Wage cap - Updated with news on Saracens Punishment

by No 7&1/2 Tue 05 Mar 2019, 9:30 am

First topic message reminder :

Saracens have made the following statement.
"
Club Statement - Co-investment partnerships between the Saracens owner and players.

Following a newspaper article, the Club would like to make the following statement:

“Firstly, we would like to reiterate that the Club readily complies with Premiership Rugby salary regulations and information relating to remuneration is declared to the salary cap manager. Although co-investment partnerships between owners and players are not a prerequisite of the salary regulations, we disclose these transactions to Premiership Rugby and will continue to do so.

“Currently, 57% of the men’s squad is comprised of home grown talent - the highest in the Premiership. These players not only produce results on the pitch, they help entitle the Club to £1.2m in credits above the baseline salary cap from the RFU and Premiership Rugby. This is a direct result of our significant investment in the Saracens Academy which nurtures and develops Saracens and England players of the future.

“A professional playing career in rugby can be short. We have a responsibility to help our players fulfil their potential, not just on the pitch but off it too. It is why our Academy incorporates an education programme that actively prepares players for life beyond the sport. We are encouraged that many of our senior players are exploring business opportunities away from rugby.”

To me it just seems to be we're doing good work for the England team so don't pry!

by Gooseberry Tue 05 Nov 2019, 2:41 pm

Scottrf wrote:Feels to me that they should review the cap with regard to home grown players. They have a lot of players now that they have developed, are now playing international rugby and commanding big salaries. We don't want to disincentivise clubs from investing in this and being forced to sell players they have brought through; Saracens have contributed a lot to the current England team. The current level of cap benefit is low, and the players are unavailable for a lot of the games.

Theyve been reviewing and relaxing the cap for years, and off the back of that took agreements from the big clubs that they would stop certain practices for getting around it. Saracens have continued to blatantly take the pee and breach the rules.

But at the same time they have supplied and employed more top quality England players than any other club. Saracens as per their statement have also been good at resting and protecting their players, a lot easier when you have a deeper squad of talent.

Tigers have just about played by the rules the last couple of seasons and also pushed the boat out to keep Tuilagi from going to France. They have been as almost as hard hit as Saracens by the England call ups, but didnt have the wiggle room in the cap to employ a shadow squad.

And thats where the argument for a more closely controlled smaller ring fenced division comes in.

by Brendan Tue 05 Nov 2019, 2:43 pm

Could home grown allowances be increased by years at club as a professional.
So some one who has come through the academy and been a senior play for 5 v 10 years are not treated the same.

by Scottrf Tue 05 Nov 2019, 2:52 pm

Heaf wrote:Trouble is Scott that would mean rich clubs like Bath would continue to plunder poorer ones like LI ... the fact that Bath got investigated previously and nothing happened while they continued to asset strip LI really sticks in the throat ... unless of course you mean they wouldn't be included in the 'home-grown' allowance.

I think an allowance for only if they came through your academy, not purchased.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 2:57 pm

Saracens currently have 25 internationally capped players. 10 are not England internationals. Of the 15 that are 9 came through their youth system.

by Kingshu Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:01 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Bottom 3 are Bath, Scarcens and Tigers the same 3 that were suspected of breaking the rules in 2015, Feels like a kind of justice lol.

Excuse me, only two teams were investigated in 2015.

It was never dosclosed who was investigated or paid a fine as it was supposedly confidential, however every club save Bath, Leicester and Saracens did, in some public communication or other, deny breaching the salary cap or confirmed they were not investigated and/or did not reach any settlement. Leading to conclusions it was these 3 that were either investigated and or paid a settlement.

by BamBam Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:17 pm

Ah all the simpletons who didn't think there was any wrong doing just because there was no official settlement must be devastated!

Has anyone heard from a "Lord" from Merthyr?

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:20 pm

Kingshu wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Bottom 3 are Bath, Scarcens and Tigers the same 3 that were suspected of breaking the rules in 2015, Feels like a kind of justice lol.

Excuse me, only two teams were investigated in 2015.

It was never dosclosed who was investigated or paid a fine as it was supposedly confidential, however every club save Bath, Leicester and Saracens did, in some public communication or other, deny breaching the salary cap or confirmed they were not investigated and/or did not reach any settlement. Leading to conclusions it was these 3 that were either investigated and or paid a settlement.

Only two teams were investigated, honest. Leicester broke the cap rules the year earlier and were fined, Quins the year after and fined. Both cases were minor breaches. (Wasps also recently)

by **RiscaGame** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:20 pm

As a gesture of goodwill, Dragons will take Liam Williams on a vastly reduced wage, to help Saracens out of this unfortunate mess.

by formerly known as Sam Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:25 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Bottom 3 are Bath, Scarcens and Tigers the same 3 that were suspected of breaking the rules in 2015, Feels like a kind of justice lol.

Excuse me, only two teams were investigated in 2015.

It was never dosclosed who was investigated or paid a fine as it was supposedly confidential, however every club save Bath, Leicester and Saracens did, in some public communication or other, deny breaching the salary cap or confirmed they were not investigated and/or did not reach any settlement. Leading to conclusions it was these 3 that were either investigated and or paid a settlement.

Only two teams were investigated, honest. Leicester broke the cap rules the year earlier and were fined, Quins the year after and fined. Both cases were minor breaches. (Wasps also recently)

Wasn't it the Manu break out season where he was listed as an academy player but played so many games that his status changed to senior player and so he came under the cap.

Risca, I'm sure a lot of the Sarries players agents are fielding unofficial calls discussing possible availability.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:27 pm

RiscaGame wrote:As a gesture of goodwill, Dragons will take Liam Williams on a vastly reduced wage, to help Saracens out of this unfortunate mess.

It was leaked at the weekend that Liam Williams would not be staying beyond this season. France was touted as the only place that coudl afford him.

by Rinsure Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:28 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Bottom 3 are Bath, Scarcens and Tigers the same 3 that were suspected of breaking the rules in 2015, Feels like a kind of justice lol.

Excuse me, only two teams were investigated in 2015.

It was never dosclosed who was investigated or paid a fine as it was supposedly confidential, however every club save Bath, Leicester and Saracens did, in some public communication or other, deny breaching the salary cap or confirmed they were not investigated and/or did not reach any settlement. Leading to conclusions it was these 3 that were either investigated and or paid a settlement.

Only two teams were investigated, honest. Leicester broke the cap rules the year earlier and were fined, Quins the year after and fined. Both cases were minor breaches. (Wasps also recently)

Wasn't it the Manu break out season where he was listed as an academy player but played so many games that his status changed to senior player and so he came under the cap.

Risca, I'm sure a lot of the Sarries players agents are fielding unofficial calls discussing possible availability.

Wasps were found to have "inadvertently" edged over the cap due to auditors adjustments. Fined, but not guilty of deliberately overstepping:

“This is not a breach of the Regulations and there is no suggestion it was deliberate,” said a Premiership Rugby spokesman. “A number of adjustments were identified by the independent auditors which resulted in the overrun. These have now been addressed.”

Unlike Saracens...

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:29 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Bottom 3 are Bath, Scarcens and Tigers the same 3 that were suspected of breaking the rules in 2015, Feels like a kind of justice lol.

Excuse me, only two teams were investigated in 2015.

It was never dosclosed who was investigated or paid a fine as it was supposedly confidential, however every club save Bath, Leicester and Saracens did, in some public communication or other, deny breaching the salary cap or confirmed they were not investigated and/or did not reach any settlement. Leading to conclusions it was these 3 that were either investigated and or paid a settlement.

Only two teams were investigated, honest. Leicester broke the cap rules the year earlier and were fined, Quins the year after and fined. Both cases were minor breaches. (Wasps also recently)

Wasn't it the Manu break out season where he was listed as an academy player but played so many games that his status changed to senior player and so he came under the cap.

Risca, I'm sure a lot of the Sarries players agents are fielding unofficial calls discussing possible availability.

I think we had two breaches - 2010/11 which was the Manu issue, and 2013/14 which was to do with incorrectly recording an injury dispensation iirc.

by Heaf Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:30 pm

Scottrf wrote:
Heaf wrote:Trouble is Scott that would mean rich clubs like Bath would continue to plunder poorer ones like LI ... the fact that Bath got investigated previously and nothing happened while they continued to asset strip LI really sticks in the throat ... unless of course you mean they wouldn't be included in the 'home-grown' allowance.
I think an allowance for only if they came through your academy, not purchased.

Yes think that's on the right lines - needs careful thinking through though as the more allowance you get in one area the more room it leaves for you to spend in another to nick other teams products - who then lose their talent and their allowances. Maybe some sort of fee should be paid for taking other teams' academy graduates within a certain time. I know there are no easy answers though ....

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:34 pm

Heaf wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Heaf wrote:Trouble is Scott that would mean rich clubs like Bath would continue to plunder poorer ones like LI ... the fact that Bath got investigated previously and nothing happened while they continued to asset strip LI really sticks in the throat ... unless of course you mean they wouldn't be included in the 'home-grown' allowance.
I think an allowance for only if they came through your academy, not purchased.

Yes think that's on the right lines - needs careful thinking through though as the more allowance you get in one area the more room it leaves for you to spend in another to nick other teams products - who then lose their talent and their allowances. Maybe some sort of fee should be paid for taking other teams' academy graduates within a certain time. I know there are no easy answers though ....

There are two allowances:

1) Producing players from your academy
2) Having players who play for England.

I would pay a portion of the latter to the previous club if the player has moved. So for example Saracens would have to give a share of the monies they have received over the WC for Daly and Billy to Wasps.

by Heaf Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:38 pm

So would LI get allowances for Watson, JJ and Joe C from Bath?

by Kingshu Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:43 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
formerly known as Sam wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Bottom 3 are Bath, Scarcens and Tigers the same 3 that were suspected of breaking the rules in 2015, Feels like a kind of justice lol.

Excuse me, only two teams were investigated in 2015.

It was never dosclosed who was investigated or paid a fine as it was supposedly confidential, however every club save Bath, Leicester and Saracens did, in some public communication or other, deny breaching the salary cap or confirmed they were not investigated and/or did not reach any settlement. Leading to conclusions it was these 3 that were either investigated and or paid a settlement.

Only two teams were investigated, honest. Leicester broke the cap rules the year earlier and were fined, Quins the year after and fined. Both cases were minor breaches. (Wasps also recently)

Wasn't it the Manu break out season where he was listed as an academy player but played so many games that his status changed to senior player and so he came under the cap.

Risca, I'm sure a lot of the Sarries players agents are fielding unofficial calls discussing possible availability.

I think we had two breaches - 2010/11 which was the Manu issue, and 2013/14 which was to do with incorrectly recording an injury dispensation iirc.

I guess Tigers dint say anything the year before so kept the same policy the following year even if it made them look guility. To be honest as a Pro 14 fan breaking the cap doesn't bother me, I can't see how Pro 14 fans can get annoyied at Scarcens as I think only fans of other Prem teams can be annoyed at them, when playing in Europe they didnt break any rules as there is no salary cap.

Can see Munster fans calling Scarcens cheats, but whenever they met it was a level playing field, Scarcens only cheated against other Prem teams in the league.

Anyway if a team like tigers fancy a move to a league with no cap I'd be happy to have them in the Pro 14, tbh wouldnt be so kean on Scarcens though.

by nathan Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:44 pm

Isn’t the idea of a cap to ensure its a level playing field for all teams and looking at ways to increase spend just going to spoil the premiership?

by formerly known as Sam Tue 05 Nov 2019, 3:58 pm

nathan wrote:Isn’t the idea of a cap to ensure its a level playing field for all teams and looking at ways to increase spend just going to spoil the premiership?

As long as the majority of teams in the Prem can afford to spend more then increasing the spending a little is ok. They salary cap can't be too restrictive as you run the risk of missing out on top level talent. Then the league will fall behind and perform even worse in European competition.

by Irish Londoner Tue 05 Nov 2019, 4:02 pm

Kingshu wrote:
Can see Munster fans calling Scarcens cheats, but whenever they met it was a level playing field, Scarcens only cheated against other Prem teams in the league.

Anyway if a team like tigers fancy a move to a league with no cap I'd be happy to have them in the Pro 14, tbh wouldnt be so kean on Scarcens though.

I think it is cheating if you think that Saracens were allowed to have a squad good enough and large enough to compete in the Premiership and Europe at the same time, where most of the other English teams would (by virtue of staying inside the cap) not have the same depth of squad.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 4:13 pm

Full Statement from PRL wrote:

PREMIERSHIP RUGBY can confirm that an independent disciplinary panel has reached a decision in respect of charges brought against Saracens Rugby Club for alleged breaches of the Premiership Rugby Salary Cap.

The charges, which relate to the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, were brought in June 2019 following a nine-month investigation by Premiership Rugby. In accordance with the Salary Cap Regulations, such charges are referred to the independent dispute service, Sport Resolutions, which appoints an Independent Panel to determine whether the alleged breaches have occurred and to decide any sanction.

The Independent Panel -which conducted a hearing over five days in September and October 2019 - was chaired by the Rt. Hon. Lord Dyson, who was joined on the panel by Aidan Robertson QC and Jeremy Summers. Lord Dyson was Master of the Rolls (President of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales and Head of Civil Justice) for four years until he retired in October 2016. He was a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom from April 2010 until October 2012.

The decision of the Independent Panel is that Saracens Rugby Club failed to disclose payments to players in each of the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. In addition, the Club is found to have exceeded the ceiling for payments to senior players in each of the three seasons. The Panel therefore upheld all of the charges.

The sanction that has been imposed on Saracens Rugby Club by the panel is:

* a total fine of £5,360,272.31
* and a total deduction of 35 league points.

The Salary Cap Regulations stipulate that a points deduction may be imposed in the current season (2019-20) only. The sanction has no bearing on any other domestic or European competition.

The Independent Panel rejected the Club’s challenge on competition law grounds to the validity of the Regulations. In setting out its conclusions, the Panel noted that the salary cap operates in a pro-competitive manner by promoting the objectives of ensuring the financial viability of Clubs, controlling inflationary pressures, providing a level playing field, ensuring a competitive league and enabling Clubs to compete in European competitions.

Under the Regulations, Saracens Rugby Club has the ability to seek a review of the decision by an arbitration body. The review can only be on the basis that there has been an error of law, the decision is irrational or that there has been some procedural unfairness. In the event that Saracens Rugby Club seeks a review, the sanctions will be suspended pending the outcome of that review.

A Premiership Rugby spokesperson said: "The Salary Cap is an important mechanism to ensure a level playing field for Premiership Clubs and maintain a competitive, growing and financially sustainable league. Today’s decision by the Independent Panel upholds both the principle of the Salary Cap and the charges brought following an extensive investigation by Premiership Rugby. We are pleased that this process has reached a conclusion and we look forward to another exciting season of Premiership Rugby.”

The Premiership Rugby Salary Cap Regulations were first introduced in 1999 and can be viewed at www.premiershiprugby.com/salarycap

by Kingshu Tue 05 Nov 2019, 4:16 pm

Certainly an advantage over the English teams that stayed within the cap, but not an advantage over French or Irish teams who didn't have a cap. If Scarcens beat Clermot would you think Scarcens cheated by having a smaller budget than Clermot, but breaking domestic rules?

by Scottrf Tue 05 Nov 2019, 4:20 pm

nathan wrote:Isn’t the idea of a cap to ensure its a level playing field for all teams and looking at ways to increase spend just going to spoil the premiership?

But if you add value by developing players to the level that they are demanding higher wages, is that really an unfair advantage? I think it's good for English rugby to encourage teams to develop rather than buy.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 4:25 pm

Interesting that Saracens defence was that the Salary Cap Regulations break competition law.

by Guest Tue 05 Nov 2019, 5:30 pm

BamBam wrote:To see a great example of the success of salary / spending caps, just look at how much they've stopped Saracens / Man City / PSG from doing what they please

Hopefully that's about to end.

by Guest Tue 05 Nov 2019, 5:40 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
RiscaGame wrote:As a gesture of goodwill, Dragons will take Liam Williams on a vastly reduced wage, to help Saracens out of this unfortunate mess.

It was leaked at the weekend that Liam Williams would not be staying beyond this season. France was touted as the only place that coudl afford him.

The regions will move heaven and earth to bring him back, no doubt about that. All 3 will have a good go at bringing him in. Seems the Ospreys are the front runners.

by king_carlos Tue 05 Nov 2019, 6:11 pm

Heaf wrote:So would LI get allowances for Watson, JJ and Joe C from Bath?

Not under the current system, no. I agree with LT that clubs should do however.

The home grown player credits of up to £600k are actually included in the £7m salary cap ceiling that gets quoted. The cap is £6.4m and the home grown credits increase that to £7m. It's £50k max credits per player and £600k maximum in total. Almost all clubs access this hence the cap being quoted at £7m.

Wording as simple as that in the press led to lack of understanding amongst many fans though. When the investigation was announced many fans said, the cap is £7m, you get £600k in home grown credits, plus £400k for injury dispensation, then came to the conclusion that added up to £8m. Not realising the £7m already included maximum home grown credits being accessed.

In terms of international absentees:

- If a player is in the EPS the club can claim £40k per season in credits
- If a player is in the EPS the club can claim a further £5k credits per Prem or European match missed due to international duty
- For a player who is not in the EPS the club can claim £10k credits per Prem or European match missed due to international duty
- The max credits for a player in a season is £80k. This includes home grown credits (£50k per player) and all EPS/international credits

So if Watson, Cokanasiga or JJ miss 8 Prem or Europe games due to international duty, and are in the EPS, Bath get £80k in credits. Personally I think some of that should go to the academy that trained them.

by king_carlos Tue 05 Nov 2019, 6:19 pm

miaow wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
RiscaGame wrote:As a gesture of goodwill, Dragons will take Liam Williams on a vastly reduced wage, to help Saracens out of this unfortunate mess.

It was leaked at the weekend that Liam Williams would not be staying beyond this season. France was touted as the only place that coudl afford him.

The regions will move heaven and earth to bring him back, no doubt about that. All 3 will have a good go at bringing him in. Seems the Ospreys are the front runners.

Sarries need to get £650k off their books to get under the cap. If a player doesn't play a single senior game in a season I believe their salary can be exempt from the cap. If any international players who have missed the season thus far for the RWC fancy a quick move then it could help both parties given the need to reduce their wage bill.

by Heaf Tue 05 Nov 2019, 6:21 pm

king_carlos wrote:
Heaf wrote:So would LI get allowances for Watson, JJ and Joe C from Bath?
Not under the current system, no. I agree with LT that clubs should do however.

The home grown player credits of up to £600k are actually included in the £7m salary cap ceiling that gets quoted. The cap is £6.4m and the home grown credits increase that to £7m. It's £50k max credits per player and £600k maximum in total. Almost all clubs access this hence the cap being quoted at £7m.

Wording as simple as that in the press led to lack of understanding amongst many fans though. When the investigation was announced many fans said, the cap is £7m, you get £600k in home grown credits, plus £400k for injury dispensation, then came to the conclusion that added up to £8m. Not realising the £7m already included maximum home grown credits being accessed.

In terms of international absentees:

- If a player is in the EPS the club can claim £40k per season in credits
- If a player is in the EPS the club can claim a further £5k credits per Prem or European match missed due to international duty
- For a player who is not in the EPS the club can claim £10k credits per Prem or European match missed due to international duty
- The max credits for a player in a season is £80k. This includes home grown credits (£50k per player) and all EPS/international credits

So if Watson, Cokanasiga or JJ miss 8 Prem or Europe games due to international duty, and are in the EPS, Bath get £80k in credits. Personally I think some of that should go to the academy that trained them.

That would be a start for sure but I think they should have to pay a 'transfer fee' in the first place and that should be included in the cap. Obviously after a player has been with a club as a senior for a certain period of time after graduating from the academy this wouldn't apply - maybe there could be some sort of sliding scale for each year reducing the fee payable.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 05 Nov 2019, 7:08 pm

I am not a fan of transfer fees when a player is out of contract, but it does allow teams to poach players at the end of their academy contract and before they sign a senior one. Some recompense should be due here, though it should also be noted that the RFU make a large contribution to the cost of academies.

by Guest Tue 05 Nov 2019, 7:41 pm

It's either transfer fees or you run a severely capped league to limit imbalance. France won't follow that, so you either choose to let small clubs get hurt for developing players, or you hurt the whole league and the standard of rugby in the country.

by Kingshu Tue 05 Nov 2019, 8:56 pm

A lot of good ideas and ways to help clubs, id like to see a worldwide limit to players who cant play for that Union, like Ireland 4 NIE per team, Scarcens have a lot of English players but still have 11 NEE Sale Sharks have 15NEE and I'm sure there are other teams with more. It would help promote domestic players and prevent player drains from countries like SA.

Another is players from the acamady having a reduced effect on the cap and after 5 years a further reduction.

Say after 5 years after coming through the academy only 60% of the player wages counted toward the cap, it would mean in a league where most teams can afford the cap or close to it a bigger team cant just offer more money. If a bigger team thought he was worth say £100,000 of the cap budget, the smaller team he came through from can offer £165,000 and it only takes up £100,000 of their
Cap budget.

Some of these rules I feel should be made worldwide, as if only England adopt them them England are disadvantaging themselves.

by quinsforever Tue 05 Nov 2019, 9:18 pm

RFU probably going to step in at some point, probably behind the scenes.

Saracens academy has been hugely successful. for Sarries, and for England.

Either the salary cap needs to be lifted to accomodate a large number of academy developed players in your team, or there needs to be a big change to the economics of poaching a former academy player.

it is absolutely essential that the most successful academies are financially encourage to keep churning out the best players.

that said, if sarries have broken the rules, let them pay the price.

although....i wonder how the RFU would feel about 9 of their England players playing in the Championship next season....

by BamBam Tue 05 Nov 2019, 11:33 pm

miaow wrote:
BamBam wrote:To see a great example of the success of salary / spending caps, just look at how much they've stopped Saracens / Man City / PSG from doing what they please

Hopefully that's about to end.

Top class posting with the benefit of hindsight thumbsup

Do you have a prediction for last week's lottery numbers too miaow?

by king_carlos Wed 06 Nov 2019, 12:28 am

LondonTiger wrote:I am not a fan of transfer fees when a player is out of contract, but it does allow teams to poach players at the end of their academy contract and before they sign a senior one. Some recompense should be due here, though it should also be noted that the RFU make a large contribution to the cost of academies.

The max salary for an 'academy player' under the cap is £30k. Above £30k salary per year, they are considered senior players by the cap.

There is also an academy ceiling of £100k for non-home grown academy players.

Increasing the max salary for an academy player, but keeping that £100k ceiling for non-home grown academy players, could in theory help clubs keep their academy talent during that transition period.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 06 Nov 2019, 7:34 am

There is yet to be anything mentioned about stripping domestic trophies (or even european ones I can see the argument). Seems to be a thing in rugby that you get caught cheating wrongs dont get put right we merely have punishment from now on.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:09 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:There is yet to be anything mentioned about stripping domestic trophies (or even european ones I can see the argument). Seems to be a thing in rugby that you get caught cheating wrongs dont get put right we merely have punishment from now on.

Trophy stripping is not a punishment that is in the rules as a permissible punishment. Saracens did not break any EPCR rules anyway so Champions Cup is fine. As to the Premiership, the rest of us just have to suck it up. Exeter are whinging like a toddler at the moment, and while I understand they feel hard done by they are not the only ones and for me their attitude is embarrassing and rather holier than thou from a club who are not averse themselves to stretching the rules slightly.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:10 am

I'm aware that they didn't break champions cup rules however they only qualified through cheating.

by Soul Requiem Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:11 am

LondonTiger wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:There is yet to be anything mentioned about stripping domestic trophies (or even european ones I can see the argument). Seems to be a thing in rugby that you get caught cheating wrongs dont get put right we merely have punishment from now on.

Trophy stripping is not a punishment that is in the rules as a permissible punishment. Saracens did not break any EPCR rules anyway so Champions Cup is fine. As to the Premiership, the rest of us just have to suck it up. Exeter are whinging like a toddler at the moment, and while I understand they feel hard done by they are not the only ones and for me their attitude is embarrassing and rather holier than thou from a club who are not averse themselves to stretching the rules slightly.

Surely you can only win the Champions cup because of your previous form in domestic rugby so by extension their very entry into the tournament is an issue.

Ooh don't complain that a team cheated you out of not one but two titles.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:16 am

They did not cheat Exeter out of a title any more than they cheated Quins (or Tigers season before) out of a playoff place.

Saracens have been found guilty of cheating and been given the maximum punishment allowed. All the Premiership clubs can feel aggrieved and vindicated, but demanding penalties that they chose not to put in the rules is, imo, pathetic.

If Tony Rowe wanted automatic relegation for breaches of the salary cap, he should have fought for it to be in the rules. He did not.

If he wanted teams to be stripped of the trophy he should have fought for it to be in the rules. He did not.

Even if the trophies were to be stripped, they should not be awarded to anyone else any way as multiple teams have been cheated out of progressing further than they did.

by Soul Requiem Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:17 am

Perfectly vindicated to do so if you ask me.

by Rinsure Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:48 am

Seeing some interesting news on twitter this morning that Saracens are declining to send representatives to the (media?) launch of the Champions and Challenge Cups today.

Have they decided to go on strike? Does this jeopardise their participation?

by Heaf Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:51 am

Probably just decided there would be too many awkward questions and trying to keep their heads down ...

by Rinsure Wed 06 Nov 2019, 9:55 am

Unprofessional, if nothing else though. You'd expect them to front up.

Even political parties put someone forward to answer awkward questions, however badly!

by Irish Londoner Wed 06 Nov 2019, 10:25 am

Rinsure wrote:Seeing some interesting news on twitter this morning that Saracens are declining to send representatives to the (media?) launch of the Champions and Challenge Cups today.

Have they decided to go on strike? Does this jeopardise their participation?

There's probably a fine for "not participating in the promotion of the event" but in the scheme of things it's small change to Saracens. As other people have posted they'd probably not face the press today.

by formerly known as Sam Wed 06 Nov 2019, 10:28 am

Rinsure wrote:Seeing some interesting news on twitter this morning that Saracens are declining to send representatives to the (media?) launch of the Champions and Challenge Cups today.

Have they decided to go on strike? Does this jeopardise their participation?

I imagine they don't want their players dropped into that environment, the press would be all over them. The dodgy red tops would have "reporters" there calling them cheats to try and illicit a response. There's some real anger from the other clubs, see the Exeter top man calling for the Saracens to be relegated, I can understand that for player welfare you don't want them in that environment.

ERC representatives are probably happy as they won't want their competition launch being overtaken by this media frenzy.

by Big Wed 06 Nov 2019, 11:29 am

formerly known as Sam wrote:
I imagine they don't want their players dropped into that environment, the press would be all over them. The dodgy red tops would have "reporters" there calling them cheats to try and illicit a response. There's some real anger from the other clubs, see the Exeter top man calling for the Saracens to be relegated, I can understand that for player welfare you don't want them in that environment.

ERC representatives are probably happy as they won't want their competition launch being overtaken by this media frenzy.

I think particularly good not to throw them into that particular pot when they didn't even cheat in that tournament - as bad as it is, it has nothing to do with the European Cup. For the Champions/Challenge Cup there is no salary cap, and even with what appears to be an effective £600k a year overspend (based on the fine I think that's the ball park for hidden perks) they are almost certainly still be spending less than some of the non-English clubs.

by RugbyFan100 Wed 06 Nov 2019, 11:58 am

Kingshu wrote:Certainly an advantage over the English teams that stayed within the cap, but not an advantage over French or Irish teams who didn't have a cap.

The French do have a salary cap.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 06 Nov 2019, 12:18 pm

RugbyFan100 wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Certainly an advantage over the English teams that stayed within the cap, but not an advantage over French or Irish teams who didn't have a cap.

The French do have a salary cap.

Yes, but with so many loopholes and allowances that while the cap was 11.7m Euro in 2018, some clubs were spending 20m Euros a year.

by TJ Wed 06 Nov 2019, 12:23 pm

The Irish even Leinster do not outspend Saracens. Best estimates are they spend around 7 million maybe 8. Saracens were clearly spending way more than that

by RugbyFan100 Wed 06 Nov 2019, 12:50 pm

LondonTiger wrote:
RugbyFan100 wrote:
Kingshu wrote:Certainly an advantage over the English teams that stayed within the cap, but not an advantage over French or Irish teams who didn't have a cap.

The French do have a salary cap.

Yes, but with so many loopholes and allowances that while the cap was 11.7m Euro in 2018, some clubs were spending 20m Euros a year.

Sorry, that is absolutely untrue. The top 14 is rigorously policed, and finances completely audited. Teams have been fined and relegated for overspending in the past. You have plucked that figure out of thin air.

by Sponsored content