Wage cap - Updated with news on Saracens Punishment

Rugby Fan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:That was a strange interview, and with an annoying Irish guy. Pretty awkward that a player and an ex player go in and answer questions about it when both are just trying to get on with their lives - very unfortunate for them.

The whole interview was 40 minutes long, and they spent most of it promoting their CBD business, so I think a few minutes being grilled about Saracens and the salary cap was a small price to pay for some commercial exposure in Ireland.

TightHEAD wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:I wonder if BT sport's will now stop defending them

and BBC rugby podcast.

BamBam wrote:
I don't know enough about the regulations to be able to say what they could have done to ensure they were under the cap this season, but from the outside, releasing Liam Williams is the only obvious player movement they have made - it doesn't appear they are desperately trying to comply

BamBam wrote:I've got very little sympathy. If it was their first offence I'd be more inclined to think that the points reduction was enough, but let's not forget the never to be spoken of agreement that was made between the clubs the first time that they (along with Bath) "allegedly" broke the cap (even if the mouth breathers still think there's "no proof")

I can imagine that the other clubs made damn sure that any future breaches would result in the strongest possible punishment, and that's where we are now.

I don't know enough about the regulations to be able to say what they could have done to ensure they were under the cap this season, but from the outside, releasing Liam Williams is the only obvious player movement they have made - it doesn't appear they are desperately trying to comply

Rinsure wrote:

BamBam wrote:
I don't know enough about the regulations to be able to say what they could have done to ensure they were under the cap this season, but from the outside, releasing Liam Williams is the only obvious player movement they have made - it doesn't appear they are desperately trying to comply

What could they have done? Possibly not signed the Lions winger, and incumbent England fullback. Might have been a show of a desire to comply.

But they did.

BamBam wrote:

Rinsure wrote:

BamBam wrote:
I don't know enough about the regulations to be able to say what they could have done to ensure they were under the cap this season, but from the outside, releasing Liam Williams is the only obvious player movement they have made - it doesn't appear they are desperately trying to comply

What could they have done? Possibly not signed the Lions winger, and incumbent England fullback. Might have been a show of a desire to comply.

But they did.

Yep, although I sense you're a Wasps fan

I just mean I don't know enough about contracts etc to be able to say what definitively counts - if they had cancelled the signing of Daly, would they have had to pay him some sort of compensation? If so, does that count under the cap?

Rugby Fan wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:I wonder if BT sport's will now stop defending them

and BBC rugby podcast.

Danny Care has been very critical of Saracens on that podcast. Probably one of the most outspoken current players.

SirBurger wrote:For the record, Dallaglio who is on the board at Wasps is adamant Daly did not take a pay cut.

carpet baboon wrote:Maybe someone could ask why BT have been so steadfast in their defence of Saracens?

maestegmafia wrote:Anyone seen a rough estimate of far over the £7M they were?

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Anyone seen a rough estimate of far over the £7M they were?

IF as was stated they received the maximum fine (which is £3 for every £1 overspend) then over the 3 years with the fine just under £5.4m the overspend is just under £1.8m.

carpet baboon wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Anyone seen a rough estimate of far over the £7M they were?

IF as was stated they received the maximum fine (which is £3 for every £1 overspend) then over the 3 years with the fine just under £5.4m the overspend is just under £1.8m.

I believe the times today are reporting that it was 1.2 and 1.3 in two of the seasons

carpet baboon wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Anyone seen a rough estimate of far over the £7M they were?

IF as was stated they received the maximum fine (which is £3 for every £1 overspend) then over the 3 years with the fine just under £5.4m the overspend is just under £1.8m.

I believe the times today are reporting that it was 1.2 and 1.3 in two of the seasons

Owen Slot wrote:The Saracens scandal rages on today. Saracens have to prove to the rest of the Premiership that they can finish this season under the salary cap and if they cannot, it seems they will face relegation.

Either option will surely be a dramatic blow to the European champions. Relegation to the Championship will no doubt trigger the departure of a number of players. The other option is to get the club under cap, but that would require the departure of a number of players pretty much immediately.

Either way, players go. The only other option is for the players to agree to a dramatic cut in wages this season. That is chief executive Ed Griffiths’ best chance of keeping the squad largely intact and may be an option that he will present to the players today.

What is hard for Saracens is that there is so little room for manoeuvre. They have to shift £1 million-plus off their total salary spend, having tried and, so far failed, to do so.

Two weeks ago, when Griffiths resumed his role as chief executive, he rang the other 12 Premiership Rugby Limited (PRL) clubs — the other 11 in the Premiership plus Newcastle Falcons — and asked them if they were interested in taking some of his players. To some clubs with whom he spoke, he was discussing the concept, not specifics. To others, he mentioned particular names.


Most were not in a position to do business with him because they were already spending to the full cap. Even if they were, though, such is the antipathy for Saracens that some clubs didn’t want to help out anyway.

While the other clubs are pleased that Saracens have been punished for breaking the cap, there is also a feeling that the full extent of the breach has not yet been exposed. The judgment by the Sports Resolutions committee, that handed down the 35-point deduction and £5.35 million fine, included a small number of examples of salary-cap breaches. The other clubs do not yet fully believe that the whole web has yet been exposed. This explains their hardline attitude.

When PRL’s decision to punish Saracens was handed down on November 5, their immediate response was to say that this would not be a problem for the current season because they were definitely under cap. The suggestion that they just continue with pretty much the same squad again enraged their rivals.

So now, it seems, they are prepared to see Saracens relegated, no matter how damaging for the league.

Griffiths has some delicate manoeuvring to perform. He has to come back to PRL next week with a proposal that persuades the other clubs that Saracens can finish the season without breaking the cap again. Otherwise, it seems, they are down.

Times Staff wrote:Saracens are facing automatic relegation from the Premiership at the end of this season if they fail to reduce their wage bill by £2 million before the end of the month.

The club’s breach of the salary-cap regulations was so extensive that they initially agreed to the figure but it now appears pretty much impossible for them to meet their pledge.

The salary cap is set at £7 million. Saracens were fined £5.36 million and docked 35 league points after an investigation revealed they broke the salary-cap regulations in each of the previous three seasons. But Saracens will only be deemed to be compliant with the cap this season if they can reduce their wages by £2 million.

Initially the new chief executive, Ed Griffiths, was bullish that he could shop his players around on the market and cut spending accordingly. However, having been in the job for a fortnight, he has discovered that this is almost impossible.

Saracens had initially been given until the close of play today to show how they were going to come in under cap and to satisfy a number of demands by the other Premiership clubs. One of those demands was that Nigel Wray, the chairman, would resign. That did indeed happen last week. Today the players arrived at training only to be told to take the morning off and return in the afternoon.


Bringing down the wage bill looks extremely unlikely. The highest paid player at the club is Owen Farrell, who earns £750,000. There are a number of other players earning around £500,000. Saracens would therefore need a big clear-out to cut costs by £2 million.

One problem is that most of the other clubs have spent up to the salary cap limit anyway and therefore cannot squeeze any more players in. Another problem is that the players may not wish to leave anyway. When the players were being shopped around to other clubs, it is unlikely that they even knew they were up for sale.

Although the full judgment has not been published, those who have read it say it is damning. The club had initially insisted after the guilty verdict that they would be under the cap for this season, arguing the breaches had all been due to one-off business arrangements with senior players such as Maro Itoje and Owen Farrell.

Premiership clubs are usually audited under salary-cap regulations at the end of the season. The Times revealed in December that Premiership Rugby would take the extraordinary step of monitoring Saracens mid- season, in recognition of the need to restore faith in the league. Wray, who also resigned as a club director yesterday, is understood to have been against opening the books to Deloitte for a forensic audit.

The club then radically changed its position when Griffiths was appointed as interim chief executive earlier this month. He admitted that Saracens were on course to break the cap again and that urgent cuts would be required to the wage bill.

This latest remarkable twist to the tale indicates that the rest of the Premiership is still not satisfied that Saracens will be compliant. All clubs were represented at a meeting on Tuesday, with Bruce Craig, the Bath owner, joining via a video link from the Caribbean.

Griffiths is understood to have been calling around rival Premiership clubs in a bid to offload players that would help bring down the Saracens wage bill but has been struggling to find takers. Very few clubs are believed to have the budget or space in their own caps. It is unclear what mechanism PRL would use to relegate Saracens. One source said last night that the Tuesday meeting amounted to a disciplinary hearing. Another said Saracens would have to take voluntary relegation if they did not come back next week with the right solution.

The Times revealed this month that Saracens could have been deducted 70 points — which would have almost certainly relegated them — because two of the three breaches were in excess of £650,000. The independent panel decided that the two 35-point penalties should run concurrently.

Saracens initially threatened to appeal, provoking fury around the league, with clubs calling for them to be relegated and have their titles removed.

Neither of those actions was permissible under the regulations, nor was the publication of the full report which detailed how and to what extent Saracens broke the rules. Lord Dyson said last week that he believed the judgment should be published because it was in the public interest.

Griffiths had said that his mission was to make Saracens appear “whiter than white” and he acknowledged that mistakes had been made. “We will deal with it,” he had promised. “It is an easy thing to say — we are going to be compliant — but you need to back up words with actions.”

Saracens have been exploring whether Liam Williams, the Wales full back, could join Scarlets before the end of this season rather than in the summer but no arrangement has yet been reached. Richard Wigglesworth, Brad Barritt and Alex Lozowski are among the senior players out of contract in the summer, while George Kruis is due to leave at the end of the season although that does not help them solve the immediate crisis.

How the salary cap scandal unfolded and led to sanctions

March 4 A Daily Mail investigation reveals that Saracens have set up co-investment schemes between Nigel Wray, then the chairman, and a number of star players.

March 11 Wray declares “investment is not salary” and “the club is open and transparent with the salary-cap manager and we proactively disclose co-investments even though we are under no obligation to do so.”

April 10 Premiership Rugby announces a review into Saracens after it is found club did not disclose all details of the co-investments.

September 3 Matter passed to a specialist arbitrators firm.

October 26 Saracens group head of finance, Bernard van Zyl leaves the club, along with fellow director Nick Leslau.

November 5 Saracens are docked 35 points and fined £5.3 million after being found guilty of salary-cap breach.

January 2 Wray stands down as chairman. Ed Griffiths, who left after first the salary-cap scandal in 2015, returns as interim chief executive.

Saracens players told they WILL be relegated in 30-minute crisis meeting after breaking salary cap AGAIN
Saracens held talks with the entire squad about relegation prospects
Sportsmail understands the club have now accepted relgeation
They have failed to bring their salaries under the required limit
Sarries face an automatic drop to the Championship regardless of their finish
The league champions were told to either hand their titles back or drop divisions
COMMENT: Saracens' fall from grace is sheer, unprecedented chaos
By WILL KELLEHER and CHRIS FOY FOR MAILONLINE

Saracens players are understood to have been told at a meeting this morning that the club WILL be automatically relegated from the Premiership at the end of this season.

English rugby is awash with rumours about the fate of the disgraced champions, but multiple sources have indicated to MailOnline Sport that their demotion from the top division is now assured.

The north London club faced an ultimatum from their rivals; to slash their wage bill with immediate effect, hand back their titles and agree to forensic analysis of their accounts, or accept relegation.

It appears that Saracens have informed their squad that the club hierarchy have come to the conclusion that it is better to drop down to the Championship this summer, rather than face the prospect of doing so following further sanctions, if they are found to be in breach of the salary cap again this season.

As yet, there has been no official confirmation, but it appears that the unthinkable will happen.

One source has indicated that the meeting attended by Saracens players this morning lasted barely half-an-hour and it was revealed that there would be an additional deduction of 35 league points, in light of the new cap breach – which will mean relegation is certain.

Last night, MailOnline Sport revealed that the club have admitted to being ‘way over’ the spending limit for this campaign – and the Times have reported that Saracens were ordered to cut £2million from their budget with immediate effect.

Despite offering several players to other Premiership clubs, they have not been able to comply with the ultimatum.

Having been proven in November to have broken the league's £7million salary cap in the previous three seasons – in which they won the league twice – Sarries were originally fined £5.36m and docked 35 points.

That took them to the foot of the league table, but while vitriol towards them still circles in boardrooms this latest twist in the saga has unfolded as the club look to be struggling to fit under the cap again this season and were not keen for their books to be re-opened.

It has left the players and staff in turmoil, with stars' agents receiving calls from other sides about the availability of their talent late on Thursday night and into this morning.

Rival clubs are said not to be in a mood to help Saracens soften this crushing blow.

The original investigation into Saracens was prompted by a Sportsmail expose in March.

In the present regulations any sanctions for salary cap breaches are just used as a 'starting point' and can be upgraded or downgraded if necessary.

THE SALARY CAP EXPLAINED
The salary cap stands at £7million, which was increased from £6.5m in the 2016-17 season.

Built into the cap is the ability for clubs to nominate two 'excluded players', whose salaries are not included, and claim £400,000 in injury credits.

The identity of the excluded players is confidential.

Within the £7m there is £600,000 of 'Homegrown senior player credits' (defined as relating to a senior player who was at the club before his 18th birthday and has been there for at least two complete salary cap years prior to the current salary cap year), at a rate of £50,000 maximum per individual player.

Clubs receive credits for players unavailable while on international duty of up to £80,000 per player.

Sportsmail understands that while relegation to the second tier was not the original decision taken by the investigatory powers-that-be, there seems to be special dispensation to take such action if there is a 75 per cent majority vote among the 13 league shareholders.

All the Premiership clubs – plus Newcastle Falcons who kept their share in the league despite relegation last season – were present at a board meeting on Tuesday where extra sanctions for Saracens were discussed.

On Sunday, Saracens face Racing 92 at Allianz Park with the chance of progressing into the quarter-finals of the Heineken European Champions Cup.

In the circumstances, Mark McCall's side have mounted a decent campaign to defend their title – using 42 players in their five pool matches so far, many of them rookie academy graduates.

However, if Saracens were to go on and win the tournament again, they will not be able to defend their title next season.

Ordinarily, the winners of the trophy from the previous season qualify automatically, but sources have clarified that clubs are essentially nominated by the feeder leagues – the Premiership, Top 14 and Pro 14 – so a team operating outside of those competitions could not participate.

Saracens will now be excluded from Europe next season and would face a two-year absence from the Champions Cup, as they would go into the Challenge Cup upon their inevitable, swift return to the Premiership for the 2021-22 campaign.

The timing of this couldn't be worse in one sense. The 2021 Champions Cup Final will take place at Tottenham's new stadium, which Saracens are using for marquee matches as part of a five-year deal with Spurs. They are now unlikely to have a shot at reaching that home-town, grand occasion.

A season out of continental action for Saracens would in turn create additional disruption for England.

In principal, national coach Eddie Jones is entitled to pick players from the Championship – although whether or not he would do remains to be seen, as they would be deprived of elite-level game-time on a weekly basis.

If Owen Farrell and Co do not have European matches to prove their form and fitness before autumn Tests and the Six Nations, it will surely undermine their selection prospects.

Two invidious options were presented to the disgraced domestic and European Champions at a Premiership Rugby (PRL) meeting on Tuesday. Sarries were told they either had to hand back their titles won in the three years they have been proven to have broken the cap, and let auditors fully investigate club finances, or face the drop to the Championship in June.

When new chief executive Ed Griffiths arrived at the start of the month, Saracens said they would take immediate steps to comply with the cap and were committed to following the rules.

However, a source told Sportsmail that Saracens have admitted to being 'way over' the cap this season and have swiftly realised that they cannot cut costs sufficiently quickly and comprehensively.

A 'long list' of players available for transfer has been circulated, but there has not been the required interest, partly because Saracens previously adopted a policy of cutting agents out of deals.

The Saracens squad held an emergency meeting at 8.30am on Friday to consider the latest incredible twist in this sorry tale.

PRL announced last month a comprehensive review of the cap regulations to be led by former government minister Lord Myners— and new CEO Darren Childs suggested that harsher punishments in future could include relegation and stripping of titles.

News of this latest development came on the day retired chairman Nigel Wray cut all formal ties with Saracens and handed his shares to his children in the fallout of the salary cap breach that rocked the sport.

In November, Saracens were fined the largest sum in rugby history and dropped to the bottom of the table after a Sportsmail investigation prompted the inquest.

Wray's investment ventures with star players including Owen Farrell and Maro Itoje formed the basis of Premiership Rugby's investigation.

Having stepped down as chairman earlier this month, Companies House files announced Wray had resigned as a director of the club and its parent company Premier Team Holdings.

The multi-millionaire has been on the hunt for co-investment since 2018 and was reportedly willing to sell at least half of his ownership.

Despite taking a step back, Wray's family remain heavily involved and will continue to bankroll the club.

Sarries CEO Griffiths told Sportsmail on Thursday: 'The Wray family have always been committed to Saracens and remain so.'

The latest Companies House files show that Wray's ownership has been transferred to the Edna Wray Grandchildren's Accumulation & Maintenance Trust. Wray's children — Lucy, who is on the Saracens board, and Joseph — are the two main beneficiaries of the trust.

The Premiership and European champions were hoping to slash their wage bill to avoid another breach of the cap.

Lions star Liam Williams has already confirmed his exit, while England lock George Kruis is exploring the option of a move abroad.

Flankers Calum Clark and Michael Rhodes could also be released as a matter of urgency, while prop Juan Figallo could join the exodus.

If Clark, Figallo and Rhodes make swift exits, Saracens could cut an estimated £800,000 from their wage bill in a bid to come down to the £7m ceiling.

Any compensation paid to players, as and when they are released early from contracts, must be included in this season's salary cap.

Players' agents are now scrambling to find clubs for worried Saracens players, many of whom could leave the club under relegation clauses in their contracts — should the club be demoted.

Currently Saracens sit on minus-seven points at the foot of the Premiership table, but they were sure to overtake rivals and stay up come the summer. Thursday night's bombshell could scupper that quest altogether.

Saracens were contacted for comment.

HOW IT HAS ALL UNFOLDED...
March 4 - Sportsmail investigation sends ripples through sport with revelations about investment partnerships between Nigel Wray and Owen Farrell, Mako Vunipola and Billy Vunipola and property-sharing arrangements

March 5 - Clubs and former players call for formal probe into Saracens

March 6 - Sportsmail understands a rival club has hired forensic accountants to look into Saracens

March 7 - Sportsmail reveals Maro Itoje has company linked to Nigel Wray

March 11 - Nigel Wray releases a statement in response to Sportsmail's investigations, saying 'Investment is not salary' and 'The Club is open and transparent with the salary cap manager and we proactively disclose co-investments when they occur, even though we are under no obligation to do so. We respect the rules and the salary regulations that are in place.'

March 13 - Premiership Rugby will not confirm whether Nigel Wray's understandings of the salary cap rules are correct

April 9 - Sportsmail understands Premiership Rugby interrogating former Saracens players

April 10 - Premiership Rugby announce formal review into Saracens after it is found the club did not disclose all details of co-investment partnerships

August 3 - Rival clubs demand update on salary cap review, telling Sportsmail they are being 'kept in the dark'

September 3 - Sportsmail reveals that the matter has been passed to specialist arbitrators Sport Resolutions

September 24 - Clubs dismiss idea of an out-of-court settlement being made with Saracens at conclusion of disciplinary proceedings

October 26 - Sportsmail reveals that Saracens's group head of finance Bernard Van Zyl - who had responsibility at the club for managing the salary cap - has left, along with fellow director Nick Leslau, who had been at the club for over 20 years

November 5 - Saracens were docked 35 points and fined £5.3million after being found guilty of breaching the salary cap

November 18 - Saracens decide they will not appeal their punishments with chairman Nigel Wray claiming: 'Perhaps we have done the wrong thing for the right reasons'

December 19 - Premiership Rugby announce an independent review into salary cap regulations in light of the Saracens scandal, led by ex-government minister Lord Myners

December 26 - Liam Williams agrees a deal to leave Saracens and join Scarlets on a £400,000 per year deal

January 2 - Nigel Wray quits as Saracens chairman and admits 'it's time for a fresh start' at the club

January 4 - New Saracens chief Edward Griffiths apologises 'unreservedly' for club's salary cap breaches

Yesterday - Saracens face the prospect of automatic relegation after other clubs turned on them

carpet baboon wrote:I wonder how beshocked is taking this news

LondonTiger wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Anyone seen a rough estimate of far over the £7M they were?

IF as was stated they received the maximum fine (which is £3 for every £1 overspend) then over the 3 years with the fine just under £5.4m the overspend is just under £1.8m.

I believe the times today are reporting that it was 1.2 and 1.3 in two of the seasons

Those numbers are not in the Times Online stories, just that they have to make a reduction of £1m in one story and £2m in another.

Edit:
Looks like those numbers have been removed from the story and replaced with exceeded by big amounts in two seasons.

BamBam wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:I wonder how beshocked is taking this news

There's no proof that they are about to break the cap again this season, its all just speculation according to beshocked

If they get relegated, it'll just be because the other teams are being mean

mikey_dragon wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Anyone seen a rough estimate of far over the £7M they were?

IF as was stated they received the maximum fine (which is £3 for every £1 overspend) then over the 3 years with the fine just under £5.4m the overspend is just under £1.8m.

I believe the times today are reporting that it was 1.2 and 1.3 in two of the seasons

Those numbers are not in the Times Online stories, just that they have to make a reduction of £1m in one story and £2m in another.

Edit:
Looks like those numbers have been removed from the story and replaced with exceeded by big amounts in two seasons.

If it was Wray investing in players' businesses then it sounds like an okay loophole tbh.

carpet baboon wrote:To be fair Ido feel sorry for the fans, and the players and most of the staff
But those at the top who decided to cheat and keep on cheating by quite big numbers, well they deserve what they get

king_carlos wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:To be fair Ido feel sorry for the fans, and the players and most of the staff
But those at the top who decided to cheat and keep on cheating by quite big numbers, well they deserve what they get

I have a lot of sympathy for most the fans. The odd ones calling the enforcement of the cap a witch hunt less so.

I also have massive sympathy for back room staff and squad players who may well lose their jobs due to the need to cut costs if Sarries get relegated.

LondonTiger wrote:Bruce Craig leading the lynch mob is pretty funny. Not a fan of Tony Rowe but Exeter are entitled to wonder "what if?". The hypocrisy of Craig (and some Bath fans) is hilarious. They smashed the cap to recruit the side that lost the 2015 final preferring to pay over the odds to strip other clubs of their best players rather than develop their own academy. Complete hypocrite - probably bitter that despite splashing the cash they still lost.

LondonTiger wrote:Bruce Craig leading the lynch mob is pretty funny. Not a fan of Tony Rowe but Exeter are entitled to wonder "what if?". The hypocrisy of Craig (and some Bath fans) is hilarious. They smashed the cap to recruit the side that lost the 2015 final preferring to pay over the odds to strip other clubs of their best players rather than develop their own academy. Complete hypocrite - probably bitter that despite splashing the cash they still lost.

carpet baboon wrote:To be fair Ido feel sorry for the fans, and the players and most of the staff
But those at the top who decided to cheat and keep on cheating by quite big numbers, well they deserve what they get

LondonTiger wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:To be fair Ido feel sorry for the fans, and the players and most of the staff
But those at the top who decided to cheat and keep on cheating by quite big numbers, well they deserve what they get

I have a lot of sympathy for most the fans. The odd ones calling the enforcement of the cap a witch hunt less so.

I also have massive sympathy for back room staff and squad players who may well lose their jobs due to the need to cut costs if Sarries get relegated.

And Griffiths has past form in sacking players and staff without the decency of telling them face to face. A number of good friends suffered back in 2008 by text message and fax.

Irish Londoner wrote:From The Guardian a few minutes ago:
"Saracens to accept second 35-point deduction and effective relegation
Club admit defeat in attempt to comply with salary cap
Players told at emergency meeting to discuss crisis"

Kitson in the Guardian wrote:At the back of the players’ minds will also be another nagging thought: should they have seen some of this coming? Sure, it is not strictly their business how their club’s finances are handled. But did no-one think to wonder, as they looked around the dressing-room with its legions of top internationals, how they could assemble and retain this calibre of squad while no-one else was doing so? If not, perhaps they should have done.

king_carlos wrote:

Kitson in the Guardian wrote:At the back of the players’ minds will also be another nagging thought: should they have seen some of this coming? Sure, it is not strictly their business how their club’s finances are handled. But did no-one think to wonder, as they looked around the dressing-room with its legions of top internationals, how they could assemble and retain this calibre of squad while no-one else was doing so? If not, perhaps they should have done.

Well put I think. I have a lot of sympathy for squad players who may lose their job and have to move due to the fallout but get mixed feelings with regards to the senior players all on big wages. Surely Daly must have had some inclination when signing for instance.