Rugby union?

Soldato
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
8,833
Saracens to appeal 35-point deduction and £5.36m fine for breaching salary cap rules.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50300756

That's one hell of a punishment!

That is savage.

It's been long suspected that several clubs, Saracens and Bath but probably others were cheating the cap. I'm glad that Premier Rugby has done something but WOW that is one hell of a sanction. It may not be quickest but rugby union is generally quite open about dealing with it's problems. No one shirked from exposing Quins with the blood replacement and they're taking head injuries very seriously now.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
28,069
Location
London
I don't follow rugby but how can a club accidentally not disclose their player's salaries in three consecutive seasons? And then claim administrative errors.....
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Dec 2004
Posts
15,764
Points deduction for one season...main impact will be that they'll be working hard to qualify for the champions cup...probably still manage it though.

Do wonder how many other clubs are potentially in trouble. Saracens were quite blatant though simply with their squad.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Jun 2009
Posts
2,633
Location
No where
It's a ridiculous fine, they went 700k over there budget.
It's what happens when you loose 7 people ever couple of months for a number of weeks.

Of course there gonna go over budget just to stop the handicap of having that big a squad.

Maybe the clubs should have additional money for squad members going on internationals?
 
Soldato
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
8,833
Most clubs in the premiership can’t spend up to the existing salary cap they can’t afford to. If we let big clubs get away with it the premiership will lose that essential quality that nearly anyone can beat anyone on a given day or nearly anyone can make a good run to the play offs.
 

Stu

Stu

Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
2,737
Location
Wirral
The rules say the following:

For every £1 exceeding the £350,000 Overrun threshold a fine of £3 is payable by the Club for the Salary Cap Year being considered by the Disciplinary Panel (in addition to any Overrun tax payable).

There are some extra calculations around the rate of fine within the overrun threshold, but roughly speaking them indicates that Sarries over spend by ~ £600k each season over the past three seasons, which is less than 10% over the cap amount. Looking at it this way doesn't seem such a gross oversight, but it is an oversight. However, it seems to be a bit messy regarding the rules around co-investment, and whether they should be included when considering the salary cap.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Posts
1,804
The rules say the following:



There are some extra calculations around the rate of fine within the overrun threshold, but roughly speaking them indicates that Sarries over spend by ~ £600k each season over the past three seasons, which is less than 10% over the cap amount. Looking at it this way doesn't seem such a gross oversight, but it is an oversight. However, it seems to be a bit messy regarding the rules around co-investment, and whether they should be included when considering the salary cap.

Or the equivalent of a few players... Seems like a gross oversight to me.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Dec 2004
Posts
15,764
As an example, would it be like hiring Haskell as a personal trainer while he played Wasps?

What typically happens is that the players would start a 'property investment' company, and the club's owners would 'invest' in it. So the players end up with control of a company that owns property. Basically the club was buying homes in London for it's players (which as you can imagine, is a pretty enticing incentive), and claiming it wasn't part of their salary spend.
 
Associate
Joined
15 Oct 2015
Posts
1,480
What typically happens is that the players would start a 'property investment' company, and the club's owners would 'invest' in it. So the players end up with control of a company that owns property. Basically the club was buying homes in London for it's players (which as you can imagine, is a pretty enticing incentive), and claiming it wasn't part of their salary spend.

Ah, that is quite a clever thing to do, but wouldn't it make more sense to buy property in the midlands or up north? :p
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Dec 2004
Posts
15,764
Total bloody farce the whole situation. Everyone knew they were up to this years ago, and because they were implicitly allowed to, other teams started trying the same in order to compete.

Sarries getting demoted now...so even with losing a significant chunk of players they'll absolutely stomp everyone next year.

I mean kudos for actually dealing with it, but leaving it for so long has made a right mess.
 
Back
Top Bottom