Refreshed side

First topic message reminder :

So a few comments I've lifted from the guardian from Eddie Jones. Pretty much as you'd expect in terms of looking ahead to the next challenge.
“I tell you what happens to teams – they evolve,” Jones said. “Some guys will lose desire, some guys will lose fitness, some guys will get injuries and there’ll be young guys come through. So this team is finished now. There will be a new team made. We’ll make a new team for the Six Nations and that new team for the Six Nations will be the basis of going to the next World Cup.'

Apparently the team at the weekend is the youngest to appear in a WC final so there won't be 15 new guys coming in but clearly a few are coming to the end. Are there particular areas or players jones will be looking at?

For me this bunch stand a decent chance in and around the squad to get more caps soon. Genge, Painter, Willis, Dombrandt, Smith, spencer, Robson and a outside chance of Mullins at full back.

Guys that are all young enough to be around for years to come but all with great potential. Perhaps not as good/proven as some who will step back but hugely talented.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Khouli Khan wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:You'd have to prove they're cheats first which you seem unable to do.

I probably wont have to pretty soon. Perhaps you should report me for libel in the meantime

Editing your own posts I see, good work.

Oh do shut up.

Am I not supposed to correct spelling mistakes then and text that may have been deemed to be unacceptable?

I know how sensitive you are about these things.

TightHEAD wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Exactly, when it comes to international rugby I don't really care what happens at club level. As long as they players perform when called up that's all that matters.

Without clubs there would be no international players. Unbelievable attitude, clearly not a rugby fan.

Its like saying that the GP salary cap has no effect on Saracens progress in the European competition.

Clueless to even suggest that club, international and European success are not inextricably linked.

quinsforever wrote:i love England's recent success built around the core of Saracens players, with Saracens ex-players like Borthwick on the coaching staff

couldnt care less what their club plays them

it shows the benefit to england of having a core group of players together. if that means you have to breach the salary cap, then the salary cap needs to be re-thought. fact.

Then rugby would turn into the circus that is professional football. Fact.

Yeah, that'd be brilliant wouldn't it....

Khouli Khan wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Exactly, when it comes to international rugby I don't really care what happens at club level. As long as they players perform when called up that's all that matters.

Without clubs there would be no international players. Unbelievable attitude, clearly not a rugby fan.

Its like saying that the GP salary cap has no effect on Saracens progress in the European competition.

Clueless to even suggest that club, international and European success are not inextricably linked.

Where have I suggested that they aren't linked? I however am not overly emotional about the subject so can differentiate between England and Saracens, maybe you should try doing the same as it is after all just a game.

Presumably then england are in the state of mistrust as wales and scotland are so hot a big deal at present.

LondonTiger wrote:https://www.606v2.com/t69391-england-6-nations-thread

Just in cased anyone wants to talk about on pitch matters.

When has that ever been the priority

Wow...some serious over reactions on here or what.

Some interesting stuff coming out about the salary cap breaches, £650K in 16/17, but Sarries were only paid £80K per England player, not the £180K agreed with the RFU, with between 7 and 10 players on England duty, that would have put them under the Salary cap. Has this been rectified? If not why not?

It seems it is the PRL that is reluctant to publish the report, what is clear is that it went against the recommendations of Lord Dyson, who recommended against relegation.

Sky have apparently seen a copy of the report, some of the "transgressions" see to me to be regarded harshly. Property being bought with percentages of the property being funded by Wray, who also retained a percentage in the property. Allows them to buy better houses, but it is also an investment in the property on Wray's behalf. One occasion the player funded 80% of the price, Wray and another funded the 20%, the player paid back the 20% within a few months, but it was regarded as a payment.

I would like to see a full and unredacted copy published to allow everyone to make up their own minds, I do not see if the crime warrants such a harsh punishment whey it should not all be hung out to dry, or doe sit show that the punishment was cruel and harsh, not really warranted and was just certain clubs looking to take advantage of the situation?

Some quotes:

"The disciplinary panel, led by Lord Dyson, accepted that Saracens' breaches of the regulations were "not deliberate" and had advised against their relegation, believing it would be a disproportionate punishment"

"n 2016-17 the overspend was more than £1.1m, in 2017-18 it was just over £98,000 and in 2018-19 it was £906,000" - Not the £2M being banted about.

"The report, compiled by Sport Resolutions, a specialist independent dispute service, noted that Ashton paid 80% towards a house worth £1.4m, while Wray and another director paid 20% towards the property.

The suggestion was that this was a benefit and equivalent to salary in kind.

Saracen's downfall came because of the repayments.

Ashton bought the property while he was still a player and asked to buy out Wray and the other director's stake over a period of 18 months, by which point he had already left Saracens."

"The panel advised against the relegation of Saracens and noted in their decision.

It said: "We accept that the breaches were not deliberate, but in our view they were reckless. We consider that to impose a deduction of 70 points in one salary cap year is disproportionate and is not required to satisfy the underlying purpose of the relegations."

Saracens had called for the report to be made public after Premiership Rugby initially said that the club had requested it be kept under wraps." - The PRL are still saying Sarries don't want the report released.

Could we keep the salary cap stuff on the Salary cap thread please and chat England stuff on here? it's pretty boring sifting through all the bickering.

yappysnap wrote:Could we keep the salary cap stuff on the Salary cap thread please and chat England stuff on here? it's pretty boring sifting through all the bickering.

https://www.606v2.com/t69391-england-6-nations-thread

I think LT made that thread for that reason, yappy!