AP Clubs Vote to Block Salary Cap Investigation!

by No 7&1/2 Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:56 am

First topic message reminder :

Or Saints keeping Ashton.

by BamBam Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:36 pm

Well done Glos

by Exiledinborders Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:17 pm

HongKongCherry wrote:Glaws are the next to confirm we didn't break the cap

http://www.gloucesterrugby.co.uk/news/11858.php#.VjIenNLhCHt

What a charade! Everybody knows who the guilty ones are already.

by BamBam Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:29 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:
HongKongCherry wrote:Glaws are the next to confirm we didn't break the cap

http://www.gloucesterrugby.co.uk/news/11858.php#.VjIenNLhCHt
What a charade! Everybody knows who the guilty ones are already.

Now now Exiled, don't forget we need proof, until then its all speculation and you're all just being mean to Nigel and Bruce

by Geordie Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:43 pm

Well the Falcons weren't over the cap....I think there'd be something sadly wrong if we were and still relegation fodder! Rolling Eyes

So as fans of clubs that thought it was a fair league...will we be refunded some money as the league was effectively fixed?

Also I wonder if we (Falcons) are keeping quiet about the whole thing as a weapon In case we are not in the AP when its ringfenced in the next few years.

by HammerofThunor Thu Oct 29, 2015 3:50 pm

No one was over the cap. That's been made very clear. Falcons could still have been investigated. So you're not off the hook yet Smile

by Heaf Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:15 pm

LI have now also issued a statement saying it wasn't them

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:43 pm

So that's Exeter, Gloucester, Wasps, Harlequins, Sale, Newcastle, Worcester and London Irish all denying they were the culprits.

And then there were four....

by yappysnap Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:55 pm

Harlequins and Gloucester's statements came around partly due to fan pressure for a statement, I wonder what the other four clubs are saying to their fans at the moment if their not releasing statements?

by HammerofThunor Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:01 pm

Munchkin wrote:So that's Exeter, Gloucester, Wasps, Harlequins, Sale, Newcastle, Worcester and London Irish all denying they were the culprits.

And then there were four....

Newcastle said they didn't exceed the cap. But the PRL said no-one exceeds the cap (officially) so they're still in th frame (technically).

Just read Baxter's comments in the Belfast telegraph and they're similar. Not exceeds the cap, etc, but not, "we were not one of the clubs being investigated/involved in the settlement.

Might be strong enough to prompt reaction but technically (spell check wanted to change the last two words to 'butt chin ally' king

) McCall or Wray could say the same and give us nothing.

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:03 pm

Tigers and Falcons must be under huge pressure. It will very difficult for them to explain away not making a statement.

It crazy that it has come to this. Individual clubs having to come out and deny they were the clubs under investigation. It'd nuts. If the guilty clubs had admitted guilt, and taken their medicine right at the start of this fiasco, it would have been largely forgot about by now. The healing process could have begun, instead of the further damaged being caused by this very stupid attempt to brush it all under the carpet.

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:09 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Munchkin wrote:So that's Exeter, Gloucester, Wasps, Harlequins, Sale, Newcastle, Worcester and London Irish all denying they were the culprits.

And then there were four....

Newcastle said they didn't exceed the cap. But the PRL said no-one exceeds the cap (officially) so they're still in th frame (technically).

Just read Baxter's comments in the Belfast telegraph and they're similar. Not exceeds the cap, etc, but not, "we were not one of the clubs being investigated/involved in the settlement.

Might be strong enough to prompt reaction but technically (spell check wanted to change the last two words to 'butt chin ally' ) McCall or Wray could say the same and give us nothing.

Yep, Newcastle still to declare. The statements are going to have to be very clear, as most were, and it would be very unwise for any club to mislead their fans by publishing a misleading statement. That will make things worse for them.

Craig and Wray could try that, but it would be a disaster for them. Truth will out.

by HammerofThunor Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:09 pm

Yep. It's complete lunacy. All it does is make people think that we're talking millions over years. Makes it out to be worse than it is. Unless,we are talking millions over years? (See)

by SecretFly Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:14 pm

Now now................ no speculation!!!!

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:27 pm

Munchkin wrote:So that's Exeter, Gloucester, Wasps, Harlequins, Sale, Newcastle, Worcester and London Irish all denying they were the culprits.

And then there were four....

How many of these are official club statements? I'm sure in Exeter's case it was just Baxter saying they didn't cheat, which is little more than what Cockerill has said.

by HammerofThunor Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:44 pm

Wasps, Gloucester and London Irish have all made club statements. Exeter, Sale and Harlequins were all the DOR speaking to journalists (I think). Not sure about the others. Baxter said they're obviously not cheating the cap. O'Shea said they weren't being investigated. Diamond said they weren't one of the clubs that were investigated (and has in the past said they're not at the cap)

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:46 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Yep. It's complete lunacy. All it does is make people think that we're talking millions over years. Makes it out to be worse than it is. Unless,we are talking millions over years? (See)

True. With things being covered up, people tend to think in extremes. None of us know the extent of this, but I do think it must be bad enough if some are going to extraordinary lengths to cover it.

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:49 pm

Fuzzy Dunlop wrote:
Munchkin wrote:So that's Exeter, Gloucester, Wasps, Harlequins, Sale, Newcastle, Worcester and London Irish all denying they were the culprits.

And then there were four....

How many of these are official club statements? I'm sure in Exeter's case it was just Baxter saying they didn't cheat, which is little more than what Cockerill has said.

I didn't read Cockerills comment, but Baxter would be risking his reputation if he wasn't convinced what he said is true.

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 7:50 pm

SecretFly wrote:Now now................ no speculation!!!!

It's ok. The boss is away devil

by SecretFly Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:27 pm

Munchkin wrote: Baxter would be risking his reputation if he wasn't convinced what he said is true.

Try telling that to McCafferty. Some of the things he's been saying in recent days makes it quite apparent he's not even convinced he knows what he's talking about much less whether it's true or not; but is of course under contract and agreement to spout it anyway. Nigel must be having a right larf listening to McCafferty try to sell the bluff.
Reminds me of the great Donald Rumsfeld.

by HammerofThunor Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:46 pm

Did you think that about what he said Fly? I thought it sounded exactly like "some teams have cheated the cap, they brought their lawyers in but still failed to convince us it was ok. So they threatened to hold up the commercial deals and offered a bribe. The people I represent accepted this (for some because they had little choice) and agreed we wouldn't call them cheaters".

The statement could have easily been "Following an investigation it has been decided that no one has breached the cap. Discussions were had over the technical details of the cap regulations and changes have been made for future years. As always we strive for the best for the league."

by SecretFly Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:05 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Did you think that about what he said Fly? I thought it sounded exactly like "some teams have cheated the cap, they brought their lawyers in but still failed to convince us it was ok. So they threatened to hold up the commercial deals and offered a bribe. The people I represent accepted this (for some because they had little choice) and agreed we wouldn't call them cheaters".

The statement could have easily been "Following an investigation it has been decided that no one has breached the cap. Discussions were had over the technical details of the cap regulations and changes have been made for future years. As always we strive for the best for the league."

I'll tell you what I think Hammer. I think he sounded like a whipped pup, sent out to give his master's reasoning to the world but told he'd get another beating if he called it a whipping.

In other words, the humiliation was dropped on him twice.... first in accepting a 'bride' for a 'cheat'...and then in being told by communicate that truth by not telling any truths.

Correct me if I'm interpreting you wrong, but it seems you infer that was McCafferty being smart and working his wording skilfully to overcome the ban on the word 'cheat'. Nope, I see a man told to go make a fool of himself, trying to invent the language of cover-up on the hoof, and not doing a very good job of it..... and the two clubs laughing at their puppet boy doing their bidding. Another exercise in power.... humiliate the underlings.

Who runs the PRL? It seems two known unknown clubs do.

by carpet baboon Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:21 pm

Odd you should say that fly. A lady I work with who knows some stuff has watched and listened to his non speach.
Her professional opinion?
"That man's soul has been taken"

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:27 pm

Well it is halloween...almost devil

by carpet baboon Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:41 pm

She does have great taste in horror films too

by Guest Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:53 pm

carpet baboon wrote:She does have great taste in horror films too

Hence the macabre description Very Happy

I don't know about McCafferty's involvement in all this. When I first read his statement I thought it was very much a politicians reply, and that he was probably covering himself by holding to the confidentiality agreement, and trying to save face by saying as much as he did. Creating space between himself, and those guilty.

by carpet baboon Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:40 pm

That was my take too. The lady in question seemed to think it wasn't quite said in duress just sheer soul crushing defeat.
I almost started to feel bad for him

by Sin é Thu Oct 29, 2015 11:53 pm

I seem to remember reading an article a few weeks back in the Rugby Paper which claimed that unnamed people on the PRL Board were trying to get rid of the Chairman and McCafferty. It looks like McCafferty hung in there.

Anyway, he deserves everything he is getting after his carry-on over the Heineken Cup. Good riddance to him. I doubt if he will last very long there now.

by HammerofThunor Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:21 am

You do realise it was Wray and Craig who wanted rid of him? To replace him with 'their man'.

by Sin é Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:31 am

HammerofThunor wrote:You do realise it was Wray and Craig who wanted rid of him? To replace him with 'their man'.

I know. Thats what happens to you when you get into bed with snakes, you run the risk of getting bitten.

by HammerofThunor Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:41 am

Although it hasn't happened. You just seem to want it happen.

by HammerofThunor Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:03 am

Back on topic

Seems Sants have made one of those 'we didn't breach the cap' statements. Not as solid as some but as good as Exeter's

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34669989

by Geordie Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:18 am

No communication coming from the Falcons is hardly a surprise.

Its the same for absolutely anything. Injury news, signings...etc etc Its a permanent cloak of silcence.

I know we are no where near the salary cap...but ive said it before....I wonder if we are just keeping this as a "bargaining tool" should we fail to make the ringfenced premier league.

by Poorfour Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:30 am

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:You do realise it was Wray and Craig who wanted rid of him? To replace him with 'their man'.

I know. Thats what happens to you when you get into bed with snakes, you run the risk of getting bitten.

Since Craig and Wray's South African backers bought their way into the clubs after the PRL was formed, it's more a case of "when snakes get into bed with you..." - the other PRL members don't have much choice as to who they deal with. I suspect a big part of the problem is that the cap was agreed by the original generation of owners (who essentially set up the PRL, and some of whom are still around) and it seems that some of the men who replaced them are less than committed to maintaining something that they inherited rather than signing up to.

For what it's worth, it seems pretty obvious that everything McCafferty has said in the last couple of weeks has been very closely drafted by lawyers. He has to say it, because he's the CEO and spokesman and he can't say anything else, because anything else would result in litigation, but he doesn't look at all happy with the situation. I have a fair bit of sympathy for him - he looks like he wanted to do the right thing, but he doesn't have many options, and seems to have reached the limit of his considerable negotiating skills.

by yappysnap Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:03 am

So still waiting on Falcons, Tigers, Sarries and Bath

by Geordie Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:30 am

Yappy ill be utterly amazed if you hear anything from the falcons.

by **LondonTiger** Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:38 am

GeordieFalcon wrote:Yappy ill be utterly amazed if you hear anything from the falcons.

ditto re Tigers.

by Welly Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:31 am

I can see tigers not releasing a statement.

by SecretFly Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:39 am

Tigers Statement:

"We would be willing to release a statement but there is no right or wrong way to approach it. Do we send it by text or make a direct statement to cameras? Either way is legitimate and neither way is wrong. And we feel we may be accused of doing it wrong if we choose one method over the other.
So we've agreed that our opinion is probably being exaggerated at this point and therefore we have no further comment to make, having clarified our position."

by **LondonTiger** Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:45 am

My elder daughter is in a performance of Romeo and Juliet on Monday, so I am unable to attend Tigers AGM. Probably a good thing as I would have been tempted to shred my season ticket card and show Mr Cohen just what I think.

As it is this is the final straw that means after 19 seasons I will not be renewing my ST for next season.

by Welly Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:47 am

LondonTiger wrote:My elder daughter is in a performance of Romeo and Juliet on Monday, so I am unable to attend Tigers AGM. Probably a good thing as I would have been tempted to shred my season ticket card and show Mr Cohen just what I think.

As it is this is the final straw that means after 19 seasons I will not be renewing my ST for next season.

Id don't think secretfly statement is real (Could be wrong).

I suspect we are keeping quiet as a back handed deal with Sarries and Bath over Manu and Ben youngs.

by **LondonTiger** Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:52 am

I wrote my comment before SF's fake statement was posted Welly, just slow in posting. It is the conniving and the backhand deals that has finished me.

I will just go back to coaching junior rugby and enjoying the grass roots game again. From the end of this season, in my current mood, pro rugby can go $£%^ itself.

by Welly Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:56 am

fair enough.

Could also do with practising typing speed Wink

by HammerofThunor Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:05 pm

I've cancelled my subscription to BT sports when this kicked off at the end of last season.

by jbeadlesbigrighthand Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:03 pm

What I don't understand about all of this is that if there have been no breaches of the salary cap, how come there have been settlements reached between clubs and Premiership Rugby? What need can there have been for settlements if everything was in order?

How can PR hope to sweep this under the carpet?

by HammerofThunor Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:48 pm

Because the PRL said there were breaches. ~~Bath and Saracens~~ Two clubs said there were breaches. They refused to agree they had breached and made a settlement payout to stop the PRL from pursuing it. Therefore no-one was technically found to have breached the cap.

by jbeadlesbigrighthand Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:10 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Because the PRL said there were breaches. ~~Bath and Saracens~~ Two clubs said there were breaches. They refused to agree they had breached and made a settlement payout to stop the PRL from pursuing it. Therefore no-one was technically found to have breached the cap.

Oh, I understand the background. It's just the fact that PRL expect anyone to believe the nonsense they are putting out. If there was no breach there can be no need for a settlement. Does anyone believe that if the clubs were innocent of any wrongdoing, they would have paid a settlement? Of course not. Particularly when the clubs are at pains to point out that they have received legal advice that they have not breached the cap. Yet PRL bothers to issue an obviously nonsensical statement. And in doing so, they've shown that they are toothless and an organisation divided. Where does it leave English rugby?

by Bathman_in_London Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:01 pm

http://www.bathrugby.com/news/bath-rugby-statement-3/

Bath statement. It raises other questions I think

by HammerofThunor Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:10 pm

Bath's website won't open for me. What does it say?

by **LondonTiger** Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:12 pm

In response to recent speculation, Bath Rugby would like to clarify its position for the 2014/2015 season.

Bath Rugby can confirm the Club was within the salary cap for the 2014/15 season. The cap for the 2014/15 season was £4.76m before allowances and credits. Bath Rugby’s salary cap spend was £4.71m during that period. Bath Rugby can also reassure supporters that the Club’s spend will be within the salary cap for the 2015/2016 season.

The Club is committed to spending up to the cap to provide the best squad possible. We have one of the smaller squads in the Premiership, which comprised 36 senior players including 14 international players in the 2014/15 season.

Bath Rugby would also like to clarify its position regarding the salary cap debate. English clubs have been significantly disadvantaged both within domestic and European competitions. The clubs representing England in Europe have been expected to compete with European clubs, who have a spend of up to 100% more on their squads. These same English clubs also lose international players for one third of the domestic season with no cap relief. This system was inherently unfair, open to challenge and was in need of fundamental change.

The new Salary Framework, voted and approved unanimously by the shareholders of Premiership Rugby (PRL) last week, enables clubs to recruit cover for players called up for international fixtures, provides funding for clubs to compete equally with European clubs, provides enhanced incentives for the development of young English players, and simplifies the administration of the system.

The new defined salary framework is a much fairer system for all clubs. It will provide increased investment for all the clubs, funded 100% from central income. It will allow Premiership clubs to compete on a fairer playing field both domestically and in Europe and it will promote the production and development of English talent.

by Guest Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:13 pm

Can't view it as the site is down. If it's denying they broke the cap then we were right to think that the statements by all but Wasps and Gloucester are worthless.

Edit: Ok thanks LT. First of all I doubt 2014-2015 was the year which was being investigated, since the first reports started coming out early December. Bath's spend might well have been £4.71m, but the crux of this is payments to players from 3rd party sponsors.

Also, I should probably admit that I stopped reading after they complained that the cap was preventing them from competing with France. I've read enough of that Poopie from Beshocked.

by Sponsored content