Toulon fined 100,000 for exceeding French League salary cap

First topic message reminder :

Boudjellal's Toulon vow to contest fine for breaking Top 14 salary cap
The RCT president reacted angrily to the decision against his club.

TOULON SAY THEY will contest a fine imposed on them by the Ligue Nationale de Rugby [LNR] for breaking the Top 14′s salary cap.

The French rugby governing body yesterday announced that the three-time European champions have been fined €100,000 for exceeding the €10 million salary cap during the 2014/15 season.

Mourad Boudjellal Toulon president Boudjellal is a controversial figure. Source: Inpho/Billy Stickland

The LNR’s revelation that Toulon would be punished came after an investigation launched by the Direction Nationale d’Aide et de Contrôle de Gestion [DNACG], French rugby’s financial watchdog.

Mourad Boudjellal’s Toulon have responded by issuing a statement in which they say the club “strongly contests” the decision. In fact, Toulon claim that they were not directly informed of the fine by the LNR or DNACG.

The decision is subject to appeal, and Toulon have indicated their intention to proceed with an appeal.

The DNACG’s investigation was carried out by Deloitte, who Boudjellal called into question in a fiery response to the fine, when speaking to L’Équipe. The RCT owner suggested that Toulon were the targets of a plot by Clermont, the LNR and Deloitte.

“[This decision] blames me, even though the best-paid French players in the Top 14 are Morgan Parra and Aurélien Rougerie, two Clermont players,” Boudjellal told L’Équipe.

“And then Deloitte was the statutory auditor in this case, you know. And they are people of Michelin [the company behind Clermont] paid by the league [LNR]. I’m 1000% sure of it.”

Boudjellal also threatened that Toulon would not take part in the opening round of the new Top 14 season in two weekends’ time if the matter was not resolved to his satisfaction.

“I do not see how Toulon can start the championship,” said Boudjellal.

http://www.the42.ie/toulon-salary-cap-top-14-fine-boudjellal-2922250-Aug2016/

So you believe that Bath and Saracens were found innocent, hadn't broken the cap, but didn't want to be declared innocent in public? Why? It would have been like Sir Cliff threatening to sue everyoneshould they declare no charges were being brought against him. So you have a problem with Munster and who; even thoguh they've broken no rules?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you believe that Bath and Saracens were found innocent, hadn't broken the cap, but didn't want to be declared innocent in public? Why? It would have been like Sir Cliff threatening to sue everyoneshould they declare no charges were being brought against him. So you have a problem with Munster and who; even thoguh they've broken no rules?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/oct/22/premiership-rugby-mike-mccafferty-rfu

"there have been no breaches"

All clubs were declared innocent.

I have a problem with the IRFU's financial gerrymandering of their teams, yes. I'd love a transparent salary cap in the PrO'12. Wouldn't that be fun for the IRFU and SRU?

So again, you belive that they wanted no details and not to be delcared innocent in public? Why not release the full findings if innocent? As you say, if they found a technicality they got off with it's still cheating.

You're happy to see salary caps broken yet you want one brought in in the Pro 12? Why?

And why call it the Pro'12. You're just bitter the Welsh are suffering and want to jump into bed with a team like Saracens?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So again, you belive that they wanted no details and not to be delcared innocent in public? Why not release the full findings if innocent? As you say, if they found a technicality they got off with it's still cheating.

You're happy to see salary caps broken yet you want one brought in in the Pro 12? Why?

Again, all were declared innocent.

I've already answered why I think that the full findings weren't released.

A loophole isn't cheating. I'm not happy when caps are broken.

Do I have to put you right on each bloody point? Every time?

I want one in the PrO'12 to finally bring transparency to the murky financial world of the IRFU and SRU.

No 7&1/2 wrote:And why call it the Pro'12. You're just bitter the Welsh are suffering and want to jump into bed with a team like Saracens?

I call it the PrO'12 because it's skewed towards the Irish and Scots.

Am I bitter? Odd word, but your sentiment is right.

LondonTiger wrote:

BamBam wrote:You and beshocked should get a room ...let everyone know you're getting a room ..  sign a personal agreement to never disclose the details of your activities that night...then threaten to sue anyone who ever claims that you ever got a room

Don't forget about sacking the employee who leaked that they had booked a room.

Would that be the person they brought in to film activities? Can we call him DordLowlais?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So again, you belive that they wanted no details and not to be delcared innocent in public? Why not release the full findings if innocent? As you say, if they found a technicality they got off with it's still cheating.

You're happy to see salary caps broken yet you want one brought in in the Pro 12? Why?

Again, all were declared innocent.

I've already answered why I think that the full findings weren't released.

A loophole isn't cheating. I'm not happy when caps are broken.

Do I have to put you right on each bloody point? Every time?

I want one in the PrO'12 to finally bring transparency to the murky financial world of the IRFU and SRU.

Soyou're happy that the spirit of a rule is broken as long as the letter isn't. You're happy that there is stilla murky untransparent Aviva Prem though even with a cap. Why would the Pro 12 be better?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:And why call it the Pro'12. You're just bitter the Welsh are suffering and want to jump into bed with a team like Saracens?

I call it the PrO'12 because it's skewed towards the Irish and Scots.

Am I bitter? Odd word, but your sentiment is right.

Why is it skewed?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Soyou're happy that the spirit of a rule is broken as long as the letter isn't. You're happy that there is stilla murky untransparent Aviva Prem though even with a cap. Why would the Pro 12 be better?

Any rugby fan who is unhappy that the spirit of a rule is broken is a hypocrite.

I'm happy that the AP has a team investigating salary caps. I assume one on the PrO'12 would be better as the Blazers of Ireland would wish to be awfully transparent, right?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Why is it skewed?

Because of multiple ownership of teams, financial and player gerrymandering, an unequal distribution of income with regards to generation. That's before we get to officiating.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Soyou're happy that the spirit of a rule is broken as long as the letter isn't. You're happy that there is stilla murky untransparent Aviva Prem though even with a cap. Why would the Pro 12 be better?

Any rugby fan who is unhappy that the spirit of a rule is broken is a hypocrite.

I'm happy that the AP has a team investigating salary caps. I assume one on the PrO'12 would be better as the Blazers of Ireland would wish to be awfully transparent, right?

So you're happy or unhappy that you believe Saracens have got round the rule? There is no transparency in the Aviva with the cap why would there be in the Pro 12? Are you saying the Irish are untrustworthy? Would Wales stop having to give payments to players to make up their wages? Would be beneficial to France and English leagues.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Why is it skewed?

Because of multiple ownership of teams, financial and player gerrymandering, an unequal distribution of income with regards to generation. That's before we get to officiating.

Same everywhere. Look at the winners of the prem, salary cap ignored through loop holes (in some peoples opi9nion) and massively in debt.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

So you're happy or unhappy that you believe Saracens have got round the rule? There is no transparency in the Aviva with the cap why would there be in the Pro 12? Are you saying the Irish are untrustworthy? Would Wales stop having to give payments to players to make up their wages? Would be beneficial to France and English leagues.

There is internal transparency within the AP cap so there would be within the PrO'12 cap, right?

I'm noting that Irish rugby finances are not as transparent as they could be.

"Would Wales stop having to give payments to players to make up their wages?" is that a reference to dual contracts? If so, think hard about the Irish and Scottish set up.

As for Saracens, good on them if they found a loophole. Yes.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Why is it skewed?

Because of multiple ownership of teams, financial and player gerrymandering, an unequal distribution of income with regards to generation. That's before we get to officiating.

Same everywhere. Look at the winners of the prem, salary cap ignored through loop holes (in some peoples opi9nion) and massively in debt.

It is far from the same everywhere. That is a remarkably stupid comment. Professional sports leagues all over the world actively ban multiple ownership of competing teams.

You need to look at the LLP behind Saracens to understand their debt, if that's a comment aimed at Saracens.

LondonTiger wrote:

BamBam wrote:You and beshocked should get a room ...let everyone know you're getting a room ..  sign a personal agreement to never disclose the details of your activities that night...then threaten to sue anyone who ever claims that you ever got a room

Don't forget about sacking the employee who leaked that they had booked a room.

Don't know the situation you're referring to but in this sort of scenario

Some would call him/her a freedom fighter, others would call him/her a bad employee whistleblowing.
Leaking confidential information is indeed a sackable offence.
Would you want to employ someone who had a history of leaking sensitive information?

Tigers had allegedly broken the salary cap in the past but that's been brushed under the carpet. I have no proof but then again no one does.....

PhilBB very sensible comments indeed.

There's no transparency, it's all behind closed doors, and the cap is being ignored and worked around, so why would there be any benefit to transparency? Yes it's Wales dual contracts, they would be covered by a cap and possibly effected allowing the French and English to hoover up some talent there. Thanks for answering that you're fine with clubs looking at ways round any cap. The Welsh sigend up so are obviously happy, to paraphrase you.

beshocked wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

BamBam wrote:You and beshocked should get a room ...let everyone know you're getting a room ..  sign a personal agreement to never disclose the details of your activities that night...then threaten to sue anyone who ever claims that you ever got a room

Don't forget about sacking the employee who leaked that they had booked a room.

Don't know the situation you're referring to but in this sort of scenario

Some would call him/her a freedom fighter, others would call him/her a bad employee whistleblowing.
Leaking confidential information is indeed a sackable offence.
Would you want to employ someone who had a history of leaking sensitive information?

Tigers had allegedly broken the salary cap in the past but that's been brushed under the carpet. I have no proof but then again no one does.....

PhilBB very sensible comments indeed.

You agree with Phil that Saracens used loop holes to effectively allow them to pay players over the upper limit of the cap?

No 7&1/2 wrote:There's no transparency, it's all behind closed doors, and the cap is being ignored and worked around, so why would there be any benefit to transparency? Yes it's Wales dual contracts, they would be covered by a cap and possibly effected allowing the French and English to hoover up some talent there. Thanks for answering that you're fine with clubs looking at ways round any cap. The Welsh sigend up so are obviously happy, to paraphrase you.

There is plenty of transparency to the members of PRL. That's a point you're continually ignoring.

Please explain how the dual contracts would be possibly 'effected' in the manner of others hoovering up talent? That makes no sense at all.

Sure, the WRU are happy. PRW? Not so.

No 7&1/2 wrote:
You agree with Phil that Saracens used loop holes to effectively allow them to pay players over the upper limit of the cap?

I don't know that to be the case at all. You're not very good at this paraphrasing or quoting, are you?

So as long as Munster were telling Ospreys were they were going round the cap to pay more and threatening to sue them if they spoke out you'd be happy then?

Well if there were a salary cap for the Welsh some of the dual contracts may push it over, or the cost of them would have to be reduced hence allowing English clubs and French to outbid them.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
You agree with Phil that Saracens used loop holes to effectively allow them to pay players over the upper limit of the cap?

I don't know that to be the case at all. You're not very good at this paraphrasing or quoting, are you?

You said you believed a loop hole had been used to pay above the salary cap.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:And we go back to wouldn't it have been nice for full transparency. And again Phil,do you believe if they were found innocent they would have kept the results secret? How do they benefit if innocnet?

Yes, full transparency is great. A league salary cap that cannot be broken without penalty would be bloody marvellous. Imagine having all of that in the PrO'12?

Oh. Shame it's impossible.

My take on it is that they found a loophole. They neither broke the cap nor cheated, but found a loophole that would have embarrassed all had it leaked. It would have made PRL look silly, so all agreed for silence.

As it stands, you're accusing them of cheating (without any evidence) and of making a payment to hush it up (without knowing how much, to whom and when). From where I'm sitting, you're not holding any evidence.

As above.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
You agree with Phil that Saracens used loop holes to effectively allow them to pay players over the upper limit of the cap?

I don't know that to be the case at all. You're not very good at this paraphrasing or quoting, are you?

You said you believed a loop hole had been used to pay above the salary cap.

But not necessarily the players. Or a payment in financial terms. It could be any kind of thing.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So as long as Munster were telling Ospreys were they were going round the cap to pay more and threatening to sue them if they spoke out you'd be happy then?

Well if there were a salary cap for the Welsh some of the dual contracts may push it over, or the cost of them would have to be reduced hence allowing English clubs and French to outbid them.

Your first question makes no sense.

You also seem pig ignorant of how the SRU and IRFU contract system works. And writing bull about dual contracts pushing a team over a cap that isn't even set just shows your bizarre and silly approach when you've been shown up.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
You agree with Phil that Saracens used loop holes to effectively allow them to pay players over the upper limit of the cap?

I don't know that to be the case at all. You're not very good at this paraphrasing or quoting, are you?

You said you believed a loop hole had been used to pay above the salary cap.

But not necessarily the players. Or a payment in financial terms. It could be any kind of thing.

Did you not mean that a loophole was used to get around the cap? that seemed to be what you were suggesting? So you believe they broke the cap and used another loophole to get around the punishment?

No 7&1/2 wrote:
Did you not mean that a loophole was used to get around the cap? that seemed to be what you were suggesting? So you believe they broke the cap and used another loophole to get around the punishment?

FFS. For all we know the 'breach' was that they set up a clothing company for a player's wife in Buenos Aires.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So as long as Munster were telling Ospreys were they were going round the cap to pay more and threatening to sue them if they spoke out you'd be happy then?

Well if there were a salary cap for the Welsh some of the dual contracts may push it over, or the cost of them would have to be reduced hence allowing English clubs and French to outbid them.

Your first question makes no sense.

You also seem pig ignorant of how the SRU and IRFU contract system works. And writing bull about dual contracts pushing a team over a cap that isn't even set just shows your bizarre and silly approach when you've been shown up.

As long as it was transparent to ospreys that Munster were breaking a cap, usign loopholes etc you'd be fine if that were kept secret from everyone bar the clubs employees?

Not bothered about the other unions yet, just saying a cap may force the Welsh to lower their offers to players allowing french adn english clubs to swoop. You would accept that's a possibility surely?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
Did you not mean that a loophole was used to get around the cap? that seemed to be what you were suggesting? So you believe they broke the cap and used another loophole to get around the punishment?

FFS. For all we know the 'breach' was that they set up a clothing company for a player's wife in Buenos Aires.

No need to swear. Yes, that would be using a loophole to pay over the salary cap. So that is what you're saying you believe happened?

No 7&1/2 wrote:
As long as it was transparent to ospreys that Munster were breaking a cap, usign loopholes etc you'd be fine if that were kept secret from everyone bar the clubs employees?

Not bothered about the other unions yet, just saying a cap may force the Welsh to lower their offers to players allowing french adn english clubs to swoop. You would accept that's a possibility surely?

Yes, I'd be fine with that.

No, I won't accept that is a possibility as it is utterly ludicrous. The pot of money for the NDCs is in the public domain and relatively tiny.

No 7&1/2 wrote:
No need to swear. Yes, that would be using a loophole to pay over the salary cap. So that is what you're saying you believe happened?

When faced with such stupidity, yes there is a need to swear.

We. Do. Not. Know. What. Loophole. Was. Found.

Is it sinking in yet?

Several loopholes.

One of which was buying houses and renting them to players at far below market rates.
Another was the use of sponsored cars.


All irrelevant now as done and dusted. However by insisting on confidentiality Saracens made themselves look like dicks.

Lets get something clear, theres no need for the IRFU or the provinces to be transparent regarding their finances as there is no legal or administrative reason for them to be.

The AP fulfil their requirements, the IRFU fulfil theirs

Your problem is that you have nothing concrete to point to so you can bitch about it

marty2086 wrote:Lets get something clear, theres no need for the IRFU or the provinces to be transparent regarding their finances as there is no legal or administrative reason for them to be.

The AP fulfil their requirements, the IRFU fulfil theirs

Your problem is that you have nothing concrete to point to so you can bitch about it

Odd final sentence.

LondonTiger wrote:Several loopholes.

One of which was buying houses and renting them to players at far below market rates.
Another was the use of sponsored cars.


All irrelevant now as done and dusted. However by insisting on confidentiality Saracens made themselves look like dicks.

Who bought the houses?

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Lets get something clear, theres no need for the IRFU or the provinces to be transparent regarding their finances as there is no legal or administrative reason for them to be.

The AP fulfil their requirements, the IRFU fulfil theirs

Your problem is that you have nothing concrete to point to so you can bitch about it

Odd final sentence.

Not really when you want a full break down because you want a figure to point at and say I told you so

What is odd is that you say there are differing levels of transparency when in fact there is the same level

marty2086 wrote:
Not really when you want a full break down because you want a figure to point at and say I told you so

What is odd is that you say there are differing levels of transparency when in fact there is the same level

I've got enough figures to point and say I told you so.

There are different levels of transparency across countries, was my point. I'd forgotten how poor is your level of comprehension.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Not really when you want a full break down because you want a figure to point at and say I told you so

What is odd is that you say there are differing levels of transparency when in fact there is the same level

I've got enough figures to point and say I told you so.

There are different levels of transparency across countries, was my point. I'd forgotten how poor is your level of comprehension.

You say I told you so but fall well short of..you know...actual proof as your opinion is not as substantive as you would like to think

You didn't say different countries, you specifically compared the AP and IRFU

Since the clubs in the AP and IRFU both have publically accessible audited accounts both done using the same accounting standards that would be...what? The same level of transparency

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Not really when you want a full break down because you want a figure to point at and say I told you so

What is odd is that you say there are differing levels of transparency when in fact there is the same level

I've got enough figures to point and say I told you so.

There are different levels of transparency across countries, was my point. I'd forgotten how poor is your level of comprehension.

Then you can prove to us that one is more transparent than the other?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
No need to swear. Yes, that would be using a loophole to pay over the salary cap. So that is what you're saying you believe happened?

When faced with such stupidity, yes there is a need to swear.

We. Do. Not. Know. What. Loophole. Was. Found.

Is it sinking in yet?

Yet you said you believed that was what happened.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
As long as it was transparent to ospreys that Munster were breaking a cap, usign loopholes etc you'd be fine if that were kept secret from everyone bar the clubs employees?

Not bothered about the other unions yet, just saying a cap may force the Welsh to lower their offers to players allowing french adn english clubs to swoop. You would accept that's a possibility surely?

Yes, I'd be fine with that.

No, I won't accept that is a possibility as it is utterly ludicrous. The pot of money for the NDCs is in the public domain and relatively tiny.

So you'd want any cap to be at the upper limit of the Welsh clubs rather than any lower so as to not limit the Welsh.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
No need to swear. Yes, that would be using a loophole to pay over the salary cap. So that is what you're saying you believe happened?

When faced with such stupidity, yes there is a need to swear.

We. Do. Not. Know. What. Loophole. Was. Found.

Is it sinking in yet?

Yet you said you believed that was what happened.

You've used the word loophole when it was essentially a difference of opinion of what fell under the cap

Phil likes to challenge these things then when people do the same with him he attacks them, belittles them and says they fail to comprehend things

He used loophole. He won't say exactly what the loophole was which he believed occured.

marty2086 wrote:

You say I told you so but fall well short of..you know...actual proof as your opinion is not as substantive as you would like to think

You didn't say different countries, you specifically compared the AP and IRFU

Since the clubs in the AP and IRFU both have publically accessible audited accounts both done using the same accounting standards that would be...what? The same level of transparency

The AP and IRFU are in different countries. It's been quite easy to prove the wage levels, as a whole, paid by the IRFU.

The IRFU don't split their four teams in their accounts, dumbo.

Munchkin wrote:
Then you can prove to us that one is more transparent than the other?

Yes, easily.

The companies running each AP team have their accounts in Companies House and contain full costs for that business.

We all know nothing comparable is on offer from the IRFU.

Thanks.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

You say I told you so but fall well short of..you know...actual proof as your opinion is not as substantive as you would like to think

You didn't say different countries, you specifically compared the AP and IRFU

Since the clubs in the AP and IRFU both have publically accessible audited accounts both done using the same accounting standards that would be...what? The same level of transparency

The AP and IRFU are in different countries. It's been quite easy to prove the wage levels, as a whole, paid by the IRFU.

The IRFU don't split their four teams in their accounts, dumbo.

They are? What countries are they?

Being in different countries does not mean differences in transparency

Really? Because you have yet to do it

And again with the name calling

No 7&1/2 wrote:

So you'd want any cap to be at the upper limit of the Welsh clubs rather than any lower so as to not limit the Welsh.

I'd love it capped at the upper limit of the Welsh clubs, but what would the Irish and Scots do with the excess players they could no longer afford?

marty2086 wrote:

You've used the word loophole when it was essentially a difference of opinion of what fell under the cap

Phil likes to challenge these things then when people do the same with him he attacks them, belittles them and says they fail to comprehend things

A loophole is a difference of opinion.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He used loophole. He won't say exactly what the loophole was which he believed occured.

A loophole. I believe it was a loophole. I don't know what the loophole was.

I'm sorry if you, too, are struggling with such basic English.