NEWS: Premier rugby statement on Sarries
By Saint Ted
November 5 2019
PREMIERSHIP RUGBY can confirm that an independent disciplinary panel has reached a decision in respect of charges brought against Saracens Rugby Club for alleged breaches of the Premiership Rugby Salary Cap.
The charges, which relate to the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, were brought in June 2019 following a nine-month investigation by Premiership Rugby. In accordance with the Salary Cap Regulations, such charges are referred to the independent dispute service, Sport Resolutions, which appoints an Independent Panel to determine whether the alleged breaches have occurred and to decide any sanction.
The Independent Panel -which conducted a hearing over five days in September and October 2019 - was chaired by the Rt. Hon. Lord Dyson, who was joined on the panel by Aidan Robertson QC and Jeremy Summers. Lord Dyson was Master of the Rolls (President of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales and Head of Civil Justice) for four years until he retired in October 2016. He was a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom from April 2010 until October 2012.
The decision of the Independent Panel is that Saracens Rugby Club failed to disclose payments to players in each of the seasons 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. In addition, the Club is found to have exceeded the ceiling for payments to senior players in each of the three seasons. The Panel therefore upheld all of the charges.
The sanction that has been imposed on Saracens Rugby Club by the panel is:
- a total fine of £5,360,272.31
- and a total deduction of 35 league points.
The Salary Cap Regulations stipulate that a points deduction may be imposed in the current season (2019-20) only. The sanction has no bearing on any other domestic or European competition.
The Independent Panel rejected the Club’s challenge on competition law grounds to the validity of the Regulations. In setting out its conclusions, the Panel noted that the salary cap operates in a pro-competitive manner by promoting the objectives of ensuring the financial viability of Clubs, controlling inflationary pressures, providing a level playing field, ensuring a competitive league and enabling Clubs to compete in European competitions.
Under the Regulations, Saracens Rugby Club has the ability to seek a review of the decision by an arbitration body. The review can only be on the basis that there has been an error of law, the decision is irrational or that there has been some procedural unfairness. In the event that Saracens Rugby Club seeks a review, the sanctions will be suspended pending the outcome of that review.
A Premiership Rugby spokesperson said: "The Salary Cap is an important mechanism to ensure a level playing field for Premiership Clubs and maintain a competitive, growing and financially sustainable league. Today’s decision by the Independent Panel upholds both the principle of the Salary Cap and the charges brought following an extensive investigation by Premiership Rugby. We are pleased that this process has reached a conclusion and we look forward to another exciting season of Premiership Rugby.”
Full Statement can be found Here
Salary cap rules can be found here
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
COME ON YOU SAINTS!
Church's Stand season ticket holder
EMRU Referee
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019:11:05:11:00:14 by Abington Adam.
So the Daily Mail have top journalists, there is a turn up.
Shouldn’t they be stripped of their titles as well? Doesn’t it mean they’re well over the cap this year? Do they need to let some players go or are they allowed to crack on with more resources than everyone else ?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019:11:05:11:16:38 by Wilson Pickett.
To get hit with a £5million fine suggest that they were HUGELY over the cap so significant departures are likely. Let the cherry picking commence!
The trouble is... who can afford to. With most squads finalised for the year, who has the room in their Cap for an Itoje or a Farrell?
Having said that... we have just released Brussow and rumours of Dylan are going to release big lumps of cash; so... who have we got our eye on?
It has been blindingly obviously to all the significant difference in quality and depth of squads, this isn't a small difference when they can still field a significant number of internationals despite a huge number away at the WC. I am a big admirer of McCall and his coaching team but they have achieved what they have by ignoring the cap.
Personally I feel for the players despite them being in a small way complicit as their future is now uncertain and it won't be easy finding other clubs at a drop of a hat if this what it ends up as. Williams back to Wales may be the start of a few heavy hitters departing. Interesting what will happen if they are forced to manage back to the cap immediately and yet have contracts with players that they must also honour
NAILED ON
I actually think we win the Prem now
COME ON YOU SAINTS!
Church's Stand season ticket holder
EMRU Referee
Sarries have been pretty consistent with around 77 points.
That said I'm fully expecting them to partially win an appeal and the points reduction be brought down to about 24.
Couldn't care less about the fine, it means nothing in real terms to anyone else
Or if you signed a contract with them for X amount a year and they now cant afford that within the cap, then I am sure they can be in trouble from the player if don't pay them it?
So they could be in trouble and will take a good few years now to turn this around!
Even if they get tis overthrown on courts, it means they will have to adhere to salary cap, so the above will have to happen whatever happens.
Quote:rugbymel
I’m not sure how amassing 95 points would prove people wrong.
As a motivational tool " the world's against us" etc etc
Anyway I think the most important ramification is not this season. Saracens will no longer have a squad of players better than everyone else. They will have to be squeaky clean.
Anyway, based on last seasons points totals, with a 35 point deduction, Sarries would have finished 10th, out of the Champions Cup but staying in the Premiership. This season though, they are still in Europe and you'd imagine that they'd be going all out to win it to hope that they can compete again next year; but they will also need to focus on the Premiership. They will have to do this with a large number of their best players away with England during the 6 Nations and according to Sanderson, only playing 7 games in the Prem. It could be a tall order, especially if they don't capitalise on the games when other teams are stripped of players. They snuck past Irish, lost to us and only won against a poor Leicester side. It could be a tricky year for them.
What remains to be seen is... can they play out the season with their current squad or will they have to release players, though termination of contracts or loans. Can they still get the results that they need to avoid relegation? If they do finish bottom, will the Ring Fencing be brought in?
I guess the only consolation is that if Saracens do get relegated, at least they'll have a ground on a par with the rest of the league.*
But then I googled and found the relevant page on the EPCR site - straight from the horse's mouth.
[www.epcrugby.com]
Heineken Champions Cup
Nineteen clubs will qualify automatically for the 2020/21 Heineken Champions Cup in the following ways :.
- Guinness PRO14 (7): The three highest ranked clubs from each conference. The fourth-ranked clubs from each conference will play off for the seventh place. (NB South African clubs are not eligible.)
- TOP 14 (6): The six highest-ranked clubs based on their final finishing positions.
- Gallagher Premiership Rugby (6): The six highest-ranked clubs based on their final finishing positions.
In accordance with a decision of the EPCR Board comprising the nine unions, federations and league bodies, the 20th place in the Heineken Champions Cup will be determined as follows:
i) Heineken Champions Cup winner, if not already qualified
ii) Challenge Cup winner, if not already qualified
iii) Challenge Cup losing finalist, if not already qualified
iv) Play-off match between the losing Challenge Cup semi-finalists, if not already qualified
v) Highest ranked non-qualified club by virtue of league position from the same league as the Heineken Champions Cup winner
As an aside, I think that ruins my ‘story of the season’ prediction...
“Winner:
- Saracens have a terrible start, and are in 7th at Christmas, but pull things around and still win via playoffs.”
[m.rugbynetwork.net]
Quote:Scooby Saint COYS
Blimey.
As an aside, I think that ruins my ‘story of the season’ prediction...
“Winner:
- Saracens have a terrible start, and are in 7th at Christmas, but pull things around and still win via playoffs.”
[m.rugbynetwork.net]
Well it certainly is the terrible start!
The list of injustices goes on and on. Livelihoods of players at other clubs affected. Coaches getting the sack.
As it's been said the players involved should have realised. How welcome they will be around the league is hard to say... its professional sport. Not sure I would want any in our squad.
And I feel dirty having been to the DM website...
Quote:Saint.Kenneth
So am I right in thinking that the titles and trophies that were won whilst these breaches were happening, haven’t been stripped from them?
I guess the counter argument to that is there is no way of knowing whether they would have won them if they had stayed within the cap or that they did win them because of the salaries
Long term they will have to compete on a level playing field and their financial base plus low attendances do look rather shaky.
Quote:tedgeQuote:Saint.Kenneth
So am I right in thinking that the titles and trophies that were won whilst these breaches were happening, haven’t been stripped from them?
I guess the counter argument to that is there is no way of knowing whether they would have won them if they had stayed within the cap or that they did win them because of the salaries
Come on tedge, wake up. Look at Wendyball, field an ineligible player in a competition and you are out of the competition or face a punitive fine. Players that you couldn't afford inside the cap are by defintion almost, ineligible. If certain players weren't in their squad, but in others, thye are far less likely to win anything.
I wonder how the Chiefs fans are feeling now. When the breach was first mooted I made a rare trip to another board and found them far too relaxed aout the whole thing.
We should all know ;-
Prize money for each competition at each stage (semi HC = £x, 3rd in League = £Y)
Player wages. These should all be openly published for every player in each squad as per NFL
The outcome of the enquiry was deferred, ostensibly so that the players weren't affected by the outcome while at the world cup, we were told. I thought that was a bad sign.
But who thought it was a good idea to defer? Imagine, we won the world cup four days ago and after everyone had been basking in the afterglow for three days, the **** properly hits the fan. What a total PR disaster, epic.
Maybe Warren put it round the England squad the night before......
Quote:fair_weather_fanQuote:tedgeQuote:Saint.Kenneth
So am I right in thinking that the titles and trophies that were won whilst these breaches were happening, haven’t been stripped from them?
I guess the counter argument to that is there is no way of knowing whether they would have won them if they had stayed within the cap or that they did win them because of the salaries
Come on tedge, wake up. Look at Wendyball, field an ineligible player in a competition and you are out of the competition or face a punitive fine. Players that you couldn't afford inside the cap are by defintion almost, ineligible. If certain players weren't in their squad, but in others, thye are far less likely to win anything.
I wonder how the Chiefs fans are feeling now. When the breach was first mooted I made a rare trip to another board and found them far too relaxed aout the whole thing.
I don't need to be told to wake up thanks. The comparison with football is inaccurate. Players in football are not ineligble according to their salaries, nor could they be in rugby because individual salaries are not capped.
Quote:Wilson Pickett
I think it’s important to note this is not a reflection on the supporters or the players. They have a rich owner who is happy to cheat to win, IMHO that is all.
Supporters? Of course. Hard for them to explicitly know what was going on. If anything, they are victims.
Players? Jog on. Wouldn't have happened without their agreement to participate. They are by very definition complicit - the only thing up for debate is whether they understood what was going on (which I would find laughable that they didn't).
For someone who is ostensibly always full of apparently obvious logic, I'm staggered that you are taking this...naive position.
My blame is front and centre at a rich owner trying to fiddle the system to win.
Quote:shiversaintQuote:Wilson Pickett
I think it’s important to note this is not a reflection on the supporters or the players. They have a rich owner who is happy to cheat to win, IMHO that is all.
Supporters? Of course. Hard for them to explicitly know what was going on. If anything, they are victims.
Players? Jog on. Wouldn't have happened without their agreement to participate. They are by very definition complicit - the only thing up for debate is whether they understood what was going on (which I would find laughable that they didn't).
For someone who is ostensibly always full of apparently obvious logic, I'm staggered that you are taking this...naive position.
Shiversaint, you and I have had this debate before and sit on opposite sides of it. I can assure you that I have many faults - but naivety is not one of them! I, unlike you, understand the power of narrative. History is littered with many examples where otherwise extremely intelligent people have a belief which to outsiders is simply extraordinary - all I am saying is that the Wray narrative is very strong, very persistent and very believable.
Quote:shiversaintQuote:Wilson Pickett
I think it’s important to note this is not a reflection on the supporters or the players. They have a rich owner who is happy to cheat to win, IMHO that is all.
Players? Jog on. Wouldn't have happened without their agreement to participate. They are by very definition complicit - the only thing up for debate is whether they understood what was going on (which I would find laughable that they didn't).
In absolute agreement here. The counter that the players thought it must have been all above board doesn't hold water for me.
Let's say Maro Itoje's agent knows his value is £700k in an open market scenario. When he comes up for a contract renewal, Saracens decide that to avoid paying this full amount out and in order to stay within cap, with the other 20 plus high end internationals in the squad, they declare a salary of £500k under the cap, whilst a further £200k investment is made into a joint venture property with him and Nigel Wray.
Now the above scenario is of course entirely fabricated but surely this is roughly what it is being suggested Saracens have done with a large number of their most significant players.
What I would ask in this scenario, is that are we supposed to be absolving the player of any knowledge or responsibility in what was going on? I am not arguing that a player shouldn't accept additional earnings, or should be materially punished for accepting it, but I don't just accept that they are completely blameless. My question is do we really think they thought it was all legit, did their agents etc?
It would have taken a lot of parties being in agreement with how payments were going to be structured in this scenario to make it work. Players weren't just wondering around clueless about the situation so in my view they must take some responsibility - of course the main culpability lays with Wray et al - but they are no saints in this whole messy affair.
Supposing you are right what are you suggesting should be done about it ?
Quote:tedge
Quote: "I am not arguing that a player shouldn't accept additional earnings, or should be materially punished for accepting it, but I don't just accept that they are completely blameless. "
Supposing you are right what are you suggesting should be done about it ?
As I mentioned in the post Tedge, I'm not arguing that players should be materially or financially punished. I'm simply saying I personally don't agree with those stating the players are blameless, it's not their fault or they simply didn't realise what was happening.
I think it's a pretty naive point of view to think that they were clueless, and whilst I'm not advocating any individual punishment, if they were complicit in deliberately hiding personal income from Salary Cap regulations by agreeing to external schemes then they helped the club cheat. As such, I have zero sympathy for the position their club no finds itself in.
Quote:Saint.Kenneth
Tedge, so you think it’s fair that whilst breaking the competition rules, you then go on and win the competition?
No I agree it's unfair but I am suggesting there's no practical and useful way of dealing with it under the regulations other than what has already been done
Quote:Al from Cov
The players knew full well what was going on, they all have agents that advise them, I'm afraid they are as complicit as the owner
Yep

Quote:Chris Hoddle
Just a thought, It claims it covers the last three years. Someone said that they were given the max 35 point reduction. However if that is per year then it could have been 105 point reduction? or 35 points for 3 years?
I imagine it's a maximum per case and there has only been one case covering three seasons
Quote:lilyg
There's quite an interesting discussion on the BBC about whether HMRC will be interested in what's happened
They will probably see this as some kind of tax avoidance.
Premiership Rugby could easily enforce more stringent reporting. They could make the players take ownership by making them declare annually any income whatsoever, all investments, any directorship of a company etc. If a player does not declare something that should have been or there are irregularities with how a company has been trading the ban them from playing in The Premiership.
