[SoS_Warrior]

This is with immediate effect leaving them on -77 points.
Apparently PRL have added this sanction to any team failing to allow a mid season Cap audit

[TeflonTed]

Beyond bizarre now.

The Rugby Paper will be incandescent in its’ defence of poor old hard done by Sarries next Sunday.

Part of me doesn’t want to waste a few bob buying the rag, part of me is fascinated to see just how upset the editorial writers will be.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51283088

[SoS_Warrior]

Now here's an interesting thought. What happens if another club is found to have exceeded the cap?

[patgadd]

Now here's an interesting thought. What happens if another club is found to have exceeded the cap?

Judging by precedent, it will initially be ignored, then a word to the wise will be had. Following that there will be a secret agreement whereby the club will play an undisclosed amount to bury the whole thing. By the time the guilty club is eventually relegated, Saracens will be well back on top of the prem.

[TeflonTed]

There’s a real danger lurking here.

If the salary cap proves unworkable then sooner or later some bright spark will suggest we’d all be better off without it. After all, it works elsewhere to not have one doesn’t it?

Or does it?

[patgadd]

There’s a real danger lurking here.

If the salary cap proves unworkable then sooner or later some bright spark will suggest we’d all be better off without it.

The hack and Saracens apologist Stephen Jones has already suggested this, while protesting at the same time that Sarries didn't break the cap.
Anybody else old enough to remember Billy Bunter saying: "I never touched the cakes, and they didn't taste very nice anyway"?

[W4rriorz1980]

A 70 point deduction would be rendered meaningless if applied this season wouldn't it?

Apply it in the Champoinship.They'd be struggling to stay out of the clutches of National One then.

So they could finish on -12 then if they win their remaining games with bonus points.

Tigers are still worried they can be caught though....

[FlipFlop]

My concern is that with Sarries having a new CEO (Chairman?) who is Legal background, and with these punishments seemingly being new and out of the box i.e. unprecedented, we may have another London Welsh style summer Legal jamboree in which Sarries contest the punishments, even if the actual 'crime' is beyond question, and that this may render relegation a none event after all?

Realistically after 35 points and relegation punishments, any other points deductions become like multiple death sentences- you can only die once.

Abolition of the CAP would be bad for the sport at a competitive level as has been seen by Sarries in the past few season. If France and the Pro 14 want to spend themselves into oblivion, go fill your boots. It's not like Pro 14 is viable anyway without national financial support for the Regional sides. Could be interesting if all the Welsh regions went into Administration- where would the Welsh squad players play yet still be eligible for national selection for instance?

We all want competitive rugby. If that is helped by a followed CAP, then surely this must help. Chairmen voting for anything else must be the fools easily parted from their money.

[g2forumsm]

My understanding was that the additional sanction was to ensure that they finished bottom. If they didn't finish bottom the championship clubs were ready to invoke the PRL clause that says the bottom club gets relegated , so this would mean two clubs to be relegated this season (on current form could be us!), hence the addiotnal points means that they will finish bottom and only one club goes down - regardless

[SimonG]

My concern is that with Sarries having a new CEO (Chairman?) who is Legal background, and with these punishments seemingly being new and out of the box i.e. unprecedented, we may have another London Welsh style summer Legal jamboree in which Sarries contest the punishments, even if the actual 'crime' is beyond question, and that this may render relegation a none event after all?

Realistically after 35 points and relegation punishments, any other points deductions become like multiple death sentences- you can only die once.

Abolition of the CAP would be bad for the sport at a competitive level as has been seen by Sarries in the past few season. If France and the Pro 14 want to spend themselves into oblivion, go fill your boots. It's not like Pro 14 is viable anyway without national financial support for the Regional sides. Could be interesting if all the Welsh regions went into Administration- where would the Welsh squad players play yet still be eligible for national selection for instance?

We all want competitive rugby. If that is helped by a followed CAP, then surely this must help. Chairmen voting for anything else must be the fools easily parted from their money.

Might be difficult to contest it as the Cheats elected to be relegated rather than open their books didn't they?

[FlipFlop]

Simon G

My query of sorts was where the PRL book of punishments states 35 point deduction for initial issue, add relegating due to club stalling on info provision, then throw in another 70 for good measure to make sure.

I just have a sense that while Sarries would not contest their guilt, they may grounds over the stealth applied in the punishment. Let’s not forget that the initial sanction had a max of 65 points deduction available yet PRL seem to balk at applying it, yet have now got to 105 points an relegation. The punishment is unprecedented.

In the real world if you are proven to be guilty, rare that the judge would initially permit tagging, only to then add a £30k fine after further review and then deciding to apply the death penalty without the Counsel querying how the punishment escalated and calling into question what circumstances lead to such an extreme escalation.

Not sympathetic to the issue, but more concerned that a Learned person with much more legal nous than I could ever muster might challenge the severity of the unprecedented punishment to allow wriggle room whereby current punishments might not be enforceable.

[Ms. Citlalli Kiehn DDS]

I think 5 years of breaches and rubbing people’s noses in it without any contrition is enough to arrive at the correct decision.

Yes maybe it’s taken three goes but it never ceases to amaze me the people who excuse breaching the rules because they weren’t policed. No, don’t break the rules and if others do it’s not an excuse, they should be punished as well. If that means dropping more then do it. Yes I am “old fashioned” but what’s the point of having rules if there isn’t any real sanction.

It’s like speeders getting off on a technicality. No acknowledgement of the risk and effect just a weasely “I can do what I want because you can’t catch me within your system”.

Another rant over but c’est la vie

[TVM]

Beyond bizarre now.

In my opinion, this is an intelligent closing of loop holes.

The fact of the matter is that the rules say 'the bottom club go down'. The Championship teams could enforce this.

If - and it is a big, though not impossible if - Saracens had over hauled Tigers or Wasps or us or whoever, that it would have ended with a). someone suggesting an 'automatic relegation' was somehow unenforcable - or 2 teams going down - which isn't desirable or, in my opinion, natural justice.

This just closes that potentially weird loophole.

[TeflonTed]

Beyond bizarre now.

In my opinion, this is an intelligent closing of loop holes.

The fact of the matter is that the rules say 'the bottom club go down'. The Championship teams could enforce this.

If - and it is a big, though not impossible if - Saracens had over hauled Tigers or Wasps or us or whoever, that it would have ended with a). someone suggesting an 'automatic relegation' was somehow unenforcable - or 2 teams going down - which isn't desirable or, in my opinion, natural justice.

This just closes that potentially weird loophole.

Fair comment, we’ll add weird to bizarre as acceptable adjectives for any future discussion on the subject.

Now, I have a question.

We all know about Watergate, and the well established practice of naming complex events with a single word “gate” suffixed title.

Is this “Sarriegate” or “Salarygate” or even “Capgate”.

Suggestions on a postcard please, and I have a sneaking suspicion as to who might come up with the best one.

[A38]

I'm trying to get "Wray's a laugh" into this thread - but I can't see how.

Mind you that does very severely date me, doesn't it Ted?

[TeflonTed]

I'm trying to get "Wray's a laugh" into this thread - but I can't see how.

Mind you that does very severely date me, doesn't it Ted?

Nothing wrong with being severely dated.

Far better than the alternative.

[SimonG]

Simon G

My query of sorts was where the PRL book of punishments states 35 point deduction for initial issue, add relegating due to club stalling on info provision, then throw in another 70 for good measure to make sure.

I just have a sense that while Sarries would not contest their guilt, they may grounds over the stealth applied in the punishment. Let’s not forget that the initial sanction had a max of 65 points deduction available yet PRL seem to balk at applying it, yet have now got to 105 points an relegation. The punishment is unprecedented.

In the real world if you are proven to be guilty, rare that the judge would initially permit tagging, only to then add a £30k fine after further review and then deciding to apply the death penalty without the Counsel querying how the punishment escalated and calling into question what circumstances lead to such an extreme escalation.

Not sympathetic to the issue, but more concerned that a Learned person with much more legal nous than I could ever muster might challenge the severity of the unprecedented punishment to allow wriggle room whereby current punishments might not be enforceable.

I take your point but I wonder who might employ the Learned person bearing in mind Saracens agreed to the punishment.

[FlipFlop]

"Yes maybe it’s taken three goes but...."

Why did it take 3 goes though? The breach was the breach.

In the end, the manner in which the PRL delivered the punishment seemed akin to an over zealous Angler clubbing his catch on the riverbank endlessly until the fish stops thrashing about all because the first blow was ineffective.

I don't much care about Sarries demise as a result of the rule breaking.I definitely don't excuse the rule breaking. It's just the PRL seemed unable to issue the sanctions appropriately under the circumstances.

Maybe if we all now know if clubs have similarly transgressed elsewhere, we'll see them get relegation and 105 points deduction too.

[TeflonTed]

And it rumbles on......

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51309898

PRL will now take public opinion before considering a salary cap system review.

[patgadd]

PRL will now take public opinion before considering a salary cap system review.

They have already started via the Twittersphere; I can't find the place at the moment, but I've already put in my two penn'orth.

[FlipFlop]

PRL will now take public opinion before considering a salary cap system review.

This may be a little left field, but why don't they just blydi make the decision in light of the fact it is their responsibility . What next, PRL ask public if the league should be divided into North and South, PRL ask public if the league should be reduced to 4 teams because their owners can afford to outspend the rest with loose change in their pockets.

I'm beginning to see why they were so abject at dishing out the punishment now. They really need to stop playing with their man bits and govern.

[TVM]

And it rumbles on......

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51309898

PRL will now take public opinion before considering a salary cap system review.

Good God....don't ask them what they think. It seldom makes sense and is often driven by anger over something they don't fully understand.

I don't know what to call it, but I do know if it happens to Saints it will be Franklin's Garden Gate.

Automatically rele-gate?

[FlipFlop]

Names for the scandal

Given his leaked involvement, how about 'Ashton Gate'.

or maybe 'Profligate'

Time for Nurse to bring the meds...

[poyntonshark]

They are only asking what the public think. They are not promising or even implying that they will take any notice.

[TeflonTed]

For those who wish to contribute, the consultation doc....

https://www.mynersreview.co.uk/

To complete this survey with meaningful answers will require considerable time, considerable patience, and considerable ability to understand complex documentation and comment thereon meaningfully.

I have no doubt that a few of my more learned colleagues are more than capable of doing so, (Pat already has, where’s Bertie when you need him?) but I’ve decided it’s not my job to help PRL sort out their mess, and they probably won’t take any real notice of submitted suggestions anyway, other than to publicise them as a future defence against criticism of further cocks-ups.

“We asked the public, and did what they wanted.........”

[A38]

I do tend to accept your scepticism about the consultation process particularly as I see the PRL as merely a collection of 13 clubs and CVC - all with their own vested interests high on their individual agendas. It does not have a mind of its own.

That said I did start to look at the consultation process out of curiosity and as you say it's far more than throwing slogans at the screen.

I did take time though to read through the detail of the salary cap rules as they now stand. It's quite a comprehensive list and monitoring the cap is far, far more than looking at a player's income tax return.

How the rules could be tightened I don't know. I did think about suggesting that wives / partners being given "non-jobs" might be excluded but how that could be worded I'm not sure.

The salary cap has a clear purpose. Even Wray agreed this at the hearing. And we'd all like to think that It's the spirit which counts - not the small print. But in today's world would it not be naive to expect all the clubs to adhere to that spirit? There will always be loopholes to be exploited by the less scrupulous.

So the small print does have a purpose and I wish the revisers well. It is not a task which I would wish to undertake.