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:
LOCKDOWN!

Latest: SARACENS 23:14 LEICESTER TIGERS
Next: God only knows!

Audio: Click the link below. If it ain' there, it ain't on!
Upcoming TV: tbc

BBC Online Rugby Union Commentaries

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


Goto Page: Previous1234567
Current Page: 7 of 7
"Huge Dossier"
Roderick Flashheart 22 January, 2020 15:18
Was just shown this by a colleague - From the Times. Seems that it wasn't just the work of an enterprising journo....

"Rival clubs were feeding information to Premier Rugby about Saracens’ suspected breaches of the salary cap, helping to put in place the investigation that resulted in the English and European champions being relegated.

Harlequins were one of the clubs that did their own investigations and compiled what The Times has been told was a “huge dossier”.

The information was then passed on to Andrew Rogers, the Premier Rugby (PRL) salary cap manager.
The south west London club were working on their dossier towards the end of 2018, which is when PRL began its investigation. Harlequins started searching for information through Companies House, unearthing information about the network of co-investments that Nigel Wray, the then Saracens chairman and owner, had entered into with some of his players.

Harlequins also shared details about alleged property ownership in north London and the St Albans area and about farm ownership in South Africa.

Other clubs were also passing information to Rogers, The Times understands. It was felt that his one-man department was understaffed and could do with all the help he could get.

One of the deals that PRL was advised to investigate was the move by Jim Hamilton, the Scotland lock, from Montpellier to Saracens in 2014. Hamilton chose to go to Saracens despite the interest of other English clubs.

Some of the information that the clubs passed to PRL came second-hand through player agents. At the time, Saracens had a history of cutting agents out of their players’ contract deals, which enraged the agents, who were then happy to pass on their own knowledge of how Saracens were doing their business."



Crumbs

Re: "Huge Dossier"
TonyTaff 22 January, 2020 15:32
"HUGE DOSSIER"?

Flasheart, is that the term you use to seduce female undergraduates? winking smiley



£721.05 (*) donated to the Saracens Foundation due to visits to the Sarries frontpage [www.rugbynetwork.net]

Please read and submit articles for publication.


(*) As at October 31, 2018.

Re: "Huge Dossier"
Roderick Flashheart 22 January, 2020 15:49
(Sm151)

Re: "Huge Dossier"
1876-Fez 22 January, 2020 16:06
Do we really need another thread on the SC stuff... can't we just put it all in one... too much tapping and scrolling theses days.



SUPPORT Help for Heroes:
Help for Heroes

Re: "Huge Dossier"
daz_71 22 January, 2020 16:28
Harlequins started the dossier in 2018!. Remind me when did Gustard join them as DoR?

Re: "Huge Dossier"
Gray_Lensman 22 January, 2020 16:43
Are you saying that a member of the Saracens coaching staff in 2018 knew about salary cap breaches? Hard to believe that an assistant coach/defence coach was aware but his boss wasn't

Re: "Huge Dossier"
wolfgangvonb77 22 January, 2020 16:48
I agree this should all be put into the SC folder as im scolling and its all SC related stuff.

Re: "Huge Dossier"
Sorry Sarrie 22 January, 2020 17:14
Quote:
Roderick Flashheart

One of the deals that PRL was advised to investigate was the move by Jim Hamilton, the Scotland lock, from Montpellier to Saracens in 2014. Hamilton chose to go to Saracens despite the interest of other English clubs.

Crumbs

Haven't you heard DMWJ

[url=http://[www.facebook.com]]DMWJ[/url]

Re: "Huge Dossier"
daz_71 22 January, 2020 17:14
Quote:
Gray_Lensman
Are you saying that a member of the Saracens coaching staff in 2018 knew about salary cap breaches? Hard to believe that an assistant coach/defence coach was aware but his boss wasn't

It was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek but I should have showed that with an emoji I guess

Re: "Huge Dossier"
Darraghgirl 22 January, 2020 18:31
Quote:
wolfgangvonb77
I agree this should all be put into the SC folder as im scolling and its all SC related stuff.
I think you're right so it's merged

Re: "Huge Dossier"
Gray_Lensman 22 January, 2020 18:41
Thanks for the clarification daz 71

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
mr magoo 23 January, 2020 10:50
How could Harlequins stoop so low? Least we know now why they call it the stoop!!

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Roderick Flashheart 23 January, 2020 11:37
My apologies Darraghgirl - I should have put it into the SC thread from the off.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Sarriebone 23 January, 2020 12:20
Here's a link to the full 103 page report if anyone has the time to read it all, I shall try to

[media-cdn.incrowdsports.com]

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
TonyTaff 23 January, 2020 12:44
My phone has been downloading it for the last half hour!



£721.05 (*) donated to the Saracens Foundation due to visits to the Sarries frontpage [www.rugbynetwork.net]

Please read and submit articles for publication.


(*) As at October 31, 2018.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Marlow Nick 23 January, 2020 13:29
My hope and expectation is that a lot of the rules get tightened in the next 6 months. My suspicion is that there's a lot of borderline payments that Saracens didn't get caught for but are clearly against the spirit of the cap no matter how much bleating there is about player welfare. Brendan Venter's podcast statements make it clear that the trigger for all these support mechanisms was when a senior player came demanding a pay rise and Nigel sorted it out.

For starters how about this for a new clarification of the rules that all clubs including Saracens have to meet starting next season … 100% of all transactions between connected parties and companies wholly or partly owned by connected parties is to be considered 100% inside the cap at the gross value of the transaction. This includes co-investments, buying and selling player's company shares, dealing in image rights, publicity & appearance fees etc.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
higgy365 23 January, 2020 18:54
.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/01/2020 18:55 by higgy365.

Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 23 January, 2020 21:39
Hi, new to this forum. I'm a Saracens fan thoroughly peed off with all the 'hang 'em' high types taking great joy in seeing what's happening to Saracens.

I haven't read all of this thread or the many others but does anyone know if the club/Nigel have plans to go after PwC and the law firm who gave them advice? Especially regards the Itoje image rights valuation being so out of kilter with what the SCM said they were worth.

Also, Paul Gustard... given we know Quins were the main driver behind this, putting together their dossier on Saracens, what is the general consensus on the input Gustard might have added to the inside info?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/01/2020 21:46 by Toga.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
ukms 23 January, 2020 22:27
Quote:
Toga
Hi, new to this forum. I'm a Saracens fan thoroughly peed off with all the 'hang 'em' high types taking great joy in seeing what's happening to Saracens.
I haven't read all of this thread or the many others but does anyone know if the club/Nigel have plans to go after PwC and the law firm who gave them advice? Especially regards the Itoje image rights valuation being so out of kilter with what the SCM said they were worth.

Also, Paul Gustard... given we know Quins were the main driver behind this, putting together their dossier on Saracens, what is the general consensus on the input Gustard might have added to the inside info?

Does it matter ? You broke the rules and got caught eventually...... why ‘go after’ anyone ?

Does it matter that Gustard may (or may not) have lifted the lid on breaches after he left the club ? Perhaps he disagreed with what was going on but felt powerless to act whilst part of the club ... does it matter if anyone blew the whistle .... it’s quite common in the big wide world if there is wrongdoing.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Gray_Lensman 23 January, 2020 22:45
Toga, read the report and you'll see what the difference between the two share values amounted to and why there is no point going after PWC. Particularly as Nigel Wray said in his evidence he didn't depend on it, instead using his instinct and business know-how.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 23 January, 2020 23:37
Quote:
Gray_Lensman
Toga, read the report and you'll see what the difference between the two share values amounted to and why there is no point going after PWC. Particularly as Nigel Wray said in his evidence he didn't depend on it, instead using his instinct and business know-how.


There has also been reference to extensive legal consultation on whether the co-investment vehicles were outside the cap. That advice appears to be not worth the paper it was written on either.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 23 January, 2020 23:43
Quote:
ukms
Quote:
Toga
Hi, new to this forum. I'm a Saracens fan thoroughly peed off with all the 'hang 'em' high types taking great joy in seeing what's happening to Saracens.
I haven't read all of this thread or the many others but does anyone know if the club/Nigel have plans to go after PwC and the law firm who gave them advice? Especially regards the Itoje image rights valuation being so out of kilter with what the SCM said they were worth.

Also, Paul Gustard... given we know Quins were the main driver behind this, putting together their dossier on Saracens, what is the general consensus on the input Gustard might have added to the inside info?

Does it matter ? You broke the rules and got caught eventually...... why ‘go after’ anyone ?

Does it matter that Gustard may (or may not) have lifted the lid on breaches after he left the club ? Perhaps he disagreed with what was going on but felt powerless to act whilst part of the club ... does it matter if anyone blew the whistle .... it’s quite common in the big wide world if there is wrongdoing.


Thanks for your reply UKMS. When I want to read the opinion of a dickhead I'll bear you in mind. Cheers

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
ukms 24 January, 2020 00:04
Quote:
Toga
Quote:
ukms
Quote:
Toga
Hi, new to this forum. I'm a Saracens fan thoroughly peed off with all the 'hang 'em' high types taking great joy in seeing what's happening to Saracens.
I haven't read all of this thread or the many others but does anyone know if the club/Nigel have plans to go after PwC and the law firm who gave them advice? Especially regards the Itoje image rights valuation being so out of kilter with what the SCM said they were worth.

Also, Paul Gustard... given we know Quins were the main driver behind this, putting together their dossier on Saracens, what is the general consensus on the input Gustard might have added to the inside info?

Does it matter ? You broke the rules and got caught eventually...... why ‘go after’ anyone ?

Does it matter that Gustard may (or may not) have lifted the lid on breaches after he left the club ? Perhaps he disagreed with what was going on but felt powerless to act whilst part of the club ... does it matter if anyone blew the whistle .... it’s quite common in the big wide world if there is wrongdoing.


Thanks for your reply UKMS. When I want to read the opinion of a dickhead I'll bear you in mind. Cheers

Clearly up late on a school night .....

If you ask stupid questions you’ll get answers from a dickhead like me winking smiley



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24/01/2020 00:11 by ukms.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
JL904 24 January, 2020 00:36
Quote:
Toga
Hi, new to this forum. I'm a Saracens fan thoroughly peed off with all the 'hang 'em' high types taking great joy in seeing what's happening to Saracens.
I haven't read all of this thread or the many others but does anyone know if the club/Nigel have plans to go after PwC and the law firm who gave them advice? Especially regards the Itoje image rights valuation being so out of kilter with what the SCM said they were worth.

Also, Paul Gustard... given we know Quins were the main driver behind this, putting together their dossier on Saracens, what is the general consensus on the input Gustard might have added to the inside info?

Toga, if only you'd take the time to read the threads, you'd realise that most visiting fans engage in reasonable debate.

Most of us Saracens fans will acknowledge all the good Mr Wray has done over the years - but his cavalier attitude towards the salary cap has hurt and upset us too. Sadly, the best thing he can do now is to keep his head down, try and find a buyer for his stake in the club and walk away. It's a real shame that his continued association with the club will continue to foster resentment in rival fans, and it's painful to say I can't blame them.

Sorry, but posts such as yours are like throwing petrol on dying embers.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
ElephantJuice 24 January, 2020 01:33
Quote:
Marlow Nick
For starters how about this for a new clarification of the rules that all clubs including Saracens have to meet starting next season … 100% of all transactions between connected parties and companies wholly or partly owned by connected parties is to be considered 100% inside the cap at the gross value of the transaction. This includes co-investments, buying and selling player's company shares, dealing in image rights, publicity & appearance fees etc.

I think everybody already did that - apart from Saracens...

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Marlow Nick 24 January, 2020 08:24
There have been several Saracens fans expressing their horror with how the management have behaved but clinging to the belief that the players were not complicit. Can someone explain to me how Itoje was not fully implicated by the report that apparently discovered the man lauded as one of the best in the world, where the press speculated if he would become the first mlion pound a year player, where McCall is quoted as saying he's concerned how to retain him due to cap constraints... accepted a salary so far below his market value that he's not even in the top ten paid locks in the league. Not the top ten players. The top ten locks. Is anyone going to claim that this intelligent man believed everything was above board?

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
myleftboot 24 January, 2020 09:05
Not disputing your points Nick, but does this top ten paid locks list exist? I'd like to read it

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Duncan96 24 January, 2020 09:23
Quote:
ElephantJuice
Quote:
Marlow Nick
For starters how about this for a new clarification of the rules that all clubs including Saracens have to meet starting next season … 100% of all transactions between connected parties and companies wholly or partly owned by connected parties is to be considered 100% inside the cap at the gross value of the transaction. This includes co-investments, buying and selling player's company shares, dealing in image rights, publicity & appearance fees etc.

I think everybody already did that - apart from Saracens...

Can I just say that I have outlined in detail before why I believe this would be throwing the baby out with the bath water. While acknowledging your honestly held opinion Nick and the reasons why you hold that opinion, to engage would be Groundhog Day crossed with Einstein's definition of insanity on my part.

It raises an interesting point though. Both on this and on other threads things have been posted by Saracens supporters which are positive to Saracens and primarily aimed at other Saracens supporters. Without fail those posts are met with one or more negative comments from an increasing number of non Saracens supporters.

The replies are usually (although not always) reasonable. E.g. Reference is made to the uniquely good things that go on at Saracens to which the reply is that Lance Armstrong did some good charitable work. A reasonble point but nevertheless negative.

So, not unsurprisingly given recent events, we have a message board which is a free for all and anything positive posted about Saracens will receive a negative comment.

Now maybe that's a proper function for this board and it has been useful in recent times to educate ourselves with counter opinions. But my impression is that things are getting increasingly repetitive and Saracens supporters are now drifting away to more positive forums on e.g. facebook, having felt that negativity has run its course and, as we go forward, the club and supporters need a more positive environment to see us through.

So, my point is, perhaps not yet but quite soon, I think the people who run this board have a choice. Either carry on as is and perhaps have a board with a decreasing Saracens presence (we all have to move on at some point) or decide along with everyone else who is going to stick with Saracens that, without denying what has happened in the past, we are going to see our way through the next couple of years with a positive attitude.

The latter will mean being quite strict in removing negative, albeit reasonable comments from non Saracens supports.

Right: hard hat on for incoming flak about how we just want to stick our heads in the sand (which I'm not proposing. I'm just floating the discussion: what is this board for)

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 24 January, 2020 09:25
Quote:
JL904
Quote:
Toga
Hi, new to this forum. I'm a Saracens fan thoroughly peed off with all the 'hang 'em' high types taking great joy in seeing what's happening to Saracens.
I haven't read all of this thread or the many others but does anyone know if the club/Nigel have plans to go after PwC and the law firm who gave them advice? Especially regards the Itoje image rights valuation being so out of kilter with what the SCM said they were worth.

Also, Paul Gustard... given we know Quins were the main driver behind this, putting together their dossier on Saracens, what is the general consensus on the input Gustard might have added to the inside info?

Toga, if only you'd take the time to read the threads, you'd realise that most visiting fans engage in reasonable debate.

Most of us Saracens fans will acknowledge all the good Mr Wray has done over the years - but his cavalier attitude towards the salary cap has hurt and upset us too. Sadly, the best thing he can do now is to keep his head down, try and find a buyer for his stake in the club and walk away. It's a real shame that his continued association with the club will continue to foster resentment in rival fans, and it's painful to say I can't blame them.

Sorry, but posts such as yours are like throwing petrol on dying embers.


This is a Saracens forum. I'm not looking for an echo chamber but I'm not looking for yet more, 'you cheated you cheated you cheated' Pavlovian dog response to any question that doesn't have to begin with a preamble confession that we are all somehow tainted pariahs for being a Saracens fan and offer my profuse apologies. I asked a perfectly civil question that isn't inflammatory or an excuse or mitigation for breaking the cap.

If I got professional and qualified advice from a consulting firm like PwC then I'd expect that advice to stand up to a little more scrutiny than for one man to say that the conclusion the advice came to was actually wrong by a factor of 100%. I'm just saying I might be a tad miffed at PwC.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Statesman 24 January, 2020 09:30
Quote:
Marlow Nick
There have been several Saracens fans expressing their horror with how the management have behaved but clinging to the belief that the players were not complicit. Can someone explain to me how Itoje was not fully implicated by the report that apparently discovered the man lauded as one of the best in the world, where the press speculated if he would become the first mlion pound a year player, where McCall is quoted as saying he's concerned how to retain him due to cap constraints... accepted a salary so far below his market value that he's not even in the top ten paid locks in the league. Not the top ten players. The top ten locks. Is anyone going to claim that this intelligent man believed everything was above board?

It’s worse than that - the PRL have effectively accused him/Saracens of converting income into capital gain. From memory the difference between his marginal rates of tax on income and gains is c25% - so I reckon he owes the tax authorities £200k!

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 24 January, 2020 09:30
Quote:
Duncan96
Quote:
ElephantJuice
Quote:
Marlow Nick
For starters how about this for a new clarification of the rules that all clubs including Saracens have to meet starting next season … 100% of all transactions between connected parties and companies wholly or partly owned by connected parties is to be considered 100% inside the cap at the gross value of the transaction. This includes co-investments, buying and selling player's company shares, dealing in image rights, publicity & appearance fees etc.

I think everybody already did that - apart from Saracens...

Can I just say that I have outlined in detail before why I believe this would be throwing the baby out with the bath water. While acknowledging your honestly held opinion Nick and the reasons why you hold that opinion, to engage would be Groundhog Day crossed with Einstein's definition of insanity on my part.

It raises an interesting point though. Both on this and on other threads things have been posted by Saracens supporters which are positive to Saracens and primarily aimed at other Saracens supporters. Without fail those posts are met with one or more negative comments from an increasing number of non Saracens supporters.

The replies are usually (although not always) reasonable. E.g. Reference is made to the uniquely good things that go on at Saracens to which the reply is that Lance Armstrong did some good charitable work. A reasonble point but nevertheless negative.

So, not unsurprisingly given recent events, we have a message board which is a free for all and anything positive posted about Saracens will receive a negative comment.

Now maybe that's a proper function for this board and it has been useful in recent times to educate ourselves with counter opinions. But my impression is that things are getting increasingly repetitive and Saracens supporters are now drifting away to more positive forums on e.g. facebook, having felt that negativity has run its course and, as we go forward, the club and supporters need a more positive environment to see us through.

So, my point is, perhaps not yet but quite soon, I think the people who run this board have a choice. Either carry on as is and perhaps have a board with a decreasing Saracens presence (we all have to move on at some point) or decide along with everyone else who is going to stick with Saracens that, without denying what has happened in the past, we are going to see our way through the next couple of years with a positive attitude.

The latter will mean being quite strict in removing negative, albeit reasonable comments from non Saracens supports.

Right: hard hat on for incoming flak about how we just want to stick our heads in the sand (which I'm not proposing. I'm just floating the discussion: what is this board for)

Totally agree. I wrote my earlier reply above before I'd read your reply. Sentiment is the same.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Poking With Sticks 24 January, 2020 09:45
Quote:
Toga
There has also been reference to extensive legal consultation on whether the co-investment vehicles were outside the cap. That advice appears to be not worth the paper it was written on either.

Any half decent lawyer in that situation would have just appended the discussion with "but you would need to ask the Salary Cap Manager to be certain".

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Sans Culottes 24 January, 2020 10:04
Quote:
Statesman
Quote:
Marlow Nick
There have been several Saracens fans expressing their horror with how the management have behaved but clinging to the belief that the players were not complicit. Can someone explain to me how Itoje was not fully implicated by the report that apparently discovered the man lauded as one of the best in the world, where the press speculated if he would become the first million pound a year player, where McCall is quoted as saying he's concerned how to retain him due to cap constraints... accepted a salary so far below his market value that he's not even in the top ten paid locks in the league. Not the top ten players. The top ten locks. Is anyone going to claim that this intelligent man believed everything was above board?

It’s worse than that - the PRL have effectively accused him/Saracens of converting income into capital gain. From memory the difference between his marginal rates of tax on income and gains is c25% - so I reckon he owes the tax authorities £200k!

Maybe advantage has been taken of entrepreneurs relief that has the potential to permit £10 million of gains taxed only at 10%. Not sure of the detail nor whether this could have been used in this case.

You can see why capital gains might be more attractive than income.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Marlow Nick 24 January, 2020 10:21
Quote:
Duncan96
Can I just say that I have outlined in detail before why I believe this would be throwing the baby out with the bath water. While acknowledging your honestly held opinion Nick and the reasons why you hold that opinion, to engage would be Groundhog Day crossed with Einstein's definition of insanity on my part.

It raises an interesting point though. Both on this and on other threads things have been posted by Saracens supporters which are positive to Saracens and primarily aimed at other Saracens supporters. Without fail those posts are met with one or more negative comments from an increasing number of non Saracens supporters.

The replies are usually (although not always) reasonable. E.g. Reference is made to the uniquely good things that go on at Saracens to which the reply is that Lance Armstrong did some good charitable work. A reasonble point but nevertheless negative.

So, not unsurprisingly given recent events, we have a message board which is a free for all and anything positive posted about Saracens will receive a negative comment.

Now maybe that's a proper function for this board and it has been useful in recent times to educate ourselves with counter opinions. But my impression is that things are getting increasingly repetitive and Saracens supporters are now drifting away to more positive forums on e.g. facebook, having felt that negativity has run its course and, as we go forward, the club and supporters need a more positive environment to see us through.

So, my point is, perhaps not yet but quite soon, I think the people who run this board have a choice. Either carry on as is and perhaps have a board with a decreasing Saracens presence (we all have to move on at some point) or decide along with everyone else who is going to stick with Saracens that, without denying what has happened in the past, we are going to see our way through the next couple of years with a positive attitude.

The latter will mean being quite strict in removing negative, albeit reasonable comments from non Saracens supports.

Right: hard hat on for incoming flak about how we just want to stick our heads in the sand (which I'm not proposing. I'm just floating the discussion: what is this board for)

Duncan

I recognise the concern. My intent is not to drive away Saracens fans from their own board however equally I do believe these matters should be debated... And a quality debate is not just a mudslinging exercise.

This board has some very sensible moderators who appear to be striking a good balance... For example limiting the number of threads on the topic and I am trying to follow their lead by limiting myself to those threads. I'd believe there are some key topics worthy of polite and considered debate

What really happened (tough when the evidence is restricted or redacted but speculation can sometimes be valid)
What changes should be made to future regulations and how they should be enforced and communicated
What will be the impact on the Saracens squad
What do Saracens management need to do in order to rebuild trust with the fans and the other PRLmembers

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
ElephantJuice 24 January, 2020 10:44
Quote:
myleftboot
Not disputing your points Nick, but does this top ten paid locks list exist? I'd like to read it

How can you be so obtuse?

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 24 January, 2020 11:26
Quote:
Marlow Nick
What changes should be made to future regulations and how they should be enforced and communicated
What will be the impact on the Saracens squad
What do Saracens management need to do in order to rebuild trust with the fans and the other PRLmembers

1. Abolish the marquee player allowance

2. Reduce the salary cap to c.£3m

3. Make any England Qualified Player (EQP) 100% cap exempt provided they ;
a. Remain with their academy club*
b. Remain EQP**
c. EQP aged <23 and never in the academy system***

4. EQPs in senior squad that didn't come from the club academy get 50% cap exemption. This would include uncapped players born overseas who joined a club as senior overseas player but became EQP either through residency and/or by declaring for England via legitimate qualifying criteria (English parent or grandparent)****

5. Transfer fee payable for EQPs still with their academy club moving to other Premiership club.



* A player would only qualify for the full 100% exemption if they joined the academy before their 19th birthday and/or had lived 75% of their life in the academy catchment area.

** e.g Tompkins would move from 100% cap exempt to 100% in cap if he plays for Wales.

*** e.g Dombrandt came via Cardiff Met University

**** e.g Ernst Joubert would have become EQP after he qualified on residency AND declared he wanted to play for England and not South Africa.


My whole strategy would be to completely reorientate the Premiership to become a breeding ground predominantly for English players. Make the academy the goto place to recruit from and give the clubs the incentive to do that.

It's only really Saracens and Leicester that do this as a default at the moment. That must change.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24/01/2020 11:31 by Toga.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Gray_Lensman 24 January, 2020 12:23
You make some interesting points there. Something like that would work if breeding England players is the function of the Premiership. Not everyone would agree (and personally the success of England isn't as important to me as the success of my club).

However, a major issue is the functioning of the academies. If you look at the Championship Rolling Maul forum you will find considerable resentment at the way Academies are allocated and run as fiefs of Premiership clubs (plus Leedshire for historic, and no longer justified, reasons). There is no obvious necessity in associating academies directly with clubs and consequently assigning the benefits primarily to that club. Additionally the way Academies have failed to develop some players or disillusioned then with rugby to such an extent that they leave the game altogether is troubling. Further, the size and distribution of the Academies is far from equitable. For example until recently Bristol's academy area consisted of the city of Bristol and South Gloucestershire. The entire area surrounding that 'belonged' to Bath. Even now Millfield School is in Bath's catchment area despite being closer to Bristol. Worcester had similar issues that became worse with the advent of Wasps as a midlands club.

It is possible that the Salary Cap could be based wholly or partly around turnover or even profit(!) rather than being a flat rate. This would encourage the commercial development of the game which is said to be a good thing. The main thing though is that the SCM needs to be far better resourced and to have greater investigatory powers. Combined with the publication of salaries as occurs in other capped sports. Fortunately the whole area of salary cap is now under review and it may come up with some interesting ideas.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Sarriebone 24 January, 2020 13:36
At this point I don't think any fan can argue the the SC regs need a serious overhall. Most of all the credits system. It doesn't seem fair that having a world class academy player playing for England so heavily punishes the team that brought them through their academy.

Ex: Saracens pay Owen Farrell a (rumoured) £750k/yr in the 2018/19 season, he played 17 matches for Saracens, 9 for England and 1 enforced rest week as he playeed more than 65% of England matches.

Saracens played 31 matches (Premiership and Europe) which means he was available for 55% of Saracens matches.
The maximum credits for Faz are capped at £80k for combined academy and England credits. So England have him for 45% of the season and yet credits only cover 10.6% of his Salary.

Without descending in to "you shouldn't have so many internationals then", does that seem fair to anyone? Where is the incentive to develop players to international standard?

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Gray_Lensman 24 January, 2020 14:05
Clearly that credit system is flawed and will doubtless be part of the review, But the 'you shouldn't have so many internationals then' argument has some truth in it. Breaching the salary cap allowed the building of a squad that other clubs could not match. With a functioning cap a player like Farrell might have been deemed too expensive to keep when products from the academy who cost less started to force their way into the side. And so he would have moved to another club. That's what other clubs had to do. If the decision was made to retain Farrell within the cap then another player would have been released. You can't divorce breaching the cap from how Saracens both retained players and continued to recruit no matter the obvious issues with the credit system.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Toga 24 January, 2020 14:21
Quote:
Sarriebone
At this point I don't think any fan can argue the the SC regs need a serious overhall. Most of all the credits system. It doesn't seem fair that having a world class academy player playing for England so heavily punishes the team that brought them through their academy.
Ex: Saracens pay Owen Farrell a (rumoured) £750k/yr in the 2018/19 season, he played 17 matches for Saracens, 9 for England and 1 enforced rest week as he playeed more than 65% of England matches.

Saracens played 31 matches (Premiership and Europe) which means he was available for 55% of Saracens matches.
The maximum credits for Faz are capped at £80k for combined academy and England credits. So England have him for 45% of the season and yet credits only cover 10.6% of his Salary.

Without descending in to "you shouldn't have so many internationals then", does that seem fair to anyone? Where is the incentive to develop players to international standard?


I've thought for years that the RFU must laugh themselves hoarse at how cheap they get English professional rugby delivered to them on a plate. The players get a great match fee while the clubs are still paying them.

Regards the championship clubs and academy territories, it's true that they aren't all equitable but that doesn't change the fact that an academy is something that clubs and DoRs either buy into or they simply don't. At the moment, under the current English model, I think the smart thing to do if you're a DoR is to provide the academy with the absolute minimum of funds and concentrate resources on scouting players in the 23-28 bracket. At that age, they're old enough to have shown what their talent potential and application is, any physical or injury weaknesses will have likely manifested itself already and they're still young enough to not have started any performance decline. If they're South African as well then so much the better as they're much cheaper. In a nutshell, that is what Diamond is doing at Sale. Importing overseas players just has so many advantages over home-grown. Lead time is perhaps the biggest differentiator - junior academy to senior squad will take at least 5 years, likely more with no guarantees the player will be any good. Or they might break as soon as they start senior rugby and all that time and investment is gone. But in a way it's worse if they're actually very good then they get into EPS squads and suddenly they want and deserve a pay rise. Then they get capped and they need another pay rise but worse you have to pay them more to get to play them far less. And then you need more money to pay your newly capped player AND to pay the other player you need in the squad to cover him while he's playing for England. And all the while, the DoR who just went straight to the 23 year old South African with 50 SuperRugby caps knows exactly what he'll cost and how many games he'll be available for right through the season.

It's madness to be honest.

There's only been one premiership round so far this year and it'll come as no surprise that Saracens had the largest EQP number in their squad when they beat Worcester with 19 out of 23 players England qualified. Worcester had 9 and they weren't even the worst in that round (LI had just 8). In total, only 56% of all the players named in the 12 Premiership sides for the round on the weekend of the 4/5th Jan were EQP. This, for me, is at the crux of many of the problems.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24/01/2020 14:27 by Toga.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Rinkadink 24 January, 2020 14:24
Quote:
Marlow Nick
(Itoje) accepted a salary so far below his market value that he's not even in the top ten paid locks in the league. Not the top ten players. The top ten locks.
Do you have a reference for this and could you copy it here or similar?

Cheers.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Sarriebone 24 January, 2020 15:00
Quote:
Gray_Lensman
Clearly that credit system is flawed and will doubtless be part of the review, But the 'you shouldn't have so many internationals then' argument has some truth in it. Breaching the salary cap allowed the building of a squad that other clubs could not match. With a functioning cap a player like Farrell might have been deemed too expensive to keep when products from the academy who cost less started to force their way into the side. And so he would have moved to another club. That's what other clubs had to do. If the decision was made to retain Farrell within the cap then another player would have been released. You can't divorce breaching the cap from how Saracens both retained players and continued to recruit no matter the obvious issues with the credit system.

My point about the "shouldn't have the internationals" was that the above calculation can be applied to any of the top internationals, I just happened to know Faz's rumoured salary off the top of my head. I suspect the calculations can be applied to George Ford with pretty much the same numbers, I've seen £600k bandied about for GF, so assuming full credits that accounts for 13.3% of his salary, fairly sure that doesn't cover the amount of matches he missed for Leicester last season.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Marlow Nick 24 January, 2020 15:11
Quote:
Rinkadink
Quote:
Marlow Nick
(Itoje) accepted a salary so far below his market value that he's not even in the top ten paid locks in the league. Not the top ten players. The top ten locks.
Do you have a reference for this and could you copy it here or similar?

Cheers.

Quote:
Salary Cap Report
259 at paras 97 to 102 Mr Rogers explains in some detail why he considers that the employment payments made to XXXXXX were an undervalue for a player of his ability and experience

Quote:
Guardian
It is understood from multiple sources that Itoje’s salary is lower than might be expected – he is not in the top 10 of Premiership earners in his position in the second row.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Marlow Nick 24 January, 2020 15:31
Quote:
Sarriebone
At this point I don't think any fan can argue the the SC regs need a serious overhall. Most of all the credits system. It doesn't seem fair that having a world class academy player playing for England so heavily punishes the team that brought them through their academy.
Ex: Saracens pay Owen Farrell a (rumoured) £750k/yr in the 2018/19 season, he played 17 matches for Saracens, 9 for England and 1 enforced rest week as he playeed more than 65% of England matches.

Saracens played 31 matches (Premiership and Europe) which means he was available for 55% of Saracens matches.
The maximum credits for Faz are capped at £80k for combined academy and England credits. So England have him for 45% of the season and yet credits only cover 10.6% of his Salary.

Without descending in to "you shouldn't have so many internationals then", does that seem fair to anyone? Where is the incentive to develop players to international standard?

One correction for you. Assuming Farrell is your marquee player then the credits you get for him are zero because he's outside the cap. One has to wonder why Saracens consider Farrell is worth £750k for only 17 matches. Personally I think they're crazy to pay him that much. He must be laughing when he gets £1M a year (£750k from Saracens plus £250k from England) for about 27 matches while other top quality fly halves are getting half that amount from their clubs. That is a choice Saracens management make.

There is of course a valid argument for the other players that are inside the cap but still market forces should apply. Eddy has called up 34 players … roughly an average of 3 per club. Saracens great academy factory have supplied 5 players. If you're asking for extra credits for the extra 2 players maybe that's reasonable but if I were you I wouldn't just ask for extra credits which give no money just permission to spend more of your own money. I'd be demanding that England pay more for players.

What I don't believe Saracens deserve extra credits for is Mako, Billy, Elliott, Liam, Sean, Rhys etc. Your management chose to headhunt these players from other clubs. You are getting credits for them. If they're not worth it them let them go back to clubs that do want them.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Sarriebone 24 January, 2020 15:49
Quote:
Marlow Nick
Quote:
Sarriebone
At this point I don't think any fan can argue the the SC regs need a serious overhall. Most of all the credits system. It doesn't seem fair that having a world class academy player playing for England so heavily punishes the team that brought them through their academy.
Ex: Saracens pay Owen Farrell a (rumoured) £750k/yr in the 2018/19 season, he played 17 matches for Saracens, 9 for England and 1 enforced rest week as he playeed more than 65% of England matches.

Saracens played 31 matches (Premiership and Europe) which means he was available for 55% of Saracens matches.
The maximum credits for Faz are capped at £80k for combined academy and England credits. So England have him for 45% of the season and yet credits only cover 10.6% of his Salary.

Without descending in to "you shouldn't have so many internationals then", does that seem fair to anyone? Where is the incentive to develop players to international standard?

One correction for you. Assuming Farrell is your marquee player then the credits you get for him are zero because he's outside the cap. One has to wonder why Saracens consider Farrell is worth £750k for only 17 matches. Personally I think they're crazy to pay him that much. He must be laughing when he gets £1M a year (£750k from Saracens plus £250k from England) for about 27 matches while other top quality fly halves are getting half that amount from their clubs. That is a choice Saracens management make.

There is of course a valid argument for the other players that are inside the cap but still market forces should apply. Eddy has called up 34 players … roughly an average of 3 per club. Saracens great academy factory have supplied 5 players. If you're asking for extra credits for the extra 2 players maybe that's reasonable but if I were you I wouldn't just ask for extra credits which give no money just permission to spend more of your own money. I'd be demanding that England pay more for players.

What I don't believe Saracens deserve extra credits for is Mako, Billy, Elliott, Liam, Sean, Rhys etc. Your management chose to headhunt these players from other clubs. You are getting credits for them. If they're not worth it them let them go back to clubs that do want them.

As my subsequent post explained I chose Farrell as I happened to know his rumoured salary and because he came through the Sarries academy, no other reason.

My point is that I think clubs deserve fair compensation for the value of the players picked, i.e how much would it cost to replace said player with a similar level for the matches the player misses. I also believe team should still get full academy credits even if the player is getting England credits, which they currently don't.

As far as I am aware Saracens would get England credits for Mako, Billy and Elliott but no academy credits. As for the other I don't believe there are any credits for internationals playing for countries other than England.

Re: Hi: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Poking With Sticks 24 January, 2020 15:49
Quote:
Toga
I've thought for years that the RFU must laugh themselves hoarse at how cheap they get English professional rugby delivered to them on a plate.

I think we club supporters sometimes lose sight of how much the international game dwarfs ours. The total number of TV and live viewers for a whole season of Premiership rugby is less than an average single game of the 6 Nations. That's the money which keeps our game going.

Re: EVERYTHING SALARYCAP RELATED
Darraghgirl 24 January, 2020 15:53
This thread is now closed

Goto Page: Previous1234567
Current Page: 7 of 7

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