Just £25k would have stopped Bath signing Taulupe Faletau

This is an interesting article from the rugby paper this morning:-

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/24685/just-25k-would-have-stopped-bath-signing-taulupe-faletau/

Were the WRU right to not give the extra ££££'s ?

Also, that is now three players from Wales on mega bucks at Bath, Preistland is on £290k, and now Faletau on £400k, and I do not know how much Charteris is on, but he will not be on peanuts, how close to the salary cap are Bath ? Lets not forget they have signed the likes of Matawalu from Glasgow as well.

Anyway, I reckon the WRU have screwed the Dragons over with this, if they are capping the DC at £325k then how can they possibly get Halfpenny back in Wales ? Another scary thought is, that the rich English and French clubs can outbid our union for players, if they can do it to us, then they could beat any union when it comes to paying players, and that will not be good for the Pro12 in the long run.

While that may be the case, I also lay some if not all of the blame at the Dragons board's door for failing to insist on being involved in all off the negotations - even the NDC side. If they had, perhaps they would have been in a position to top up the £25k some other way.

Don't forget that Dave Denton is now also at Bath, and while I don't know how much he's being paid, I understand he is now the highest-paid Scottish rugby player in history.

Well, other than Dan McCarter...

To be blunt, I have more confidence in a toasted cream egg than I do in the Bath salary cap.

Should have asked the RFU for £25k, they've been handing out money as if it grows on trees!

What should be more worrying is that both Wales and Scotland's 1st choice number 8s are at the same club in an English league.

I have often said Scottish players need to play abroad because we don't have enough professional clubs to support them. Denton's move made sense.

It won't make as much sense however if he is warming the Bench for Faletau. Likewise it won't make sense for Faletau either to be a sub for Denton.

One of the first choice number 8s for either Scotland or Wales will not be getting regular game time unless it's based on a rotation. An odd signing for Bath unless they see Denton as a 6 and a replacement for Burgess.

I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

I am a bit stumped where the article got the idea of a cap on the value of NDC being offered. It seems to be something that has just been claimed without any real information to back it up. Toby was offered the value of his current contract, as I believe Scott was too. That said there does seem to be a real issue coming up with the 'market value' of players.

Also as a side note, I have heard that Charteris was offered a £750k over three years deal to join the Scarlets, but plumped for Bath, so you can be sure he is on a very good deal there.

IanBru wrote:Don't forget that Dave Denton is now also at Bath, and while I don't know how much he's being paid, I understand he is now the highest-paid Scottish rugby player in history.

Well, other than Dan McCarter...

To be blunt, I have more confidence in a toasted cream egg than I do in the Bath salary cap.

And I don't think you're alone in that ...

LordDowlais wrote:This is an interesting article from the rugby paper this morning:-

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/24685/just-25k-would-have-stopped-bath-signing-taulupe-faletau/

Were the WRU right to not give the extra ££££'s ?

Also, that is now three players from Wales on mega bucks at Bath, Preistland is on £290k, and now Faletau on £400k, and I do not know how much Charteris is on, but he will not be on peanuts, how close to the salary cap are Bath ? Lets not forget they have signed the likes of Matawalu from Glasgow as well.

Anyway, I reckon the WRU have screwed the Dragons over with this, if they are capping the DC at £325k then how can they possibly get Halfpenny back in Wales ? Another scary thought is, that the rich English and French clubs can outbid our union for players, if they can do it to us, then they could beat any union when it comes to paying players, and that will not be good for the Pro12 in the long run.

Why did you need to start another topic Lord, I put this on the International Board Faletau topic yesterday, without the link, but in essence you are right, the WRU also come out looking bad over the Scott Williams debacle if you believe that article and personally I do.

Sorry wayne I did not see your article. I just read the rugby paper this morning and they were running with this, so I thought I would share it. It's not just about the mess with the WRU and the players contracts though.

It also highlights the very frightening thought that the rich clubs have a bigger clout than our unions, and they can just offer more every time they want a player regardless of their salary cap rules, which teams like Bath are obviously sticking two fingers up at.

Also, yes I do believe the article.

Bath released James and signed no replacement in the summer. That freed up cash for Priestland. Burgess leaving easily covered Denton's arrival. Next year the cap goes up and Bath look set to see Hooper retire. Ample cap to fit these players in. Probably no more big signings after that though.

Isn't Faletau going to be a "marquee" player for Bath though? That means he'd be outside the cap. Having said that, it does feel like Bath at least might need some 'creative accounting' with respect to the cap. I'm always mildly amused/annoyed that while Sarries constantly get the salary cap thing chucked at them on here, Bath seem to mostly get off without attracting anything like the same level of criticism. As a LI fan, I know who annoys me more! Sarries at least have a very good academy system (plenty of their first team has come through the academy), do Bath even have an academy? Or do they just poach any London Irish player who looks decent? Watson, Joseph, Homer, Garvey, Lahiff, any others??

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Bath released James and signed no replacement in the summer. That freed up cash for Priestland. Burgess leaving easily covered Denton's arrival. Next year the cap goes up and Bath look set to see Hooper retire. Ample cap to fit these players in. Probably no more big signings after that though.

Preistland
Faletau
Charteris
Matawalu

Those four players alone must take your wage to almost, 2 million big one's.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Bath released James and signed no replacement in the summer. That freed up cash for Priestland. Burgess leaving easily covered Denton's arrival. Next year the cap goes up and Bath look set to see Hooper retire. Ample cap to fit these players in. Probably no more big signings after that though.

Bath didn't release James, he wouldn't have joined them if it wasn't for our financial problems a few years ago, and as soon as he knew we had the resources he came flying back, he was on nowhere near the amount Bath are paying Priestland £290000, when the 4 Ospreys signed DCs with Wales a few months ago the top earner is on £200000, so if you think Paul is on more than that you are in cloud cuckoo land.

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

True, but it works both ways. The article seemed to suggest that Dragons were wanting WRU to pay all the extra, not share costs, although I could be wrong.

My point was more that this is the cap that WRU have set themselves. They have come to a decision that this is as much as they can afford to pay, and so if the regions want these players, it is up to the Regions to pay out that extra. It's not a matter of %. It's a matter of WRU budget. WRU are right in that they shouldn't allow themselves to be drawn into bidding wars. £25k now, how much for the next player, and the next?... Agents would be happy, but this sort of dealing could well drag the WRU into financial difficulties.

Munchkin wrote:

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

True, but it works both ways. The article seemed to suggest that Dragons were wanting WRU to pay all the extra, not share costs, although I could be wrong.

My point was more that this is the cap that WRU have set themselves. They have come to a decision that this is as much as they can afford to pay, and so if the regions want these players, it is up to the Regions to pay out that extra. It's not a matter of %. It's a matter of WRU budget. WRU are right in that they shouldn't allow themselves to be drawn into bidding wars. £25k now, how much for the next player, and the next?... Agents would be happy, but this sort of dealing could well drag the WRU into financial difficulties.

The dual contracts must be 60 % Union and 40 % club funded. They have a celing (believed to be 400k). This was under the celing. The 25k could have just been made up of another 60% and 40% as the rest of the contract would have.

But this is the WRU. This is how Unions operate. They ruin domestic rugby.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Isn't Faletau going to be a "marquee" player for Bath though? That means he'd be outside the cap. Having said that, it does feel like Bath at least might need some 'creative accounting' with respect to the cap. I'm always mildly amused/annoyed that while Sarries constantly get the salary cap thing chucked at them on here, Bath seem to mostly get off without attracting anything like the same level of criticism. As a LI fan, I know who annoys me more! Sarries at least have a very good academy system (plenty of their first team has come through the academy), do Bath even have an academy? Or do they just poach any London Irish player who looks decent? Watson, Joseph, Homer, Garvey, Lahiff, any others??

Yes, Gavin Hastings' lad Adam plays for Bath Academy at 10. He's a really hot prospect for Scotland so I keep an eye on him. My Uncle is involved with Bath Rugby's Academy and has said he is a really good player.

Munchkin wrote:

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

True, but it works both ways. The article seemed to suggest that Dragons were wanting WRU to pay all the extra, not share costs, although I could be wrong.

My point was more that this is the cap that WRU have set themselves. They have come to a decision that this is as much as they can afford to pay, and so if the regions want these players, it is up to the Regions to pay out that extra. It's not a matter of %. It's a matter of WRU budget. WRU are right in that they shouldn't allow themselves to be drawn into bidding wars. £25k now, how much for the next player, and the next?... Agents would be happy, but this sort of dealing could well drag the WRU into financial difficulties.

The talk is that the dragons were happy to increase their contribution but the wru wouldn't, which left it off the table.

Plus lets not forget that Ford said Faletau's intention was always to join bath so doubt £££ really matters in that case.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

True, but it works both ways. The article seemed to suggest that Dragons were wanting WRU to pay all the extra, not share costs, although I could be wrong.

My point was more that this is the cap that WRU have set themselves. They have come to a decision that this is as much as they can afford to pay, and so if the regions want these players, it is up to the Regions to pay out that extra. It's not a matter of %. It's a matter of WRU budget. WRU are right in that they shouldn't allow themselves to be drawn into bidding wars. £25k now, how much for the next player, and the next?... Agents would be happy, but this sort of dealing could well drag the WRU into financial difficulties.

The dual contracts must be 60 % Union and 40 % club funded. They have a celing (believed to be 400k). This was under the celing. The 25k could have just been made up of another 60% and 40% as the rest of the contract would have.

But this is the WRU. This is how Unions operate. They ruin domestic rugby.

If it's below their own cap, then I would agree, it isn't good. That's a big 'if' though.

If the contract stipulates that the 60%/40% split must be maintained, and that the limit is set at £400k, then I would have to ask if Dragons were prepared to pay their 40% of the £25k? I would find it very strange that Dragons simply couldn't pay the extra £25k themselves though, unless WRU blocked them from paying the extra. That would seem to be unfair, but it's not something I believe.

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

True, but it works both ways. The article seemed to suggest that Dragons were wanting WRU to pay all the extra, not share costs, although I could be wrong.

My point was more that this is the cap that WRU have set themselves. They have come to a decision that this is as much as they can afford to pay, and so if the regions want these players, it is up to the Regions to pay out that extra. It's not a matter of %. It's a matter of WRU budget. WRU are right in that they shouldn't allow themselves to be drawn into bidding wars. £25k now, how much for the next player, and the next?... Agents would be happy, but this sort of dealing could well drag the WRU into financial difficulties.

The talk is that the dragons were happy to increase their contribution but the wru wouldn't, which left it off the table.

Plus lets not forget that Ford said Faletau's intention was always to join bath so doubt £££ really matters in that case.

I would think the WRU could be taken to court if they were not prepared to bid up to the agreed limit on the contract, and if dragons were prepared to pay their 40% share. That's why I have doubts.

From what I have read, Faletau was intent on going to Bath, and think you're right. This then isn't so much about the actions of WRU, but more about the wishes of Faletau. I can see how the WRU may be at fault in one regard though. They should be firm in not calling up players not playing in Wales. Might be too late to do much about that now. Stable door - horse - bolted.

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

gcBlues wrote:

Munchkin wrote:I'm not sure the WRU should have paid the extra. They set their cap, and it's up to the Regions to pay the extra if they want the players badly enough. They are private businesses, although I think I'm right in saying that Dragons are also part owned by the WRU. 50%?

IRFU were not prepared to break the bank in signing Sexton. The only reason Sexton is back with Leinster is because a business man was prepared to top up his wages.

If it's a dual contract, how can a region 'pay the extra' if the union won't? The region would then be paying more than 40% for a player on a NDC which is against the agreement.

True, but it works both ways. The article seemed to suggest that Dragons were wanting WRU to pay all the extra, not share costs, although I could be wrong.

My point was more that this is the cap that WRU have set themselves. They have come to a decision that this is as much as they can afford to pay, and so if the regions want these players, it is up to the Regions to pay out that extra. It's not a matter of %. It's a matter of WRU budget. WRU are right in that they shouldn't allow themselves to be drawn into bidding wars. £25k now, how much for the next player, and the next?... Agents would be happy, but this sort of dealing could well drag the WRU into financial difficulties.

The dual contracts must be 60 % Union and 40 % club funded. They have a celing (believed to be 400k). This was under the celing. The 25k could have just been made up of another 60% and 40% as the rest of the contract would have.

But this is the WRU. This is how Unions operate. They ruin domestic rugby.

If it's below their own cap, then I would agree, it isn't good. That's a big 'if' though.

If the contract stipulates that the 60%/40% split must be maintained, and that the limit is set at £400k, then I would have to ask if Dragons were prepared to pay their 40% of the £25k? I would find it very strange that Dragons simply couldn't pay the extra £25k themselves though, unless WRU blocked them from paying the extra. That would seem to be unfair, but it's not something I believe.

If you read the article on the OP, the reporter believes the limit is £350000 not £400000, but whether Gatland thought he was worth that. Who knows?

wayne wrote:
If you read the article on the OP, the reporter believes the limit is £350000 not £400000, but whether Gatland thought he was worth that. Who knows?

The same publication reported last week that the WRU had offered 400k to Halfpenny on a dual contract. I believe 400k is the absolute maximum.

Halfpenny is currently on 600K at Toulon right? It is said that we will take a pay-cut and return to Wales to play with a Welsh region, nobody knows which on a deal that earns him 400K per annum. If 400K is the max. then the WRU are paying less than that amount, as they're only paying 60% of that whilst Pieman will pay the rest.

As for the extra 25K - well, I'm sure the WRU could have found a bit of extra money. If they knew that Scott would not be on a NDC then perhaps they would have topped it up. Never the less it still seems a bit of a fishy situation, and when I think about it from different angles I often get the impression that the union wanted him out of Dragons/Wales - very poor. We should also bear in mind that roughly 2-3 years ago Faletau agreed an extension which is when Bath and apparently a big French team were first offering him lucrative deals. Bath have really been after him for a while, is there any particular reason for this? He's good but he's no Vermeulen.

Bath's squad depth isn't impressive. Injuries and England call ups and their second team in the A league isn't able to compete with other Prem clubs. Maybe that's why they're able to have a big name 23 but are still under the cap?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Isn't Faletau going to be a "marquee" player for Bath though? That means he'd be outside the cap. Having said that, it does feel like Bath at least might need some 'creative accounting' with respect to the cap. I'm always mildly amused/annoyed that while Sarries constantly get the salary cap thing chucked at them on here, Bath seem to mostly get off without attracting anything like the same level of criticism. As a LI fan, I know who annoys me more! Sarries at least have a very good academy system (plenty of their first team has come through the academy), do Bath even have an academy? Or do they just poach any London Irish player who looks decent? Watson, Joseph, Homer, Garvey, Lahiff, any others??

I would say that perceptions are slowly starting to shift. Saracens are keeping their heads down at the moment. Bath are starting to take the flack.

It becomes harder to criticise a side when they have a non contoversial DOR, have got rid of their controversial CEO, are supplying coaches and players to England, are scoring tries and can play some attractive rugby.

Interesting that Bath have shifted their recruitment from London Irish to Wales - with the signing of Priestland,Charteris and Faletau.....

Might be the last Welsh player to make the move....

I think its pretty easy to criticise both Bath and Saracens for cheating.

beshocked wrote:Interesting that Bath have shifted their recruitment from London Irish to Wales - with the signing of Priestland,Charteris and Faletau.....

You can add Dominic Day and Jonathan Evans to that list as well.

No amount of money is going to keep players if the rugby product is c**p. Why would a top professional want to play for any team serving us garbage week in week out.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think its pretty easy to criticise both Bath and Saracens for cheating.

Much harder for you to add anything constructive or worthwhile!

I have said it to you many times - you have no evidence of wrongdoing. You can speculate, we can all speculate.

Perhaps you're a chimpanzee who has learnt how to use a keyboard. We do not know. We have no evidence for or against....

Some of your posts do seem like they could have been written by a chimp. Should I jump to the conclusion that you are indeed a chimp?

No of course not because that would be ridiculous.... I would need evidence to prove it. You can come to a conclusion but it does not make it correct.

beshocked wrote:Much harder for you to add anything constructive or worthwhile!

That's No 7&1/2 for you.

Wow beshocked throwing around insults again and LD sticking up for clubs who cheat. Well done to you both!

Faletau has been wanting to move away for a long time. It was a surprise that he stayed last time and the rumours have been rife every since he re-signed last year. This money thing is a smoke screen as far as I can see. He wanted to leave, always has, and now he's left. People with egg on their face are now trying to cover their asses by blaming the ££££.

Griff wrote:Faletau has been wanting to move away for a long time. It was a surprise that he stayed last time and the rumours have been rife every since he re-signed last year. This money thing is a smoke screen as far as I can see. He wanted to leave, always has, and now he's left. People with egg on their face are now trying to cover their asses by blaming the ££££.

Lorddowlais I know, he criticises Itoje for a lack of gametime and he's played almost every game this season, he defended Lancaster's decision to pick Webber when Webber couldn't even get in the Bath side last season.Defends the coaching failures of Lancaster during the RWC. Don't know why he argues these points. Evidence is against him.

no 7 & 1/2 my primary point is that we just don't have sufficient evidence.

Of course we can come to the conclusion - looking at Bath and Saracen's squads that they could have been breaking the salary cap but sadly none of us have access to their accounts.

Perhaps in time you will be proven to be correct but as of yet you have no evidence.

Sighhhhhh

Don't be silly beshocked.

beshocked wrote:Lorddowlais I know, he criticises Itoje for a lack of gametime and he's played almost every game this season, he defended Lancaster's decision to pick Webber when Webber couldn't even get in the Bath side last season.Defends the coaching failures of Lancaster during the RWC. Don't know why he argues these points. Evidence is against him.

no 7 & 1/2 my primary point is that we just don't have sufficient evidence.

Of course we can come to the conclusion - looking at Bath and Saracen's squads that they could have been breaking the salary cap but sadly none of us have access to their accounts.

Perhaps in time you will be proven to be correct but as of yet you have no evidence.

beshocked, don't let it get to you, members of this forum like him just come on here to ruin threads and cause friction.

Anyway, back to the point. I will be honest and I have come to the conclusion that Bath and Saracens must be breaking the salary cap rule, because when I see players wages banded about in the media, Preistland on £290k, Faletau on £400k, Charteris turning down £250k to come back to Wales, this makes my mind up for me. Do I have proof ? No I do not. So I will assume they are cheating until proven otherwise. I have no proof though, so I will be happy to be proven wrong.

Although we must be mindful of the laws in this great land of ours. One of the big one's is "innocent UNTIL PROVEN guilty" so, as Saracens and Bath have not been proven to be guilty yet, then they are innocent and doing nothing wrong, despite what myself and others think.

Given you're the one who was using misleading stats LD i'll take that with a pinch of salt. Seeing as you agree with me in the case of cheating the cap with teams obviously 'sticking 2 fingers up' (at the cap) it appears you're just out to pick issue.

no 7 & 1/2 the problem is you discuss the alleged cheating as if it's fact. It's not fact, it's speculation. Just as I could speculate that you're a chimp at a keyboard. I have no evidence but then again there is no evidence to the contrary. By your logic it's fair for me to assume you are indeed a chimp typing away....

Accusing someone of something with no proof....sound familiar?

Well said lorddowlais.

I always say in these situations when a player moves, is it just the money? I don't think it is. Yes of course it's a factor but it's not the only reason.

Welsh club rugby still needs to sort out its infrastructure and relationship with the WRU.

Is it possible for you to answer a debate without resorting to insults beshocked?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Given you're the one who was using misleading stats LD i'll take that with a pinch of salt. Seeing as you agree with me in the case of cheating the cap with teams obviously 'sticking 2 fingers up' (at the cap) it appears you're just out to pick issue.

No you are wrong.

I agree with YOU that it looks as the the both teams are cheating the salary cap, and we have come to our own conclusions, it does not make it a matter of fact. I make my mind up on a lot of things, it does not mean I am right. When the hearing is done and the judge jury and executioners have made their decision then we can talk about facts, but just because it looks as though they are cheating it does not mean that they are. It says Mars on chocolate bars, but does that mean they come from outer space ?

Its never coming out, its been buried. We'll just have to agree that Saracens and Bath cheated here i'm afraid.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Its never coming out, its been buried. We'll just have to agree that we think Saracens and Bath cheated here i'm afraid.

There fixed it for you.

Fine, like you said yourself it is obvious.

We know:

1) Two clubs were investigated for breaching the salary cap during the 2013/14 season (PRL statement)
2) Saracens were one of those clubs (admitted by former CEO Edward Griffiths)
3) Money was paid to end the investigation and prevent any further investigation for the 2014/15 season (PRL statement)
4) At the same time the TV deal for 2015-18 was signed and all clubs received their 2015/16 monies.
5) The Salary cap for 2015/16 was effectively increased by £1m
6) Most clubs were prominent in the "transfer" market for 2015/16


Add to that all the leaks (which certain people discount as worthless) and a story emerges.

We now live in a world where you can be sued if you choose to call Bernie Ecclestone a cheat and an issuer of bribes. This is because his court case for bribery was dropped when he made a payment to the court.




The salary cap investigation went the same way.

Bambam debate? What debate? No 7 & 1/2 claims the cheating is fact. In his eyes there is no debate.

Well said Lorddowlais. Completely agree.


http://rugbylad.com/the-aviva-premierships-highest-earners-revealed/

Anyway this is the AP highest earners.

Bath and Sarries only have one player on the list. Admittedly Bath will have two with Faletau coming in.

Who do you think is being ripped off the most?

Personally I think Sale with Cipriani, Gloucester with Afoa, Bath with Priestland....


Priestland is warming the bench and he's getting paid as much as starters. He must be laughing.

LondonTiger wrote:We know:

1) Two clubs were investigated for breaching the salary cap during the 2013/14 season (PRL statement)
2) Saracens were one of those clubs (admitted by former CEO Edward Griffiths)
3) Money was paid to end the investigation and prevent any further investigation for the 2014/15 season (PRL statement)
4) At the same time the TV deal for 2015-18 was signed and all clubs received their 2015/16 monies.
5) The Salary cap for 2015/16 was effectively increased by £1m
6) Most clubs were prominent in the "transfer" market for 2015/16


Add to that all the leaks (which certain people discount as worthless) and a story emerges.

1)Investigated yes but no one found guilty
2)Fair enough but see above
3) Okay but still a lack of details.
4) What's wrong with signing a deal?
5) Where's the issue?
6) Saracens weren't.

In regards to the Bernie Ecclestone case, there was evidence, there were details. In this case there currently isn't.

Perhaps Saracens and Bath are guilty but the facts need to be out there first to come to a fair conclusion.