RugbyRebels

Which Tyler wrote:

Puja wrote:

Stom wrote:But Sarries are wanting to challenge it under EU law, no? So not challenging the case but the validity of the cap itself.

I understand that they did so in the first tribunal and that argument was denied.

Puja

Feom 5P's post above

"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."

The people on the independent body are going to make it tough to claim any of those however, some serious law types from what lawyer types have been tweeting.

That Jordan Turner-Hall contract decision, not so smart.

So if they are forced to stick to the cap then who is on the market?

If they kept Mako, Billy and Farrell as their marquee players the following could be (as they'd be marquee players elsewhere):

- George - Singleton is a luxury back up currently and Woolstencroft is good enough to be a number 2 hooker.
- Itoje - would demand a marquee slot and (especially considering England commitments) wouldn't be a necessity with Skelton, Isiekwe, Kpoku and Kruis there.
- Daly - last in, first out!
- Williams - in the last year of his contract and they have plenty of back three players
- Koch - I imagine he'd command a fair wedge and they have Lamositele and Figallo.

That would still leave them able to field a 15 of: Mako, Singleton, Lamositele, Kruis / Skelton, Isiekwe, Earl, Wray, Billy, Spencer, Farrell, Maitland, Tomkins (Barritt retiring), Lozowski, Lewington, Goode / Malins

Would be great for England in my opinion if George and Itoje went to other clubs and took on captaincy roles.

Something special indeed

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50309676

He's not wrong really. Exeter lose both prem finals but have to let cordero go. I'm sure they would loved to have started a donut shop at sandy park for him so he could stay.

Bit of background on the independent Sport Resolutions https://www.sportresolutions.co.uk/

Robert Kitson in The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/ ... ying-rules

"Premiership Rugby pointed out that the salary cap was introduced 20 years ago – by agreement of the clubs – to try to maintain clubs’ financial sustainability in a professionalised sport with inevitably escalating players’ wages and to keep the league competitive between the richer and less well off.

The regulations clearly plan for the possibility that players might not receive all their money in a monthly standing order with PAYE deducted. “Salary” is defined very widely as “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”.

Three points in The Times today that I’m not sure have been mentioned on here:

1) Prem clubs have discussed not fulfilling fixtures against Sarries if they don’t drop the appeal/review
2) Discussion to setup a new league without Sarries
3) Clubs would like Sarries to be forced to get under the cap this season by trimming their squad.

No comment on sources etc. 1 & 2 seem a bit extreme but may just be an initial reaction and/or pressure on Sarries to take their medicine. That said, I can’t imagine Sarries taking this lying down and I can see this hitting the courts. Hope I’m wrong.

Its not far off a disaster for English rugby if they get kicked out the prem, and then almost certainly fold. What a mess.

..mind McCall might need a job soon....

Not turning up to the EPCR launch is just petulant.

I feel most sorry for their fans, to be honest. But this mess extends well beyond Barnet Coptall and St Albans.

They are not helping themselves.

Does anyone actually care about the launches? Though it's daft and hard to see what Sarries gain from their stance on this.

I'm not surprised by the possible stance being mooted by other AP clubs, though that's another bunch of legal minefields to venture into

If this is an accurate quote it’s quite a bold statement from Baxter, who is known for being incredibly diplomatic and level-headed.

“If you're asking me would I like to walk into Sandy Park and see three Premiership trophies there, I would love to," Baxter said, at this season's Champions Cup launch in Cardiff.

"In reality do I see that happening? No. There are too many other factors that come into play.

"I believe the way we played in the final last year would have beaten any other team in the Premiership."

I'm not sensing a great deal of love, or even sympathy, for Saracens from the rest of the Premiership.

Even that very nice Mr Robshaw is wading in , https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/ ... um=twitter

I really cannot understand why any other clubs would be sympathetic towards them (apart from any other clubs who have been breaking the cap and getting away with it). They've been cheated consistently by Saracens rule breaking and robbed of silverware, play offs, etc

Banquo wrote:Its not far off a disaster for English rugby if they get kicked out the prem, and then almost certainly fold. What a mess.

Is it really a disaster for English Rugby if Saracens go to the wall, Banquo? Surely the cap was intended to level the playing field (Pardon the pun) between the wealthy and the not so wealthy clubs. By flouting it - and they have - Sarries have made the Premiership and the Champions Cup less competitive (They are not alone in having done the latter, but this doesn't make them any less culpable). If their talents must depart for other clubs, particularly the youngsters that made up the England WC squad, then surely this will make the Premiership more competitive and therefore more entertaining - and as a consequence can only be a positive good for English rugby.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:

Banquo wrote:Its not far off a disaster for English rugby if they get kicked out the prem, and then almost certainly fold. What a mess.

Is it really a disaster for English Rugby if Saracens go to the wall, Banquo? Surely the cap was intended to level the playing field (Pardon the pun) between the wealthy and the not so wealthy clubs. By flouting it - and they have - Sarries have made the Premiership and the Champions Cup less competitive (They are not alone in having done the latter, but this doesn't make them any less culpable). If their talents must depart for other clubs, particularly the youngsters that made up the England WC squad, then surely this will make the Premiership more competitive and therefore more entertaining - and as a consequence can only be a positive good for English rugby.

I said 'not far off', but short to mid term yes. Their academy is producing a lot of goods, and their team and its success house the core of the England team and expose them to a higher quality of (winning) rugby in Europe. If competitive = more mediocre sides in with a chance, then that's not great.

Tangentially, the salary cap may have levelled ish the field in England, but likely made it harder for some sides to compete in Europe when combined with the attritional nature of AP rugby and sheer weight of fixtures.

Adam_P wrote:I really cannot understand why any other clubs would be sympathetic towards them (apart from any other clubs who have been breaking the cap and getting away with it). They've been cheated consistently by Saracens rule breaking and robbed of silverware, play offs, etc

I reckon the differing reactions are quite illuminating....

What they're doing to the Champions Cup isn't especially relevant imo unless the European models want to bring in rules around salary levels. Also does anyone do well in Europe without spending a decent amount of moola? The last decade has wins for Sarries, Toulouse, Toulon and Leinster, and they all spend a fortune

Digby wrote:What they're doing to the Champions Cup isn't especially relevant imo unless the European models want to bring in rules around salary levels. Also does anyone do well in Europe without spending a decent amount of moola? The last decade has wins for Sarries, Toulouse, Toulon and Leinster, and they all spend a fortune

I think that level of competition is important for our international guys though, and (finding ways of) winning doubly so.

Banquo wrote: I said 'not far off', but short to mid term yes. Their academy is producing a lot of goods, and their team and its success house the core of the England team and expose them to a higher quality of (winning) rugby in Europe. If competitive = more mediocre sides in with a chance, then that's not great.

Tangentially, the salary cap may have levelled ish the field in England, but likely made it harder for some sides to compete in Europe when combined with the attritional nature of AP rugby and sheer weight of fixtures.

I still don't get how any of this makes up for the huge disadvantage that Saracen's financial doping has imposed upon the other clubs in the Premiership. I get that their academy is producing some real quality, but does that justify their cheating and putting everyone else out of contention? For all that you suggest Leinster are buckets of cash, they have hardly enjoyed the domestic monopoly that Saracens have enjoyed. Scarlets, Glasgow and especially Connacht have all been able to make a good fist of winning the Pro14 in the last few years. How might Exeter and their fans feel if there was not the grinding annual inevitability of Saracens winning yet another grand final?

Competitive does not = mediocrity.

What are the stipulations on naming a squad for Europe? Which is to say how much scope is there for Sarries naming a Europe only squad?

Edit - Or perhaps more realistically naming 5-6 players who'd be Europe only, the likes of an Elsom or Thorn who would play a reduced number of games. It'd probably need a rather different calendar, but you never know

Digby wrote:What are the stipulations on naming a squad for Europe? Which is to say how much scope is there for Sarries naming a Europe only squad?

Edit - Or perhaps more realistically naming 5-6 players who'd be Europe only, the likes of an Elsom or Thorn who would play a reduced number of games. It'd probably need a rather different calendar, but you never know

This was mentioned on the Eggchasers podcast. Would be interesting if Sarries could pay a few players specifically for their European contribution (and maybe a smaller "Premiership" salary to pay a restricted number of games).

Assuming this would include Billy, Mako, Maro, etc I could see this being hugely beneficial for England in terms of their availability and longevity.