Saracens docked 35 points and fined £5m for salary cap breach
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...idApp_Tapatalk
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk
Saracens docked 35 points and fined £5m for salary cap breach
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...idApp_Tapatalk
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk
Hmmm, and we slap wrists, a la Wigan Leeds and and Us. Although if you read th e details all that Sarrys did was come clean with ‘corporate’ payments
If they've been paying players via investments to bypass the cap they should be hit hard. Seems a bit more organised than Steve Renouf's wife getting 200k a year for cleaning the Wigan changing rooms! Allegedly. Interesting quote from Sale's Steve Diamond. Fair point made.Steve Diamond, the director of rugby at Sale Sharks, added: “The cap has to be enforced. I’ve not read the judgement but if that’s what they deem appropriate, then that’s the way it is. Everyone knows before you kick a ball what you’re allowed to do.
“I think it upholds the integrity of what we do as a sport. There’s no point having a meaningless pittance of a fine or penalty if there has been a serious breach.”
Lessons to be learnt for league???
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk
It's a pretty shocking penalty really, but it's the right thing to do. It will severely put most sides off, potential relegation for breaching the cap would make club owners and Directors think before breaching the regulations. The £5m fine seems like a lot of money, especially as there has been a lot of talk about Saracens being cash strapped in general with the South African owners looking to reduce the annual losses. But again, it's a proper deterrent. With two (?) of the seasons they broke the cap also being years they won silverware, they are lucky in some respects that they haven't had the Championships taken from them like Melbourne did.
Whilst a £5m fine would probably end every Super League club bar possibly Saints, Leeds and Warrington it's unlikely we'll see anything of that magnitude announced. But it is interesting to see how a professional governing body operates. They are on a level several steps up from the family business Director level most Super League and RFL top dog operate on.
Whilst on the topic, was anyone shocked to see just how high the salary cap is in Union now? The base is £7m, rising to £9m if you fully maximise the academy dispensations! £9m! Our base will rise to just £2.1m next year. It's mind boggling that more players aren't jumping ship for Union. £2.1 is way, way too low and needs to be at least doubled if Super League is going to have a chance of growth over the next decade. A rise that big would end the competitive League we have now, no more Salford's reaching finals. Again the only clubs capable of spending nearly that would be Saints, Leeds and Warrington. Some serious, serious challenges facing the sport over the next 10 years. I know I'm overly dramatic at times, but remaining as a fully professional league without losing any more clubs would be an achievement. £9m!
I don't know the ins and outs of RU club finances but if the RFL fined any Superleague club 5 million quid that would be the end of that club.
It sends a strong statement out though if nothing else. Certainly stronger than Leeds getting fined less than what their Salary Cap breach was. Generally speaking though the RFU seem to have a pretty rigid disciplinary process across the board. Bans for example seem to actually punish players rather than Tony Clubb being let off after clearly cleaning someone out after scoring a try or players using EGP to avoid bans.
I could go on but don't want to start the RFL bashing so soon after the season.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Another interesting part is how they've diddled the cap. Investments and payments to commercial undertakings involving the players. There are several current Super League players who own or part own companies and I know of one that trades with the club they play for. Makes you wonder what goes on in our sport.
I remember watching Jon Wilkin having a load of decorative stone delivered to his house in Winwick after watching a game of kids football on the field opposite and wondered who would find out if that wasn't paid for by him. I'm not suggesting it wasn't, but there are endless ways you can achieve this and not be caught.
I can see a lengthy legal challenge coming. Saracens have been very open about all these business partnerships since allegations surfaced early this year and I don’t think someone like Nigel Wray would go down such an obvious and blatant financial route unless he was 100% confident on his legal standing. This will rumble on for a long while yet.
Forwards win games. The backs decide by how much.
Lord Dyson is the prominent figure on the prosecution side. He's no mug either. I think they'll ultimately have to compromise or they risk massively ruining their relationship with Saracens and the possible financial health and stability of their premier club, but not sure they will have to legally.
One thing that might come out of this is the question of the enforcements of salary caps in sport in general. The fallout of that would be incredible.
There are other ways round it as well. Ben Murdoch-Masilla's mrs is captain for Wire ladies. Not much scope for fiddling his money then!
I haven't followed the Saracens thing, but I've always thought that Salary Caps are bit of a 'gentlemen's agreement'. OK in principal, but compare that against a company's board members legal duty to protect their business for their shareholders...with a salary cap technically being a 'restraint of trade' and you can begin to see why our own authorities just hand out 'slaps on wrists'.
I see a big legal challenge to this one!
I've thought about this a bit and I agree with you on the legal challenge which will have a knock on effect to our game. I get that it's an operational rule of the game but as you rightly say, it's also a trade restriction. Looking at this slightly differently, from an RL point of view, does this make the game less financially attractive to investors because of the perceived level playing field (we know it doesn't really exist)?
A lot have people have said for sometime our salary cap is artificially low and quite frankly some players wages are shocking for what they do (Ryan Hampshire - £60k a year). Can anyone see the removal all together of the rule? I'd like to think not as I don't really want to see clubs going to the wall but I think it should be raised and there be more transparency regarding the whole system.
I can't see the cap being removed as it really would make a lot of clubs struggle and maybe bankrupt some smaller ones. Raise the cap a bit more or make bigger exemptions for club grown players. The recent Leeds debacle shows the need for transparency like you say,the fact they only registered those contracts at the end of the season makes a mockery of the "live cap".
The Exeter Chiefs ceo wants them relegating
steve diamond, the man who signed the just retired solomona, isn't really someone i consider to be an authority on integrity in sport.
Wray and Saracens confirmed today they aren't contesting the punishment. Seems it's pretty water tight and having Lord Dyson on their side has obviously worked for the league. £5m probably isn't that big a fine once the legal bills for contesting it start wracking up and the potential losses if they were unsuccessful after an appeal probably meant one wasn't financially advisable.
Must be a relief for Super League, as a challenge in Union could have made it illegal to have a cap, which would have caused utter chaos in RL.
A guy I work with is a big yawnion fan and explained what Saracens were doing.
Effectively, the breach arises from companies that are jointly-owned (in varying proportions) by individual players and [mostly] Saracens owner Nigel Wray. The companies were previously under other ownership (again, mainly Nigel Wray) and mostly concern property letting. If the players bought-into the companies at a fair market price, then I can't see what the issue is, but I think what's happened is that the players' shareholding has been 'given' to them and not declared (from what I can gather, the companies were set-up by people connected to Saracens/Wray, assets (eq property) acquired by the companies, then a large shareholding passed to the player concerned. And not declared as a payment to the player.