Latest news:
New Page 1

Welcome to The Saracens. Our message board is primarily a place for Saracens fans to discuss our club. We welcome posters from other clubs as long as their posts are respectful and not repetitive and our guidelines are followed. To leave a message on this board you must register. To register click HERE,
Non-rugby posts are welcome, but please prefix your subject header with "OT" or "Off Topic".


Thought for the Day:
A PRECIOUS BONUS POINT!

Latest: MUNSTER 10:3 SARACENS
Next: SARACENS v MUNSTER
Sat 14th Dec Allianz 15.00 ECR

Audio: Click the link below. If it ain' there, it ain't on!
Upcoming TV: Sat 14th Dec Saracens v Munster BT Sport 14.45

BBC Online Rugby Union Commentaries

The Fish | Rugby Union News | Fez Boys | Saracens Fixtures | The SSA | Rugby on TV


Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3
No Review
Discussion started by maynas , 17 November, 2019 12:31
No Review
maynas 17 November, 2019 12:31
Looks like its over. We are guilty and we pay up and move on and try and stay in the league. Please no more moaning on here, bleats on level playing fields, insinuations others do it too, or splitting hairs on what’s in/out of the cap, its over, we did it because we are found guilty, that’s basic justice , be humble ,suck it up and front up where it matters, on the field not the message board. Follow our basic tenets, be humble and support the players wholeheartedly through what will be the toughest season they have ever faced. Hopefully this message board calms down rather than resembling the worst of social media. To other club supporters, we fans or individual players did nothing wrong, aim you barbs at those that did please. I hope those who did wrong are strong enough of character to learn from this and continue to support the club in the future rather than run away. The signs are good that we didnt demand this review.
In the future let’s hope for a clearer more transparent, understandable to all system and more rigorous annual enforcement by PRL so no one else is allowed to carry on breaking the rules for more than 1 season.
Lots of talk before this blew up of ring-fencing the Prem at 13 clubs if Newcastle , as expected, win the Championship. Sadly my guess now is other clubs wont support that happening if we don't escape relegation so we must prioritize the league.

Re: No Review
Garp285 17 November, 2019 13:47
Well said, Maynas. Regardless of anyone's personal opinion on this we have been found guilty by an independent panel, the club have now accepted that finding, so time to loom forwards, now. We are just going to have to suck up the abuse/criticism and hopefully manage to stay up this season!

Re: No Review
Convex Hull 17 November, 2019 13:52
It is not up to you to tell NW not to 'run away', or to 'suck it up'.



Regardez mon visage. Suis-je bovvered?

Re: No Review
BlackheathSaracen 17 November, 2019 14:00
Agreed Convex Hull. It might also be worth waiting till it's official rather than paper speculation.

Re: No Review
DoubleChampions 17 November, 2019 15:54
Team selection today tells you no review. At least one of our England players would be available but we have chosen Premiership over Europe - with a 35 point deduction I am not disagreeing but the fact that no England player has been picked for Europe suggests all hands to the pump for the league and Europe for at least this year and next is a no go.

Re: No Review
Garp285 17 November, 2019 17:10
Quote:
Convex Hull
It is not up to you to tell NW not to 'run away', or to 'suck it up'.
Who is telling NW to do anything? I'm talking about us supporters.

Re: No Review
Primavesi2 17 November, 2019 17:22
Yep, got to move on now. I hope those few that were previously in denial will now accept the verdict as well.

Regarding where we go from here, can we assume that as our salary (minus the co investments) was within the cap, we should not need to sell any players?

Re: No Review
fatheralice 17 November, 2019 17:26
Quote:
maynas
The signs are good that we didnt demand this review.

The signs will only be good when Wray starts to show some contrition.
Todays' statement released via Stephen Jones shows zero sign of that unfortunately

Re: No Review
BlackheathSaracen 17 November, 2019 17:32
If he is maintaining he didn't do something wrong what should he be contrite for?

Re: No Review
wombles222 17 November, 2019 17:38
Quote:
BlackheathSaracen
If he is maintaining he didn't do something wrong what should he be contrite for?

Obviously we must wait upon official word from Saracens or the deadline passing with no request for review made, however whatever Wray believes is irrelevent is it not? He, those who colluded with him and Saracens are guilty, the previous titles earnt through nefarious means rendered worthless and Saracens as a club left without any honour and a reputation in the gutter. If he chooses to continue folowing the fallacy of innocence then how can anyone move forward and how can forgivness from the wider rugby community occur?

Re: No Review
Eric Browett 17 November, 2019 17:59
Please don't sit on the fence, wombles.

Are you saying all of our titles, including the European ones, are worthless? I'd have to disagree with you over that as there's never been a level playing field in Europe, and to suggest we wouldn't have qualified for Europe without whatever cap indiscretions we've committed is, to my mind, nonsense.

I'll also be very interested to see if we have to 'trim' our squad now. If we don't and manage to maintain the squad within the cap I wonder if there will be any backtracking from some posters about how 'naughty' we've been?

But yes, we will have to suck it up for now, and get behind the team.

No doubt there will be more incoming from people who haven't yet vented their spleen sufficiently.

Re: No Review
Clyst Colt Chief 17 November, 2019 18:09
Hi Eric
I think Wombles has very elequentlly put over how many of the rugby community feel....

In terms of venting spleen ... We have all had over three years of repeated infringements ..



"Get on Exe"

Re: No Review
BlackheathSaracen 17 November, 2019 18:12
Quote:
wombles222
whatever Wray believes is irrelevent is it not?
It's irrelevant to the verdict and sanction for sure but why should he plead guilty or tbh even show remorse if he still believes he didn't do something wrong? If a jury finds you guilty in this Country whilst you will be penalised you don't lose the right to protest your innocence, why should Wray if that's what he chooses to do?

I'll wait to see what happens tomorrow and whilst I understand the criticism from opposition supporters I am left somewhat bemused by the speed with which some club supporters are happy to cut him lose given what he has put into the club.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 17/11/2019 18:15 by BlackheathSaracen.

Re: No Review
Duckonstilts 17 November, 2019 18:20
Quote:
Eric Browett

Are you saying all of our titles, including the European ones, are worthless? .

Well the entry criteria for teams is league position. If you cheated to win the league then you cheated to enter Europe.

Re: No Review
Eric Browett 17 November, 2019 18:21
My one wish now is that there was more transparency in the process and the judgement.

As, yet again, we are not going to get the details of the judgement it is going to give Saracens apologists the scope to say we really did nothing intrinsically wrong, and it is going to give the 'haters' a chance to blame us for everything short of, and possibly including, the Black Death.

Re: No Review
wombles222 17 November, 2019 18:30
Eric my point regarding the removal of titles was made directly with regards to the premiership. With regards to the European titles I am unsure. You are correct in your assertian that Saracens were up against teams where they do not have a salary cap to work to, however one must also question would Sarries of qualified, or what seeding would they have been given when it came to the European draw. Of course this is all hypothetical, but this also drives straight at the point regarding the punishment, guilt has been found and now through the wreckless actions the ripples will flow to every corner of Saracens and place question marks everywhere, the damage in this regard, is done.

Blackheath, I agree with you that he retains the right to continue his protestations, but in the face of a guilty verdict is it wise? It certainly will not endear him nor the club to others, and will also not assist in starting the rebuilding process. I also believe that calling for Wray to go is not unfounded nor unreasonable, it was his conscious decision to do what he did, he found a loop hole and rather than reporting it he (and others) choose to exploit it. He generated a situation which unfairly unbalanced the scales towards Saracens at the cost of all the other clubs and their supporters and went against some of the core values that we have in rugby. His actions have also damaged all that is good at Saracens, including his employees, their work in the community and with charity and also hurt the fans themselves. I find it hard to allign his continued presence, especially with his lack of contrition and damage done with his ongoing involvement.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 17/11/2019 18:33 by wombles222.

Re: No Review
Garp285 17 November, 2019 18:43
Wobbles, apparently he did report it to the SCM. This is what he has said but it is where the lack of transparency in the report/verdict is a problem. We just dont know. As ive stated esrlier, we've been found guilty and if we dont appeal, then ee have to accept it and move on. I have mixed feelings over the whole affair but NW has enough credit to maintain my support.

Re: No Review
wombles222 17 November, 2019 18:46
Quote:
Garp285
Wobbles, apparently he did report it to the SCM. This is what he has said but it is where the lack of transparency in the report/verdict is a problem. We just dont know. As ive stated esrlier, we've been found guilty and if we dont appeal, then ee have to accept it and move on. I have mixed feelings over the whole affair but NW has enough credit to maintain my support.

Like others Garp I would love to read the verdict as a whole, it would answer many questions. However if premier rugby and Sarries have chosen to keep it from us then we must trust the process and respect the judgement of a highly qualified independant panel.

Re: No Review
Marlow Nick 17 November, 2019 19:22
Quote:
BlackheathSaracen
If he is maintaining he didn't do something wrong what should he be contrite for?

That's the problem. Nigel doesn't seem to think it's wrong to try to gain competitive advantage through spending more money than everyone else. One objective of the cap, that Nigel signed, is for every team to spend roughly the same amount. As long as Nigel doesn't agree with the document he signed we will have a problem because he'll keep finding ways to buy a better team and the rest of the league will keep trying to close the loopholes.

The fix of the problem is for Saracens leadership to embrace the spirit of the cap and I suspect that will only happen when Nigel leaves.

Re: No Review
Guildford Saint 17 November, 2019 19:27
If you’ve done wrong, you pay the price. It’s good that your management are accepting the pill. To do otherwise would be to the detriment of the game that we all love as a whole. Hopefully we can all move on and concentrate on the rugby. See you all again soon 👍 you’ve got a good team and you’ll ride it out. If Saints had been caught out, I’d expect the same from them. This is not meant as a sniping comment - please don’t take it as such.

Re: No Review
HonkyTonk 17 November, 2019 20:01
Quote:
wombles222
Quote:
BlackheathSaracen
If he is maintaining he didn't do something wrong what should he be contrite for?

Obviously we must wait upon official word from Saracens or the deadline passing with no request for review made, however whatever Wray believes is irrelevent is it not? He, those who colluded with him and Saracens are guilty, the previous titles earnt through nefarious means rendered worthless and Saracens as a club left without any honour and a reputation in the gutter. If he chooses to continue folowing the fallacy of innocence then how can anyone move forward and how can forgivness from the wider rugby community occur?

But by having a squad that is breaking the rules, you have the strength in depth to rest/rotate players that may have given you an advantage in Europe.

Re: No Review
wombles222 17 November, 2019 20:09
Quote:
HonkyTonk
Quote:
wombles222
Quote:
BlackheathSaracen
If he is maintaining he didn't do something wrong what should he be contrite for?

Obviously we must wait upon official word from Saracens or the deadline passing with no request for review made, however whatever Wray believes is irrelevent is it not? He, those who colluded with him and Saracens are guilty, the previous titles earnt through nefarious means rendered worthless and Saracens as a club left without any honour and a reputation in the gutter. If he chooses to continue folowing the fallacy of innocence then how can anyone move forward and how can forgivness from the wider rugby community occur?

But by having a squad that is breaking the rules, you have the strength in depth to rest/rotate players that may have given you an advantage in Europe.

I agree HT, and that is one of those question marks that resound from the findings. One cannot simply place the proven cheating into one box such as the impact it had on the league, it cannot be contained that way. The verdict places wider ramifications to the whole of the club and their achievements (both fair and foul), but as well as it torpeedos the premiership success' it equally undermines the wider success in Europe.

Re: No Review
BlackheathSaracen 17 November, 2019 20:30
Quote:
Marlow Nick
That's the problem. Nigel doesn't seem to think it's wrong to try to gain competitive advantage through spending more money than everyone else.

If the question is ultimately about co-investments then it comes down to whether they would have stayed without that investment. I don't think any of us can say for sure whether they would or wouldn't.

Right now there are too many unknowns for me but I will have to reconcile myself to that as both parties are bound by confidentiality via the independent commission process.

We'll see what tomorrow brings.

Re: No Review
Garp285 17 November, 2019 22:15
Quote:
wombles222
Quote:
Garp285
Wobbles, apparently he did report it to the SCM. This is what he has said but it is where the lack of transparency in the report/verdict is a problem. We just dont know. As ive stated esrlier, we've been found guilty and if we dont appeal, then ee have to accept it and move on. I have mixed feelings over the whole affair but NW has enough credit to maintain my support.

Like others Garp I would love to read the verdict as a whole, it would answer many questions. However if premier rugby and Sarries have chosen to keep it from us then we must trust the process and respect the judgement of a highly qualified independant panel.
And if you read my posts, that is exactly what I've said. We have been found guilty and have to accept that. What I was questioning, was your comment that the club his the investments when NW came out and said they did tell the SCM. Of course, without transparency we only have NWs word for it, that was also my point.

Re: No Review
scrappydoo 18 November, 2019 05:28
Now we appear to be putting our hands up and taking the punishment which is right if the rules have been breached. One question remains unanswered is what were these precedence (if they do exist) and what will happen to the clubs that set them. I hope in the principle of fairness they will be investigated by both PRL and the Mail.

Re: No Review
Marlow Nick 18 November, 2019 08:36
Quote:
BlackheathSaracen
Quote:
Marlow Nick
That's the problem. Nigel doesn't seem to think it's wrong to try to gain competitive advantage through spending more money than everyone else.

If the question is ultimately about co-investments then it comes down to whether they would have stayed without that investment. I don't think any of us can say for sure whether they would or wouldn't.

Right now there are too many unknowns for me but I will have to reconcile myself to that as both parties are bound by confidentiality via the independent commission process.

We'll see what tomorrow brings.

If one method of buying a better team is closed down Nigel's lawyers will simply find another. The motive behind co-investments is clearly to recruit & retain a better squad and that goes completely against the objectives of the cap. Co-investments just happen to be the clever trick this time. He had a different clever trick 5 years ago and I'm sure he'll come up with another trick next year.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18/11/2019 10:35 by Marlow Nick.

Re: No Review
Westy68 18 November, 2019 10:05
Do Saracen supporters truly believe the team they have put together is below the salary cap? (when the co-investments have gone)

I except that some players would play for a little less money but we are not talking a little less money.

I do believe it is totally unfair to play in a cup competition with different laws but if we don't have a salary cap, i can see 4/5 teams go to the wall.

I wish rugby players could get more money, considering what they put their body through but the clubs just can't get enough revenue through the gates and t.v money.

I'm sorry but cheating is not the answer, also you are not going to get relegated unless you add another 20 points onto the 35 points.

I want more transparency so you or any other club doesn't do anything similar.

Re: No Review
stevene 18 November, 2019 10:24
I think other club supporters are missing the point re co-investments. If sarries are under the cap in terms of salaries now and all co-investments are in the past therefore they shouldnt continue to count towards the cap this season. The only issue is if NW/other connected parties had agreed to make further 'co-investments' (I hate term that because it wasnt a co-investment it was an investment).

therefore I can see why the club doesnt believe it needs to trim it players immediately. It maybe an issue if some player contracts have increments based on success/personal achievement which increases their market value. Therefore there might need to be future squad trimming to facilitate this and remain within the cap in the future.

Re: No Review
paulglynn 18 November, 2019 11:32
I hope that if we are not going to ask for the review than the full judgement is made public so ALL can see what was done but I am not holding out much hope on it



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18/11/2019 11:33 by paulglynn.

Re: No Review
daz_71 18 November, 2019 11:44
Quote:
Westy68
Do Saracen supporters truly believe the team they have put together is below the salary cap? (when the co-investments have gone)

I can't disagree with you. Realistically looking at our squad and the high profile players it's hard to see how it's been assembled under the cap, but from the rumours the co-investments were obviously seen to be a way around that.

Quote:
I do believe it is totally unfair to play in a cup competition with different laws but if we don't have a salary cap, i can see 4/5 teams go to the wall.

I disagree with this line. Over the past ten years there have always been teams who chose to spend up to the cap maximum and those that didn't, so in terms of arguing about level playing fields I'm not sure it ever has been. In recent years I can only think of perhaps Newcastle who have made the top 4 without having spent up to the cap maximum (that is an assumption BTW - not based on evidence).

Quote:
I'm sorry but cheating is not the answer, also you are not going to get relegated unless you add another 20 points onto the 35 points.

I hope you are right and based on recent seasons you are. However given it's a world cup years so we are without our England players for longer I don't think it's guaranteed. Also when you have the psychological disadvantage of chasing from so far back for so long it must be a major negative in the players minds.

My other concern is who are the relegation candidates we are chasing. At the moment the bottom 3 are Leicester, Wasps and Quins. That adds added intensity to the chase due to their not being an obvious relegation candidate.

Quote:
I want more transparency so you or any other club doesn't do anything similar.

I could not agree with you more. In the modern day I still have concerns whether a salary cap is legally enforceable, if it was pursued in a court of law (I don't want anyone to take my comment here as defending the breaches as I'm not) . The Times are reporting today that Saracens have asked for the full release of the judgement as they believe it would then show the misdemeanour is a more favourable light. So for that reason I feel there should be full transparency.

Re: No Review
LutonS 18 November, 2019 11:49
Statement due at noon I believe

Re: No Review
BovvySarrie 18 November, 2019 11:51
I had read that it was not the fact that there were co-investments that was the issue. As has been stated these were in the main declared. The issue is that the balance of investment between NW and some of the players was not financially reasonable. In other words, as is generally considered in auditing, the investment from each party should reflect the risk each party is taking, and the potential gains each party can make. If an investment were (say) 80% financed by NW but the potential gain were received as 80% by the other party (the player) then that is seen as an unacceptable co-investment which has been judged by the investigation to be hidden salary. If investment and benefit are both 50:50 there is no flouting of the salary cap as this is seen as a genuine business, and not enhanced salary.

I cannot confirm this, but believe this is why we have suffered so badly, because it is only now that this interpretation is being placed on co-investment.

Re: No Review
ukms 18 November, 2019 11:57
Quote:
stevene
I think other club supporters are missing the point re co-investments. If sarries are under the cap in terms of salaries now and all co-investments are in the past therefore they shouldnt continue to count towards the cap this season. The only issue is if NW/other connected parties had agreed to make further 'co-investments' (I hate term that because it wasnt a co-investment it was an investment).
therefore I can see why the club doesnt believe it needs to trim it players immediately. It maybe an issue if some player contracts have increments based on success/personal achievement which increases their market value. Therefore there might need to be future squad trimming to facilitate this and remain within the cap in the future.

With respect this is pure speculation and again with respect you are placing your own slant on it so that it fits the PR Pushed out by NW and the club ....

Re: No Review
ukms 18 November, 2019 12:06
Quote:
BovvySarrie
I had read that it was not the fact that there were co-investments that was the issue. As has been stated these were in the main declared. The issue is that the balance of investment between NW and some of the players was not financially reasonable. In other words, as is generally considered in auditing, the investment from each party should reflect the risk each party is taking, and the potential gains each party can make. If an investment were (say) 80% financed by NW but the potential gain were received as 80% by the other party (the player) then that is seen as an unacceptable co-investment which has been judged by the investigation to be hidden salary. If investment and benefit are both 50:50 there is no flouting of the salary cap as this is seen as a genuine business, and not enhanced salary.
I cannot confirm this, but believe this is why we have suffered so badly, because it is only now that this interpretation is being placed on co-investment.

Interesting!! .... where did you read this ? .... do you have a link ?

Re: No Review
Sarriebone 18 November, 2019 12:09
Club statement from Nigel Wray: [www.saracens.com]

Re: No Review
Cookie 18 November, 2019 12:11
Wray still can't seem to find the word 'sorry' in his vocabulary.

Wray: "We have made mistakes and so, with humility, we must accept these penalties. As a club, we will now pull together and meet the challenges that lie ahead."

Re: No Review
ukms 18 November, 2019 12:20
Quote:
Cookie
Wray still can't seem to find the word 'sorry' in his vocabulary.
Wray: "We have made mistakes and so, with humility, we must accept these penalties. As a club, we will now pull together and meet the challenges that lie ahead."

Agreed .... but hopefully what he says will put an end to the sense of denial that still persists in some quarters amongst supporters. It should not however be overlooked that we only have the perspective and version of NW as to what he did .... as nothing else has been made public !

Re: No Review
Awp24975 18 November, 2019 12:20
Can I just wish you guys all the best for the rest of the season (except when play Bath).
Not everyone wants you relegated and to lose those titles you have won.
As a club you have done loads for the national team, and I for one admire the team spirit and ruthlessness in your play, yes the rules were bent a bit, buts It’s done, you’ve been punished now move on. I’m looking forward to seeing you claw these points back now!

Re: No Review
Sarriebone 18 November, 2019 12:22
Statement from PRL:
PREMIERSHIP RUGBY and Saracens have concluded matters relating to the recent breaches of the Premiership Rugby Salary Cap, with Saracens confirming they will not request a review of the decision by the independent disciplinary panel.

This means that the disciplinary process is at an end and the sanction on Saracens Rugby Club is confirmed as:
a total fine of £5,360,272.31
and a total deduction of 35 league points
The Gallagher Premiership Rugby table will be updated today.

Darren Childs, Chief Executive of Premiership Rugby, said: “We welcome Saracens’ decision to accept the verdict of the independent panel and are pleased the club has crucially reaffirmed its commitment to the Premiership Rugby Salary Cap.

“This is the right outcome for English club rugby. Bringing this process to a conclusion means that we can focus on working in partnership with all Clubs to continue to build a competitive and successful league.”

Nigel Wray, Saracens chairman, said: “We have made mistakes and so, with humility, we must accept these penalties. As a club, we will now pull together and meet the challenges that lie ahead.
“We confirm our commitment to the Salary Cap, and the underlying principle of a level playing field, and will continue to work transparently with Premiership Rugby in this regard.”

The charges against Saracens, which relate to the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, were brought following a nine-month investigation by Premiership Rugby. In accordance with the Salary Cap Regulations, the charges were referred to the independent dispute service, Sport Resolutions, which appointed a panel chaired by Lord Dyson.
The decision of the independent panel was to uphold all of the charges, finding that Saracens had both failed to disclose payments to players and exceeded the ceiling for payments to senior players in each of the three seasons.

Re: No Review
Ricardo121 18 November, 2019 12:22
Thanks Awp, very good of you to say so. I feel that the 'clawing back' will be an exciting chapter for Sarries in itself. Good luck to you as well

Re: No Review
Cookie 18 November, 2019 12:24
Quote:
Awp24975
yes the rules were bent a bit

A bit??!!!

Re: No Review
Nomad_Wasp 18 November, 2019 12:27
Quote:
Garp285
Wobbles, apparently he did report it to the SCM. This is what he has said but it is where the lack of transparency in the report/verdict is a problem. We just dont know. As ive stated esrlier, we've been found guilty and if we dont appeal, then ee have to accept it and move on. I have mixed feelings over the whole affair but NW has enough credit to maintain my support.

Quoting you, Garp, but others have pointed out. Interesting that today's statement says: "I recognise that the arrangements between myself and players, made in good faith, which comprise the material element of the charges, should have been brought to the attention of the salary cap manager for consultation prior to entering into them."

So Wray didn't report it in advance.

Re: No Review
BovvySarrie 18 November, 2019 12:35
Quote:
Nomad_Wasp
Quote:
Garp285
Wobbles, apparently he did report it to the SCM. This is what he has said but it is where the lack of transparency in the report/verdict is a problem. We just dont know. As ive stated esrlier, we've been found guilty and if we dont appeal, then ee have to accept it and move on. I have mixed feelings over the whole affair but NW has enough credit to maintain my support.

Quoting you, Garp, but others have pointed out. Interesting that today's statement says: "I recognise that the arrangements between myself and players, made in good faith, which comprise the material element of the charges, should have been brought to the attention of the salary cap manager for consultation prior to entering into them."

So Wray didn't report it in advance.

Please read my previous post. It is apparently not down to disclosure but is due to the balance of risk and benefit taken in each co-investment that NW did not confide. This imbalance is now seen as hidden salary

Re: No Review
Sarriebone 18 November, 2019 12:37
Quote:
Nomad_Wasp
So Wray didn't report it in advance.

This seems to be the issue, he may have reported them once they were in place, making the "we reported them" accurate. However the fact they weren't reported in advance would explain the "failure to disclose in a timely manner" comment from PRL and the smaller fine that NW alluded to in his video.
Probably the right move to take the punishment on the chin, but it's still all too shrouded in secrecy for my liking.

Re: No Review
Ecksile 18 November, 2019 12:38
Would the other players in the squad have known about these investments?

If not, could be some bad feeling there.

Re: No Review
Nomad_Wasp 18 November, 2019 12:39
Quote:
BovvySarrie
Quote:
Nomad_Wasp
Quote:
Garp285
Wobbles, apparently he did report it to the SCM. This is what he has said but it is where the lack of transparency in the report/verdict is a problem. We just dont know. As ive stated esrlier, we've been found guilty and if we dont appeal, then ee have to accept it and move on. I have mixed feelings over the whole affair but NW has enough credit to maintain my support.

Quoting you, Garp, but others have pointed out. Interesting that today's statement says: "I recognise that the arrangements between myself and players, made in good faith, which comprise the material element of the charges, should have been brought to the attention of the salary cap manager for consultation prior to entering into them."

So Wray didn't report it in advance.

Please read my previous post. It is apparently not down to disclosure but is due to the balance of risk and benefit taken in each co-investment that NW did not confide. This imbalance is now seen as hidden salary

Thanks for this, that seems very logical. Do you have a source for that? I think that is what many people had assumed anyway, that Wray was putting the majority of the money in but the players were taking the benefits. A joint business venture with mutual risk is very different.

Re: No Review
WorcesterSauce 18 November, 2019 13:01
Quote:
ukms
Quote:
stevene
I think other club supporters are missing the point re co-investments. If sarries are under the cap in terms of salaries now and all co-investments are in the past therefore they shouldnt continue to count towards the cap this season. The only issue is if NW/other connected parties had agreed to make further 'co-investments' (I hate term that because it wasnt a co-investment it was an investment).
therefore I can see why the club doesnt believe it needs to trim it players immediately. It maybe an issue if some player contracts have increments based on success/personal achievement which increases their market value. Therefore there might need to be future squad trimming to facilitate this and remain within the cap in the future.

With respect this is pure speculation and again with respect you are placing your own slant on it so that it fits the PR Pushed out by NW and the club ....

Bit rich coming from a Wasps fan who wilfully accepted anything that came out of the Wasps PR machine in regards to the move to Coventry.

Re: No Review
fatheralice 18 November, 2019 13:07
Not quite the contrition we were hoping for, but at least Wray's statement shows a bit more honesty than his previous efforts on this matter.

It was good to see him confirm his commitment to the cap , and the level playing field requirement within that, put in writing, to hopefully end the anti-competitive nonsense that has been pushed at times over the last 5 years or so.

Quote:

“We confirm our commitment to the Salary Cap, and the underlying principle of a level playing field, and will continue to work transparently with Premiership Rugby in this regard.”

For the good of the game, lets hope he stands by those words over the next few seasons and beyond.

Re: No Review
Waldo 18 November, 2019 13:19
Now wait for the next Daily Mail expose !

Re: No Review
stevene 18 November, 2019 13:50
Quote:
ukms
Quote:
stevene
I think other club supporters are missing the point re co-investments. If sarries are under the cap in terms of salaries now and all co-investments are in the past therefore they shouldnt continue to count towards the cap this season. The only issue is if NW/other connected parties had agreed to make further 'co-investments' (I hate term that because it wasnt a co-investment it was an investment).
therefore I can see why the club doesnt believe it needs to trim it players immediately. It maybe an issue if some player contracts have increments based on success/personal achievement which increases their market value. Therefore there might need to be future squad trimming to facilitate this and remain within the cap in the future.

With respect this is pure speculation and again with respect you are placing your own slant on it so that it fits the PR Pushed out by NW and the club ....

Couldnt be more wrong. Im a Sale fan. Also a qualified accountant for 16 years. I'm also really unimpressed with Nigel Wray and his reaction to all this.

My conclusion is based on reasonable financial assumptions and (hopefully) a reasonable ability to understand company accounts/ information. There is rumour of offshore image rights payments but I cant interpret what I cant see/ read. What I can tally are public statements and published financial and company information.

As your a wasps fan perhaps I could lend a hand to the directors and accounts team at Wasps who thought an equity injection could be treated as income in order to cure a breach of your investment covenants? From an accounting perspective thats pretty much dunce level.....

Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3

This Thread has been closed
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net