and Twelvetrees - the whole squad has a completely different look.

Leicester did very well to come 3rd in the league position but the salary cap IMO has definitely hurt them.


Jimpy I didn't say that breaking the rules was alright. I said that I think the rules themselves are flawed and I can understand why there are some grievances against the current system. Breaking the system isn't right but neither do I think the current system is correct either.

Hammerofthunor to be frank if that upsets you so much then you need to grow some thicker skin.

My point is that there are disagreements that need to be dealt with amicably - whether that's homosexuality or the salary cap. I find the treatment of homosexuals in other countries deplorable and am disgusted that some Russian $%&*s decided to prank Elton John when he was trying to discuss a serious topic with Putin. Don't pretend you know me.

There are some people in the world who can't be reasoned with - I will concede that but ultimately we have to work towards a positive solution whether it's the salary cap, the refugee crisis, the issue of homosexuality.

I find it amusing actually - you'll put me on your ignore list, instead of confronting me you'll just hide away or brush it under the carpet (something you don't want the AP to do). If you want to swear at me or insult by all means.

I am interested to hear your point of view even if it's Beshocked you're a  &*() and *()($%&.

The inability to have dialogue with me shows your intolerance IMO. Of course you could accuse me of hypocrisy on other topics and would have a fair point.

To be honest I think most of you make some very good points but I don't agree with everything.


Munchkin the "big" clubs haven't got their own way with the salary cap though have they? Lower than the French and Irish (who don't have one).

Munchkin wrote:If the Rugby Paper is right then it shows that at least some clubs are still fighting for action to be taken, and so much so that it has ousted Craig from his position as VC. That's a real positive, but it's not enough. Will those offending clubs get a vote?

If the offending clubs do get punished, I think this could a real positive for the AP, and all professional leagues. It will show that the big clubs, the big money, don't always have to get their way. I don't think the petition will have much of an effect, but if it did it would also show that fans have at least some say in the governance of our leagues.

Agree mate. If it worked in the NFL where mere millionaires beat the billionaires to put in a common sense business model, it can work with the Premiership as well.

Are Leicester hurt by the cap or hurt by people cheating more?

Munchkin wrote:If the Rugby Paper is right then it shows that at least some clubs are still fighting for action to be taken, and so much so that it has ousted Craig from his position as VC. That's a real positive, but it's not enough. Will those offending clubs get a vote?

If the offending clubs do get punished, I think this could a real positive for the AP, and all professional leagues. It will show that the big clubs, the big money, don't always have to get their way. I don't think the petition will have much of an effect, but if it did it would also show that fans have at least some say in the governance of our leagues.

Yep. I'm having a lot of renewed faith in the idea that Big guys, wielding their brash power-talk and blank chequebooks, will not ride roughshod over our sport or the wishes of the majority of fans that the sport is fair, seen to be fair, and not controlled by guys who want it to fit their blueprint of Football and become the plaything of the highest bidder and the unlimited budgets.

There is still a way of finding balance that allows everyone to breathe in a climate of mutual respect and balanced competitiveness, and these AP teams protesting behind the scenes for justice and for justice to be seen to be done within the structures of agreed rules - I salute them. Keep up the fight. Mightn't win it but keep resisting the pressure from the Big Boys to bury and deny.

SF, thats a bit rich. The Irish provinces have one of the highest spends per squad in the whole of Europe.

They haven't broken the rules to do so though.

You talk about level playing field.

How is it a level playing field when one side has their own stadium for years and years whilst the other has to build their own stadium, incurring significant costs and is held back by not being able to acquire their own stadium for years?

In the case of Bath they've been frustated by being unable to refresh and improve their stadium.

One way a team can catch up is with more money.

Fans from clubs that have had their own stadium for years do not understand what it's like to have to struggle with being a nomad - it hurts the club identity and building revenues.

Ultimately it's about who you want to get their own way. The smaller clubs or the bigger clubs. Personally I want a compromise to be reached. I don't want the smaller clubs to dominate and equally I don't want the bigger ones to either.

The rules are the rules but it doesn't mean they shouldn't change if deemed flawed or just plain wrong.

Doctor grey the NFL has a much higher salary cap.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Are Leicester hurt by the cap or hurt by people cheating more?

How many Leicester players have gone to Bath and Saracens?

Isn't it only Ford and there's the family connection? Of course I am sure you'll say it was only about the money, not that Ford Jr wanted to link with his father and be first choice 10......

beshocked wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Are Leicester hurt by the cap or hurt by people cheating more?

How many Leicester players have gone to Bath and Saracens?

Isn't it only Ford and there's the family connection? Of course I am sure you'll say it was only about the money, not that Ford Jr wanted to link with his father and be first choice 10......

But have they been hurt by the cap? As much as I dislike Cockerill, you have to admire the job he's done. It's looking better by the day as well.

No 7&1/2 wrote:They haven't broken the rules to do so though.

Yes I understand that. But when he says this:-

SecretFly wrote:Yep. I'm having a lot of renewed faith in the idea that Big guys, wielding their brash power-talk and blank chequebooks, will not ride roughshod over our sport or the wishes of the majority of fans that the sport is fair, seen to be fair, and not controlled by guys who want it to fit their blueprint of Football and become the plaything of the highest bidder and the unlimited budgets.

It's a bit of a double standard, to say the least.

LordDowlais wrote:SF, thats a bit rich. The Irish provinces have one of the highest spends per squad in the whole of Europe.

Keep believing that Lord.

We're not higher than the top four in France and we're not higher than the top four in England.  So we'd have rough parity...for now...Thank God

- but don't tell me Connacht boys are on Clermont wages or that Ulster exceeds Leicester wages.

Oh and thanks once again for waiting in the long grass for a particular Irish guy to speak....  

Oh and congratulations on the few Home games that Wales have in the WC hosted by another Rugby Nation - again.

...AND the profits the WRU will make from those Home games during an Away WC

...AND the fact, noted by yourself on another thread, that the WRU will actually make more of a Profit from the English WC than the RFU will...


Still on for playing with me?

SecretFly wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:SF, thats a bit rich. The Irish provinces have one of the highest spends per squad in the whole of Europe.

Keep believing that Lord.

We're not higher than the top four in France and we're not higher than the top four in England.  So we'd have rough parity...for now...Thank God

- but don't tell me Connacht boys are on Clermont wages or that Ulster exceeds Leicester wages.

Oh and thanks once again for waiting in the long grass for a particular Irish guy to speak....  

Oh and congratulations on the few Home games that Wales have in the WC hosted by another Rugby Nation - again.

...AND the profits the WRU will make from those Home games during an Away WC

...AND the fact, noted by yourself on another thread, that the WRU will actually make more of a Profit from the English WC than the RFU will...


Still on for playing with me?

OI, you've got your own thread for Ireland vs Wales slagging matches, this is just for us banging our heads against a giant Beshocked shaped wall!!!

no 7 & 1/2 Yes they have been hurt by the cap IMO.

Well said Lorddowlais. An Irishman preaching to us about salary caps......

Bambam so where do you feel the current disagreement is?

I believe that if found guilty Saracens,Bath and Saints should be punished.

It should be done after the RWC.

Is the main disagreement that most of you think that the current rules are fine as they are?

SecretFly wrote:Oh and congratulations on the few Home games that Wales have in the WC hosted by another Rugby Nation - again.

...AND the profits the WRU will make from those Home games during an Away WC

...AND the fact, noted by yourself on another thread, that the WRU will actually make more of a Profit from the English WC than the RFU will...

What has any of that got to do with what the Irish spend on their provincial squads ?

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 Yes they have been hurt by the cap IMO.

Well said Lorddowlais. An Irishman preaching to us about salary caps......

But haven't they just finsihed top of all the teams who haven't been accused of cheating? It can't be hurting that much can it? The players you picked out as well; you said Ford moved for his dad, Twelvetrees I'm sure moved due to not getting into the team didn't he (sure you've said that), Parling has been moved on rather than for more money ain't he?

Money is money, Lord...Once proud to boast about it on another thread...now trying to brush it under a carpet?

Leave the Irish v Welsh stuff for other threads, like Bam says.

This is about AP and PRL and I WILL continue to make contributions as I see fit on the topic

What do you think about the situation, Lord? What's your take on what's going on?

Munchkin wrote:You probably already know this: According to the Rugby Paper, Craig is to step down as VC at PRL, whatever punishment is due the offending clubs wont be voted on until the end of year, and there will be no action taken against any club unless ALL vote in favour. Will Turkeys vote for Christmas? Will they be allowed?

This is an online petition calling for action against the offending clubs: DontSweepItUnderTheCarpet.

Is that correct? - if so it's incredibly stupid ... how can you enforce a set of rules if the offenders know they can veto any punishment?

Leicester have not been hurt by the cap especially. Some players have moved on, and some not signed to stay under the cap - but that was what the 14 PRL teams agreed to.

And that's my point LT. To play by the rules as some players become better and demand more money you face the choice of paying them more, balancing it with maybe letting another go or moving them on bringing in a journey man and a young kid maybe. It's all about balance. They haven't been hurt by that, or probably wouldn't if others were also making that same choice.

no 7 & 1/2 do you honestly think that Tigers are as good a team than they used to be?

It's not just the AP, Tigers aren't making the same impact in Europe they used to.

Oh right so now you're changing your view - from every move to being about money to no players leaving Leicester for more money.....

Castro moved to Toulon simply because he wanted to top up his tan, not his bank account?

Does it not count because it's Leicester?

You might have a valid point if Saracens and Bath were taking numerous Leicester players but they haven't.

The salary cap has hurt Leicester.

Heaf wrote:

Munchkin wrote:You probably already know this: According to the Rugby Paper, Craig is to step down as VC at PRL, whatever punishment is due the offending clubs wont be voted on until the end of year, and there will be no action taken against any club unless ALL vote in favour. Will Turkeys vote for Christmas? Will they be allowed?

This is an online petition calling for action against the offending clubs: DontSweepItUnderTheCarpet.

Is that correct? - if so it's incredibly stupid ... how can you enforce a set of rules if the offenders know they can veto any punishment?

Actually it is not true.

All clubs already agreed what the punishments should be.

What is happening however is that a minority are threatening not to sign the commercial agreements unless the other clubs agree to suspend the investigation. The decision to suspend that investigation has to be unanimous. The investigation is now complete - so the offending parties want all other teams to agree to no penalty. If they agree then the offending parties sign the commercial deals and those clubs who survive from the income rugby generates will get the cash they so badly need to pay salaries etc.

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 do you honestly think that Tigers are as good a team than they used to be?

It's not just the AP, Tigers aren't making the same impact in Europe they used to.

Oh right so now you're changing your view - from every move to being about money to no players leaving Leicester for more money.....

Castro moved to Toulon simply because he wanted to top up his tan, not his bank account?

Does it not count because it's Leicester?

Teams have ups and downs beshocked. Where have I said no Leicester players leave for more money? My point is that the cap clearly hasn't hurt them, they sit top of the teams who didn't cheat. Saracens cheated and Bath cheated and still didn't win in Europe. You currently don't have a cap because you see it as unfair, what next play with an extra man?

beshocked wrote:

Doctor grey the NFL has a much higher salary cap.

Beshocked, the NFL does have a higher salary cap indeed, it is $143m for this season

However, if they so chose, the Dallas Cowboys/New York Giants/Washington Redskins could spend double/triple what the actual cap is if they had the freedom.

The likes of the Jacksonville Jaguars and Tennessee Titans can't.

As proof, over the last 3 seasons, Jacksonville have been below the cap by $33m, $27m and $22m over the last 3 seasons. Washington have been below the cap by $6m in 2015, OVER the cap by $1.5m in 2014 (when they were fined), and under by $600k in 2013.

As it happens, both teams are towards the bottom of the league because Washington's management buys a load of average players but their revenue and fame is such that they still have plenty of cash to spend.

I would say that this is comparable to Newcastle and Saracens spending power, why should Sarries be allowed to increase the advantage they have over Newcastle even further if Newcastle can't even spend up to the cap as it is now?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams have ups and downs beshocked. Where have I said no Leicester players leave for more money? My point is that the cap clearly hasn't hurt them, they sit top of the teams who didn't cheat. Saracens cheated and Bath cheated and still didn't win in Europe. You currently don't have a cap because you see it as unfair, what next play with an extra man?

Saints have been implicated by one man. None of the print press did the same. Can we stop repeating it as fact?

The new cap will hurt us, as we will not have the funds to spend up to it. that however was a compromise agreed so that the clubs who do not need to worry about balancing the books would agree to a cap.

Which they then broke anyway.

Europe is not the be all and end all. It is the icing on the cake. (with international rugby the cherry on the top)

beshocked wrote:Fuzzy Dunlop

Surely you can see the make up of the Leicester squad to see how the salary cap has hurt Leicester. From a predominantly English club to one of the highest foreign numbers in the league. Inability to hold onto players like Waldrom,Salvi,Parling,Castro,Ford and Twelvetrees - the whole squad has a completely different look.

Leicester did very well to come 3rd in the league position but the salary cap IMO has definitely hurt them.


Jimpy I didn't say that breaking the rules was alright. I said that I think the rules themselves are flawed and I can understand why there are some grievances against the current system. Breaking the system isn't right but neither do I think the current system is correct either.

Hammerofthunor to be frank if that upsets you so much then you need to grow some thicker skin.

My point is that there are disagreements that need to be dealt with amicably - whether that's homosexuality or the salary cap. I find the treatment of homosexuals in other countries deplorable and am disgusted that some Russian $%&*s decided to prank Elton John when he was trying to discuss a serious topic with Putin. Don't pretend you know me.

There are some people in the world who can't be reasoned with - I will concede that but ultimately we have to work towards a positive solution whether it's the salary cap, the refugee crisis, the issue of homosexuality.

I find it amusing actually - you'll put me on your ignore list, instead of confronting me you'll just hide away or brush it under the carpet (something you don't want the AP to do). If you want to swear at me or insult by all means.

I am interested to hear your point of view even if it's Beshocked you're a  &*() and *()($%&.

The inability to have dialogue with me shows your intolerance IMO. Of course you could accuse me of hypocrisy on other topics and would have a fair point.

To be honest I think most of you make some very good points but I don't agree with everything.


Munchkin the "big" clubs haven't got their own way with the salary cap though have they? Lower than the French and Irish (who don't have one).

Who said they have? They agreed to the current rules though, and they broke them. One of the 'they' being your club, Saracens.

You're telling that Saracens have less of a spend than the Irish? Catch yourself on. Maybe that's why Sarries managed to get into £40m debt? Sarries, and a few others, spend well above what the Provinces get.

You are defending the indefensible, beshocked, and doing a poor job of it.

Doesn't fit my narrative for Leicester as nicely if I do Scott.

And to be fair none of this is fact as we've been denied it to 'protect the world cup'.

Indeed, I'm trying to set the bar at 'strong speculation' though

no 7 & 1/2

There is a difference between thinking something is unfair and breaking the rules.

Saracens and Bath have broken the rules should be punished. What I want to see is a complete rehaul of the system which I don't think currently suits every club. I think the rules themselves are flawed.

I guess the main difference between us is that you believe the current system is good as it is. I completely disagree.

It is about dealing with the issues at hand. That means punishment and reformation of the system.

Is that so hard to implement? That gives the clubs and fans who want Saracens and Bath if guilty to be punished what they want, a reformation of the system will help strengthen the league and deal with some issues that the likes of Saracens and Bath have.

Is my suggestion so unreasonable?

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:If the Rugby Paper is right then it shows that at least some clubs are still fighting for action to be taken, and so much so that it has ousted Craig from his position as VC. That's a real positive, but it's not enough. Will those offending clubs get a vote?

If the offending clubs do get punished, I think this could a real positive for the AP, and all professional leagues. It will show that the big clubs, the big money, don't always have to get their way. I don't think the petition will have much of an effect, but if it did it would also show that fans have at least some say in the governance of our leagues.

Yep.  I'm having a lot of renewed faith in the idea that Big guys, wielding their brash power-talk and blank chequebooks, will not ride roughshod over our sport or the wishes of the majority of fans that the sport is fair, seen to be fair, and not controlled by guys who want it to fit their blueprint of Football and become the plaything of the highest bidder and the unlimited budgets.

There is still a way of finding balance that allows everyone to breathe in a climate of mutual respect and balanced competitiveness, and these AP teams protesting behind the scenes for justice and for justice to be seen to be done within the structures of agreed rules - I salute them.  Keep up the fight.  Mightn't win it but keep resisting the pressure from the Big Boys to bury and deny.

Well the outcome may be a lot more positive than I believed, if these reports are true. Could be a very healthy outcome for the AP, and one which will act as a cautionary tale for other leagues. Put the bullies like Wray in his place.

The reformation that you're looking for isn't a positive one though.

You can't afford your current spending or make a profit. How is a higher cap a good idea?

But the new rules won't suit everyone so what you mean is change them to suit some cheats isn't it?

I don't mind what the rules are to be honest, they are agreed between all clubs; what I don't like are people breaking rules. I don't mind a change in future as has happened for the new season. Ways and means to do it. Completely separate from the cheating, then the delay, and possible cover up.