By FarnhamShark
#5276
Presumably they'll also have to reduce their salary bill (can they still afford Elliott Daly?) and they'll almost certainly miss out on Top 6 this season - the punishment that keeps on punishing. There must be lots of fans of other clubs saying "Told you so" at the moment!
By FarnhamShark
#5281
Of course, this assumes that their appeal will be unsuccessful. History suggests that this is probably not a good assumption. At least, however, it's becoming clearer what is and what isn't allowable going forward.
User avatar
By MikeGC
#5282
I suspect they'll appeal against this and defend themselves rigorously.

Boils down to two separate issues for me.
1. Going into "partnership" with players - looks really dodgy but there must be ambiguity in the salary cap rules which led Saracens to believe they could go down that route.
very difficult to defend though and probably justifies some punishment.
2. properly paying academy graduates who achieve international status (Farrell, Itoje, George). I'm guessing other academy graduates fill important shirts in their best match day 23.
In my humble opinion Saracens have developed these lads and there should be a much larger salary cap discount on their wages to allow them to stay at their "home club" - if not, what's the point of having a fabulous academy programme and retaining those lads ?
Seems unfair.
User avatar
By iBozz
#5283
Alex wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 11:03 am
3 years worth of going over the limit....

I just love to 31p, makes it so much more severe! :mrgreen:

I guess that the points drop makes The Cheetahs safe from relegation this term, then! :lol
Alex liked this
User avatar
By Alex
#5284
FarnhamShark wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 11:25 am
Of course, this assumes that their appeal will be unsuccessful. History suggests that this is probably not a good assumption. At least, however, it's becoming clearer what is and what isn't allowable going forward.
Rumour I saw on Twitter was them trying to get it down to 20 points on appeal
By H's D
#5288
Long overdue....
Perhaps the authoritities should now acknowledge the scale of the problem and change the rules so that Championships should be rescinded and penalties made more commensurate with the time frame involved: deducting 25 points the first season, 20 the next, and 15 the following one.
Unless they do such things Saracens might even consider £5M and only one 'lost season' a relative bargain for at least 3 Premierships and a couple of European Championship Cups.
They will have made far more money and Kudos by such cheating.
Should their Trophy cabinet not be emptied?
By AndaleManito
#5290
H's D wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 11:47 am
Long overdue....
Perhaps the authoritities should now acknowledge the scale of the problem and change the rules so that Championships should be rescinded and penalties made more commensurate with the time frame involved: deducting 25 points the first season, 20 the next, and 15 the following one.
Unless they do such things Saracens might even consider £5M and only one 'lost season' a relative bargain for at least 3 Premierships and a couple of European Championship Cups.
They will have made far more money and Kudos by such cheating.
Should their Trophy cabinet not be emptied?
Completely agree. It should be made that they don't have an overall net benefit from cheating. If someone told me "Sale are gonna win the prem for the next two years, then be relegated the year after, but then be straight back up into top for the year after that", then i'd take it in a heart beat.

Take their titles away, they didn't win them within the rules so they didn't win them full stop.

I only have sympathy for Sarries fans, as whilst some might say they denied the blindingly obvious time and time again, they are still fans and it would be disingenuous to say we wouldn't do the same in their position imo. I mean if Dimes tells me we're doing nothing wrong, I'll take his word for it until I have concrete evidence otherwise.

However, no sympathy for the club and the players, they knew what they were getting into and anyone claiming ignorance I see in the same light as drug cheats saying "oh must have eaten some contaminated meat" or "my trainer gave me this pill and I just assumed it must have been above board because my trainer would never cheat".

Glad to see PRC have the balls to do this, lets just hope it sticks. I mean, you look at their squad and you just think "how the hell can they afford to pay these players".

It's sad as well from an entertainment POV as every week at Sarries there are players, who would be first choice for other clubs, either on the bench or not involved, and overall I think the premiership would be all the better for it's top players playing as much as possible (player welfare etc permitting obviously).
User avatar
By poyntonshark
#5293
I agree in principle. No doubt Sarries will fight to get reductions in both points deduction and fine, but if allowed to keep the trophies they would surely see it as a price worth paying. Though it is worth pointing out that it isn't 5mill for three premierships and a couple of Heinekens, it is another 5mill.
User avatar
By poyntonshark
#5297
Quote from Hobblers post -

"Unless they do such things Saracens might even consider £5M and only one 'lost season' a relative bargain for at least 3 Premierships and a couple of European Championship Cups."

Those 3 seasons didn't just cost them the 5mill they have been fined, so it's another 5mill on top of everythig else they alerady spent, or rather over spent.
By Elgar
#5306
This is really interesting. I think this could be far more serious for Sarries than imagined by taking the view that it’s a small price to pay for the success that has gone before.

£5.36m is, even to Sarries and Nigel Wray, significant. And more importantly only the tip of the iceberg.

I think they are also likely to take a further, significant financial hit from losing sponsors; I can imagine for example that Allianz would want to disassociate straight away and wouldn’t be surprised if there were scope for them to claw back substantial sponsorship monies paid in previous years. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them go unsponsored for a time.

Legal costs associated with an unsuccessful appeal are likely significant.

They’ll presumably have to reduce their wage bill immediately to come back within the rules. Whether in contract amendments or terminations, there could be significant legal and compensation costs associated with that as well.

Even with the current player pool it’s very difficult to see them placing high enough in the league to be in the Champions Cup next year. (qualification by winning the thing – balanced with making sure that their points deduction doesn’t lead to relegation this year - probably not an option given the limits on how many games their internationals can play post RWC). I don’t know the figures but resume that amounts to material lost revenue.

Goodwill with paying fans and sponsors could take more than then next 2 or 3 seasons to build back up to where it is now, even assuming the playing side isn’t too badly hit.

Yet the playing side could be quite badly hit in the short as well as medium term. It’s foreseeable that all of this could cause poor morale leading to a dip in form in the short term and a net out-flow of talent for at least the next 2 or 3 seasons.


My main hope would be that this doesn’t damage the potential of exciting youngsters, Joel Kpoku et al, who you’d otherwise expect to be seasoned and important England internationals before the next world cup.
By Ewok shark
#5308
Does anybody think an English club can win a European cup without stretching the cap? Not saying cheating is to be encouraged but I don't see how the English teams can compete if they do stay within the cap.
User avatar
By Flumpty
#5309
Well finally it looks like Saracans have been brought to book - as heartbreaking as it must be for their fans.

Every rugby supporter (except maybe some Sarries fans who chose to do a Nelson) and their dog has wondered for years how they can collate such a stable of top rated talent and stay within the salary cap and now we know.

The implications of this going forward for Sarries are enormous. Could this be the end of them ? What will they need to do for 2019/2020 to bring them in line with the Salary Cap ?
By SimonG
#5311
It's now official - Saracens have won their titles by cheating. Wonderful news for those who want an honest competition.

Now take away the titles they won by cheating.
By ageinghoody
#5316
Not sure I see what practical effect taking away their titles would have.

OK, it would mean a bit more schadenfreude for the rest of us to gloat over, but unless we're going to convince European Rugby that three Champions Cups should be replayed, then it's just an empty gesture.

I wonder how many other Premiership clubs are now undertaking a very close review of their accounts for the past few years in case any "arrangements" they might have made are now going to be ruled inadmissible.
By H's D
#5318
.., then it's just an empty gesture.
Not really empty at all IMHO.
As with withdrawn Olympic medals the Championships would be awarded to those finishing second, who could add it to their history. Sarries would be obliged to remove all physical and written references to those trophies and wins. It permanently affect them in all repsects.

However rules would have to be changed for such things to be part and parcel of cheating.
Some on here should also look at the very limited range of things that Sarries are permitted to appeal this judgement on. Most of those already mentioned by the Sarries management
are completely ruled out.
Could the club lose their titles?

As it stands, no. The punishment only applies to this season and not retrospectively. Saracens are confident they will not be losing any of their eight major titles - five Premiership crowns and three European Champions Cups - won in the past decade.
Can Saracens win their appeal?

The Premiership Rugby statement suggests Saracens' chances of a successful appeal - or review - are slim.

This has been a nine-month investigation conducted by independent legal experts, who have already considered and dismissed Saracens' defence.

So unless the review finds there has been some basic unfairness or procedural error, then it will be upheld. But at the moment the sanctions are suspended.
BBC
User avatar
By Lord Elpus
#5319
I don't understand why Sorries didn't adopt the tried and trusted welsh way of stuffing brown envelopes into players' boots. Worked wonders for decades until everyone got paid for playing.
Last edited by Lord Elpus on Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By SimonG
#5320
H's D wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:15 pm
.., then it's just an empty gesture.
Not really empty at all IMHO.
As with withdrawn Olympic medals the Championships would be awarded to those finishing second, who could add it to their history. Sarries would be obliged to remove all physical and written references to those trophies and wins. It permanently affect them in all repsects.

However rules would have to be changed for such things to be part and parcel of cheating.
Some on here should also look at the very limited range of things that Sarries are permitted to appeal this judgement on. Most of those already mentioned by the Sarries management
are completely ruled out.
Could the club lose their titles?

As it stands, no. The punishment only applies to this season and not retrospectively. Saracens are confident they will not be losing any of their eight major titles - five Premiership crowns and three European Champions Cups - won in the past decade.
Can Saracens win their appeal?

The Premiership Rugby statement suggests Saracens' chances of a successful appeal - or review - are slim.

This has been a nine-month investigation conducted by independent legal experts, who have already considered and dismissed Saracens' defence.

So unless the review finds there has been some basic unfairness or procedural error, then it will be upheld. But at the moment the sanctions are suspended.
BBC
Exactly. Take them away and let the history books show they lost the titles through cheating.
By H's D
#5321
To those who think Sarries fine is significant.........

If you were given £14M out of the blue as a one-off gift but then fined £5 million of it for a previous "adminstrative error", would you be better or worse off, would you still be chuffed or would you be sad?
I would be ecstatic! :evillaugh:
£5M is small in comparison with the £14M each Premiership recently received as a windfall from CVC.
By H's D
#5324
Lord Elpus wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:27 pm
I don't understand why Sorries didn't adopt the tried and trusted welsh way of stuffing brown envelopes into players' boots. Worked wonders for decades until everyone got paid for playing.
.

If precedent is anything to go by Harlequins were fined 50p for every pound they overspent...
That might suggest Sarries overspent by around £2.5M during each of those years inquestion.

Those envelopes and boots would need to be pretty big!!

If Sarries cheated in one year then their right of qualification for the top European Competition becomes null and void the following year. Anything they achieved in the European competition that year SHOULD ALSO BE null and void.
By Tribesman
#5329
Important to note that there is no scope for an ‘appeal’ here, which is being widely misreported. There is scope for a procedural review, which is unlikely to get anywhere considering who was on the independent disciplinary panel.

Explanatory Twitter thread here:

By ageinghoody
#5339
Just a thought!

Are Sarries able to avoid exceeding the cap again this season without breaching their contracts with players?

I'd have thought it would take a couple of years at least to "run down" the contracts they are already committed to before they can decline to renew on the same terms and the affected players head off to France.
By SimonG
#5359
ageinghoody wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:38 am
Just a thought!

Are Sarries able to avoid exceeding the cap again this season without breaching their contracts with players?

I'd have thought it would take a couple of years at least to "run down" the contracts they are already committed to before they can decline to renew on the same terms and the affected players head off to France.
Well they have already played games this season with a squad that is almost certainly over the cap so we should now have another inquiry followed by another fine and another 32 point deduction. Or better still ban the entire club from all forms of rugby for a year or two. That would give them time to reduce their staff and get within the cap.
User avatar
By Yareet
#5361
SimonG wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 1:55 pm
ageinghoody wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:38 am
Just a thought!

Are Sarries able to avoid exceeding the cap again this season without breaching their contracts with players?

I'd have thought it would take a couple of years at least to "run down" the contracts they are already committed to before they can decline to renew on the same terms and the affected players head off to France.
Well they have already played games this season with a squad that is almost certainly over the cap so we should now have another inquiry followed by another fine and another 32 point deduction. Or better still ban the entire club from all forms of rugby for a year or two. That would give them time to reduce their staff and get within the cap.
As I understand it, the cap is calculated based on total salaries paid over the season. We're 4 months into the season so if a club has spent c.£2.5mn so far this season, they have c.£4.5mn for the remaining 8 months.

If Sarries have already overspent that just comes out of the remainder for the rest of the season. There are rumours that Williams and Kpoku are off. Were that to be with immediate effect, they may be closer to the cap.

tl:dr if they lose people with immediate effect/very soon, the could well be fine for the 2019/20 season.
By H's D
#5365
It isn't what the club have spent on salaries that is the issue.
My understanding is that the overspend/breaching of the rules/ failure to disclose is down to the "investments" Nigel Wray has made in Companies that he has set up as joint ventures with the players. All with a view to their lives after rugby.....

If one co-director takes remuneration and therefore benefits from a company after minimal financial input , but the other who has financed the majority of it doesn't , one could see how that could work........and why it is being regarded as a "benefit".

Very difficult for the club to alter matters as they are not in control.

The rules are quite clear though, the club must declare all possible "benefits" the players receive directly or indirectly by playing for Sarries.
User avatar
By Yareet
#5366
H's D wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 2:22 pm
It isn't what the club have spent on salaries that is the issue.
My understanding is that the overspend/breaching of the rules/ failure to disclose is down to the "investments" Nigel Wray has made in Companies that he has set up as joint ventures with the players. All with a view to their lives after rugby.....

If one co-director takes remuneration and therefore benefits from a company after minimal financial input , but the other who has financed the majority of it doesn't , one could see how that could work........and why it is being regarded as a "benefit".

Very difficult for the club to alter matters as they are not in control.

The rules are quite clear though, the club must declare all possible "benefits" the players receive directly or indirectly by playing for Sarries.
I may be being naïve but those arrangements can be changed pretty quickly - essentially Nigel buys the player out of the deal for a nominal fee. Income stream dries up for the player overnight.
By H's D
#5369
Yep. You sound Pretty Naíve!
As well as Company Law and The Inland Revenue getting in the way.......
That would mean the player agreeing to the loss of an asset that he was assured was within the salary cap rules. And then the KakaPo Poo would fly!
"Sorry Wiggy, but your 70% stake in "Wiggy9 Ltd" is now sold to me for £1.00, terribly sorry about the complete loss of your company's £875, 000 property portfolio in London "
Imagine those conversations with the Vunipolas, Farrell and Maro Itoje! Most of those companies were apparently vehicles for holding Property portfolios. I suspect Wray expected only a minimal return on his investment share.....
Was it ...
'Play for Sarries and you get "an interest free/a nominal fee mortgage" on a property owned by your own limited company. The increase in value each year is yours to keep but it doesn't count as a salary benefit!'.........?
Last edited by H's D on Wed Nov 06, 2019 9:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By Elgar
#5373
H's D wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:43 pm
To those who think Sarries fine is significant.........

If you were given £14M out of the blue as a one-off gift but then fined £5 million of it for a previous "adminstrative error", would you be better or worse off, would you still be chuffed or would you be sad?
I would be ecstatic! :evillaugh:
£5M is small in comparison with the £14M each Premiership recently received as a windfall from CVC.
How is the CVC money a windfall or one-off gift?

As opposed to proceeds of a transaction representing a partial return on the investment each of the clubs have made in Premiership Rugby's brand, whilst running at a loss (I think Exeter are the only club to turn an annual profit more than once since the Premiership began?). I doubt if if £14m even covers the losses in the case of at least some clubs.

£14 mil is two seasons worth of the salary cap. So only %200 of a significant part but by no means majority of the annual running cost.

I doubt any commercial stakeholder would be ecstatic over receiving a regulatory fine because the amount was only just over a third of the value of such a meagre* private equity return.


(* the true value to the clubs of CVC's investment was always understood to be their influence in growing the value of the brand overall - more like Dragons Den deal than a Silicon Valley IPO!)
By eBike
#5375
Further development.

McCall and Barrit as coach and captain failed to appear at the Heineken Cup launch in Cardiff.

Can we deduce that they a) unready to face the media b) expect to get dropped from the competition or c) know that further ERC sanctions are pending ?

Only time will tell.
By H's D
#5376
Elgar wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:58 pm

How is the CVC money a windfall........?
I got the description of it as a "windfall" direct from media comment. Windfall as in 'out of the blue' and at no real direct cost to the clubs involved.

Your analysis is only one version of the actualité of "investing" of course, opinions differ as to whether that "Premiership Brand Value" is anything more than a huge bubble ready to burst. This controversy could well see the pin approaching! One might well say it's already somewhat deflated....
More like a Bitcoin industry than a sound investment....
By FarnhamShark
#5380
I'm as much anti-cheating as everybody else on this board, but there's no doubt that Sarries have been highly effective at developing their own English talent, as well as buying lots from other teams. Perhaps we could re-think the salary cap by applying it exclusively to bought-in players? In Sale terms, whatever we pay Tom & Ben, Josh, Ross, etc. is outside the cap, which is then set at a more appropriate level, but applied rigorously. Feasible? Desirable? I can see problems in defining "home-grown", but not insurmountable ones.
By Van Cannonball
#5382
I’ve said elsewhere that I think the credits for academy players should be increased, and I think it would be fair to also add an extra amount where it’s an academy product that goes on to become an international
By H's D
#5384
More detail of the nitty gritty.......https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/ ... ying-rules
Wray appears to not only have been co- investing in bone fide companies with a product, but also to have been facilitating players investing in properties through co-investing presumably so the players avoided all mortgage interest payments...............?
Salary: “any salary, wage, fee, remuneration, compensation, match fee, per diem, royalty, gratuity, profit, perquisite, reward, emolument, earnings, incentive, retainer, loyalty payment, preferred payment or any other sum”
The most broad item being "Perquisite": a benefit, privilege, or advantage over and above regular income, salary, or wages.
By Surbiton_Shark
#5389
Dimes sums it up nicely

Sarries were warned multiple times and still continued to take the michael - even now it's just a complete denial.

Quite apt they play Gloucs away and it's televised on TV!
User avatar
By TeflonTed
#5392
Surbiton_Shark wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:27 am
Dimes sums it up nicely

Sarries were warned multiple times and still continued to take the michael - even now it's just a complete denial.

Quite apt they play Gloucs away and it's televised on TV!
I imagine some of the more pointy-headed denizens of The Shed are even now penning sarcastic chants, scribbling banners and practising their Eeee-Awwws.
User avatar
By Lord Elpus
#5395
TeflonTed wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:57 am
Surbiton_Shark wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:27 am
Dimes sums it up nicely

Sarries were warned multiple times and still continued to take the michael - even now it's just a complete denial.

Quite apt they play Gloucs away and it's televised on TV!
I imagine some of the more pointy-headed denizens of The Shed are even now penning sarcastic chants, scribbling banners and practising their Eeee-Awwws.
I didn't know they'd learned to scribble.
ale shark liked this
By Elgar
#5411
H's D wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:47 pm
Elgar wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:58 pm

How is the CVC money a windfall........?
I got the description of it as a "windfall" direct from media comment. Windfall as in 'out of the blue' and at no real direct cost to the clubs involved.

Your analysis is only one version of the actualité of "investing" of course, opinions differ as to whether that "Premiership Brand Value" is anything more than a huge bubble ready to burst. This controversy could well see the pin approaching! One might well say it's already somewhat deflated....
More like a Bitcoin industry than a sound investment....
Agreed, I only analysed the club owners side of the transaction and from CVC's view it could well turn out as well as a crypto investment.

But it's only the club's, not CVC's, perspective that's relevant to whether Sarries should be ecstatic at only being fined £5.36m in an adjacent financial year to banking £14m in a PE transaction.
Never ending word association thread

Dune https://media.tacdn.com/media/attractions-sp[…]

24/03/24 Bath 42 Sale 24 [GP]

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once&mdas[…]

Covid Repayments

Umm, I’m staggered anyone was unaware. […]

"how you are going to transform little Sale[…]