RugbyRebels

jngf wrote:Sounds especially hypocritical given the po faced stance over Steffler ...

Even had it been a loan until the end of the season? Quite honestlym even if it was all left too late, and no Prem team had room left in the cap - that wouldn be a different kettle of fish between Stef's "I know the rules, but think that I'm the greatest (despite never showing it at international level) and therefore you should let me do what I want" versus "no-one in England has room in their squad for me a 0 / short notice, so it's this or the Championship for 1 year".
Steff wanted to have his cake and eat it.
The Sarries contingent might not have an actual choice - I guess you could argue that they could reduce their salary accordingly; but in this hypothetical, we're asking them to take a 90% pay cut, versus Steff's smaller-pay-rise-than-Toulon-offered.




Out of interest - what's the betting that the proposed overhaul of the salary cap regulations "to tighten things up" wil include an increase in the cap - say £400k increase would surely allow all of Sarries' top players to be spread about the prem; even meaning that the lower-spending clubs would have a more realistic chance of securing one of the better-paid talents (eg Fazlet rumoured to be on £750, so a club would still be out of reach for a club spending up to the cap - unless he takes a much-needed pay cut)
It has been static for a couple of years, after all; and you could make a good argument that our only team doing well in Europe has been spending (way) above the cap in the first place, so if more teams were allowed to, maybe we'd be performing better in Europe - don't hold much hope for it being that simple, but still.

I'd also like to see the academy credits tidied up - rather than "up to £20k for up to 12 players; under the age of 25" of whatever it is right now, to just "10% of any eligible player's salary can be excluded from the cap" - requirements that the player was in the club's system by the age of 18, and had been with the club continuously, scrap the upper age limit.

There is no way Farrell, Itoje etc are going to be playing in the Championship and if a loan deal can be arranged, even if if it is France, then I dont see a major issue with it.
If the players show a commitment to England and are only away for a season, then the exceptional circumstances clause can be legitimately invoked.

Forgive me if anyone has asked this already, but have any sanctions been applied to those players who were complicit in the breaking of the salary cap? It strikes me as decidedly odd that the club has been placed in a position of being effectively dismantled while the individuals involved look like they will simply be able to move their inflated contracts elsewhere. The sanctions now to be applied to the club will have an impact on everyone of its employees, from playing staff, coaches, academy players, Rallas, medics, ticket sellers and the blokes who sweep up the burger wrappers. Yet this is all down to the inflated salaries paid to a very few players.

I think principally of Farrell, the Vunipolas and George who had 'investment companies' established in their names (I think they were the only ones, but happy to be corrected). Surely they must at least have been aware that an arrangement, amounting to little more than a brown envelope stuffed with used 50s, being somewhat out of the ordinary and to what extent were they aware that this was merely a mechanism to allow the club to breach the rules?

I dislike Saracens enormously and yet I can remember feeling quite sorry for the likes of Richard Hill when Munster put them out of the HC in the semis (on our way to winning it) in 2008. It has taken a decade, but I now regard the club as a pariah that has bought its honours and now shamed our game. I acknowledge that there is something quite wrong with this view - it is not the club, but the rapacity of a few individuals that is at fault and surely this form of collective sanction is utterly inappropriate unless it runs in tandem with equally stringent sanctions against the individuals responsible?

I think this whole affair is highly regrettable on every level, and will only be negative for England

The only grain of comfort I take is that it's in relation to the team that Convex Hull supports...he he

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:Forgive me if anyone has asked this already, but have any sanctions been applied to those players who were complicit in the breaking of the salary cap? It strikes me as decidedly odd that the club has been placed in a position of being effectively dismantled while the individuals involved look like they will simply be able to move their inflated contracts elsewhere. The sanctions now to be applied to the club will have an impact on everyone of its employees, from playing staff, coaches, academy players, Rallas, medics, ticket sellers and the blokes who sweep up the burger wrappers. Yet this is all down to the inflated salaries paid to a very few players.

I think principally of Farrell, the Vunipolas and George who had 'investment companies' established in their names (I think they were the only ones, but happy to be corrected). Surely they must at least have been aware that an arrangement, amounting to little more than a brown envelope stuffed with used 50s, being somewhat out of the ordinary and to what extent were they aware that this was merely a mechanism to allow the club to breach the rules?

I dislike Saracens enormously and yet I can remember feeling quite sorry for the likes of Richard Hill when Munster put them out of the HC in the semis (on our way to winning it) in 2008. It has taken a decade, but I now regard the club as a pariah that has bought its honours and now shamed our game. I acknowledge that there is something quite wrong with this view - it is not the club, but the rapacity of a few individuals that is at fault and surely this form of collective sanction is utterly inappropriate unless it runs in tandem with equally stringent sanctions against the individuals responsible?

The thing is...what responsibility do they have?

They have a responsibility by law when it comes to tax and legality...and everything was above board, there.

But when it comes to the cap...that's up to the club. If the club tells you it's all fine, then it's all fine.

Players should not face sanctions and I don't see what they can do differently anyway.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:Forgive me if anyone has asked this already, but have any sanctions been applied to those players who were complicit in the breaking of the salary cap? It strikes me as decidedly odd that the club has been placed in a position of being effectively dismantled while the individuals involved look like they will simply be able to move their inflated contracts elsewhere. The sanctions now to be applied to the club will have an impact on everyone of its employees, from playing staff, coaches, academy players, Rallas, medics, ticket sellers and the blokes who sweep up the burger wrappers. Yet this is all down to the inflated salaries paid to a very few players.

I think principally of Farrell, the Vunipolas and George who had 'investment companies' established in their names (I think they were the only ones, but happy to be corrected). Surely they must at least have been aware that an arrangement, amounting to little more than a brown envelope stuffed with used 50s, being somewhat out of the ordinary and to what extent were they aware that this was merely a mechanism to allow the club to breach the rules?

I dislike Saracens enormously and yet I can remember feeling quite sorry for the likes of Richard Hill when Munster put them out of the HC in the semis (on our way to winning it) in 2008. It has taken a decade, but I now regard the club as a pariah that has bought its honours and now shamed our game. I acknowledge that there is something quite wrong with this view - it is not the club, but the rapacity of a few individuals that is at fault and surely this form of collective sanction is utterly inappropriate unless it runs in tandem with equally stringent sanctions against the individuals responsible?

Some journalists are suggesting that the players are victims. I'm finding that hard to believe. Unless incredibly dense, they must have realised that the financial arrangements were a bit odd?

I wonder if Daly is feeling any regret about leaving Wasps now...

I did comment earlier in the thread that I have no sympathy for the top earners, as they must have either known or strongly suspected that what they were engaged in was questionably ethical and not within the rules.
Does that make them complicit and liable to penalty? I doubt it. The onus would be on their employer to ensure that they were running the club in a fit and proper manner. It would be a tough argument to make that any employee should be held accountable for the actions of their employer.
HMRC might see it differently. The club are very keen to defer any intense scrutiny of their finances, and it may that the club and certain individuals may have questions relating to tax that might be difficult to answer.

This man is a professional journalist.

Timbo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I can’t believe how lucky Saracens have been in the last few minutes to stay in Europe. Some decidedly dodgy decisions allowing them to scrape past.

Credit to them though. They’re a fantastic side, beyond the controversy.

It was smash and grab from Racing in that first half tbh. Saracens too fired up and too loose. 2nd half, even down to 14 was all Sarries.

Faz was a bit hot headed, but in the circs I'd even cut him some slack.

twitchy wrote:This man is a professional journalist.

By all accounts, he has been like this on twitter since day one. I’ve no idea how he keeps winning journalism awards and keeps persuading the times to pay him to write drivel. As I posted earlier in the thread, for the sake of your own sanity his work is best viewed as satire.

Stom wrote:The thing is...what responsibility do they have?

They have a responsibility by law when it comes to tax and legality...and everything was above board, there.

But when it comes to the cap...that's up to the club. If the club tells you it's all fine, then it's all fine.

Players should not face sanctions and I don't see what they can do differently anyway.

I am asking that very question, Stom. What responsibility do Farrell, Billy & Mako V, George, Itoje and Wiggleworth have (I now read that Wray had 'businesses' with the latter two, too)?

If they were told that their visible salaries were being augmented by an investment in a company established solely for the purposes of making that investment then I would suggest that they cannot have been anything other than aware that their salaries were being augmented in a manner intended to conceal the augmentation. That, in my view, makes them complicit and responsible.

Even were they to have been told by Wray, or by any other individual(s) in the club, that everything was above board, would it not take a considerable effort to allow themselves to be unaware that something fishy was afoot? Just because the 'club' tells them everything is fine does not make it so, nor does it absolve them of complicity.

I sense that it would be impossible to 'prove' that any single player was aware of the full extent of the salary doping within the club, but I suggest that those with 'business' relationships with Wray could not be unaware that something was amiss; that would stretch the credibility bungee a little too far.

Like you I cannot see how sanctions could now be safely applied to the players, but that isn't to say that they don't deserve a share of the opprobrium currently being leveled at a club, but which should be more tightly focused on the individuals that have brought this disaster upon it.

Im surprised by only a couple of elements of this debacle

1) it took so long to nail them for it, it was 'obvious' to an outsider from any other club what has to have been happening over an extended period of time, several years. Presumably this will prompt a relationship change between all clubs in the EPL and the RFU so that in future greater transparency will be required

2) that their sponsors have so far not abandoned them, it would be wrong to speculate but there could only be a couple of reasons why you would stick by them in the circumstances. Im guessing the lawyers will be examining the contracts very very closely

Which Tyler wrote:

jngf wrote:Sounds especially hypocritical given the po faced stance over Steffler ...

Even had it been a loan until the end of the season? Quite honestlym even if it was all left too late, and no Prem team had room left in the cap - that wouldn be a different kettle of fish between Stef's "I know the rules, but think that I'm the greatest (despite never showing it at international level) and therefore you should let me do what I want" versus "no-one in England has room in their squad for me a 0 / short notice, so it's this or the Championship for 1 year".
Steff wanted to have his cake and eat it.
The Sarries contingent might not have an actual choice - I guess you could argue that they could reduce their salary accordingly; but in this hypothetical, we're asking them to take a 90% pay cut, versus Steff's smaller-pay-rise-than-Toulon-offered.

So we go easier on the Sarries boys for being complicit in cheating than over players who move openly and honestly like Bendy and Steff? Give over

A reason i can think of players not being culpable is if such practices are happening at other clubs as well. I saw Venter twattering something to that effect early on in the thread. Any idea if this is the case? I'm guessing none are as blatent as sarries but i'd be surprised if everyone was squeaky clean.

PS

Re punishing players by stopping them playing for england. I find it interesting which acts matter. Take drugs, you're tainted for life. Cheat at every breakdown, that's ok. Violently assault someone, redemption is possible after a few weeks off. Accept loads of money and look the other way ....?

Mr Mwenda wrote:PS

Re punishing players by stopping them playing for england. I find it interesting which acts matter. Take drugs, you're tainted for life. Cheat at every breakdown, that's ok. Violently assault someone, redemption is possible after a few weeks off. Accept loads of money and look the other way ....?

....and bloodgate....

Does McCall not also deserve more criticism than he's gotten? Seems to have gotten off very lightly to me

Where do you draw the line in this apportioning of blame?

The players, ALL the players as surely they ALL must have known. Every coach and support worker at the club. The kit man, ticket office staff and the IT guy too?

If these transgressions were so blatant and outrageous, then why not condemn the whole damn lot of them?

Fact is you have to draw the line and for me it has to be those who are responsible for running the club. Those who were or still are in senior positions and made the decisions to act in the manner they did.

I'd also ask PRL to take at themselves. This had been going on for years and yet it took a newspaper expose to blow the lid off it. Thats a sure sign that the governance of this league is woefully inadequate, something that i hope the Myners report will properly address.

fivepointer wrote:Where do you draw the line in this apportioning of blame?

The players, ALL the players as surely they ALL must have known. Every coach and support worker at the club. The kit man, ticket office staff and the IT guy too?

If these transgressions were so blatant and outrageous, then why not condemn the whole damn lot of them?

Fact is you have to draw the line and for me it has to be those who are responsible for running the club. Those who were or still are in senior positions and made the decisions to act in the manner they did.

I'd also ask PRL to take at themselves. This had been going on for years and yet it took a newspaper expose to blow the lid off it. Thats a sure sign that the governance of this league is woefully inadequate, something that i hope the Myners report will properly address.

I respect that viewpoint. I like the head coach and Sanderson. The club's junior development is admirable. Unfortunately, though, all the high profile people there are guilty by association. The way things look like panning out, the main ones who will suffer are the fans and the lesser/younger players whos future in the game must, at best, be uncertain.

If the disciplinary authority had relegated the club from the GP AND banned the entire first team squad and coaching staff from top class rugby (i,e. GP, Europe and international games) for a year (or even two) I would not see it as unjust. I suspect that a fair few players and coaches at other clubs would feel the same way.

As ever, the game is what matters most. It has been tainted and the punishment ought to discourage any club from doing the same again AND it should drive home to players the danger of profiting from such cheating, either in terms of financial gain or trophies won.

The senior players would make a mint playing in the US for a season whilst on the naghty chair in UK/Europe.

morepork wrote:The senior players would make a mint playing in the US for a season whilst on the naghty chair in UK/Europe.

The ban could state first class rugby in any country.

Just listened to Brendon Venters thoughts on the rugby pod. The word delusional springs to mind.

It does amuse me that Owen Farrell (or any of the others tbf) is sat in the changing rooms and in moment of clarity realises, hey, I know what Im on per year.......kerching!......theres at least 22 of us sat about so divide whats left between the remainder of the salary cap.......hmmm, its awful nice of the lads to be on so little so that I can keep earning that hefty wage, they must be doing it for the glory of winning, nice one!

btw has anyone posted Brian Moores thoughts on twitter?

worth a read






click on the > symbol for his reasoning