RugbyRebels

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote: Yep understand that, but HOW will the relegation be implemented?

Dunno.
Personally, I'd simple expunge any league points won by Saracen's for the year (assuming that awarding a 28-0 victory, and a rest weekend to their opponent isn't palatable)

Oakboy wrote:Was it not Saracens choice to be relegated rather than submit to a full audit? Their decision in that respect overrules the machinery of the disciplinary process perhaps?

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Was it not Saracens choice to be relegated rather than submit to a full audit? Their decision in that respect overrules the machinery of the disciplinary process perhaps?

That’s not the point- I’m asking how prl will implement it.

fivepointer wrote:Would be good if PRL set out exactly on what basis Saracens are being relegated.

Tigersince74 wrote: "15 Promoted Club

15.1 A Promoted Club shall, within 28 days of receiving confirmation of promotion to the Gallagher Premiership from PRL, comply with the requirements of Regulation 4.4 by providing to the Salary Cap Manager the documents listed in Regulation 4.4.

15.2 A Promoted Club shall provide copies of its Declaration for the 2018-19 Salary Cap Year and its Certification for the 2017-18 Salary Cap Year as required under Regulations 4.2 and 4.3."

Spot the error the dates were not changed from one year to the next! It should read for the end of this season the promoted club provides copies of its declaration of complying with the salary cap 19/20 and certification of the previous year 18/19.

The new regs for next season 20/21 are usually published in February so not long to wait. It is normally compliance in the promotion year and the previous year

If Saracens finish top 20/21 they will need to be compliant in the successful Championship season and the previous year 19/20 which they failed and elected to be relegated.

Compliance with the Salary Cap regulations is part of the Professional Game Board Minimum Standards Criteria. Good luck finding these since London Welsh took them on

jimKRFC wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Would be good if PRL set out exactly on what basis Saracens are being relegated.

I thought that Sarries had chosen to be relegated. Sarries gave assuranaces they would be under the cap for this season, then they say we can't get under the cap, PRL say "ok, allow us to do to a forensic audit (& give up titles) or be relegated". Sarries agree to relegation because an audit would be finicially stressful (or whatever bollocks it was they came out with) thus agreeing to the financial hard ship and stress that the Championship brings.

So the basis is they chose it & it should be two years.

A poster, Tigersince74 on the sportsnetwork site posted this after they got hold of the 19/20 regs:

Tigersince74 wrote: "15 Promoted Club

15.1 A Promoted Club shall, within 28 days of receiving confirmation of promotion to the Gallagher Premiership from PRL, comply with the requirements of Regulation 4.4 by providing to the Salary Cap Manager the documents listed in Regulation 4.4.

15.2 A Promoted Club shall provide copies of its Declaration for the 2018-19 Salary Cap Year and its Certification for the 2017-18 Salary Cap Year as required under Regulations 4.2 and 4.3."

Spot the error the dates were not changed from one year to the next! It should read for the end of this season the promoted club provides copies of its declaration of complying with the salary cap 19/20 and certification of the previous year 18/19.

The new regs for next season 20/21 are usually published in February so not long to wait. It is normally compliance in the promotion year and the previous year

If Saracens finish top 20/21 they will need to be compliant in the successful Championship season and the previous year 19/20 which they failed and elected to be relegated.

Compliance with the Salary Cap regulations is part of the Professional Game Board Minimum Standards Criteria. Good luck finding these since London Welsh took them on

Tom Moore wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Big D wrote:One of you guys that read the report is what Wray says correct that the salary cap manager can determine Itoje's image rights value (via their accountant) for the sake of the salary cap despite the club using another accountants?

https://www.saracens.com/club-statement ... igel-wray/

Basically, yes! As long as he can show his working and that he acted reasonably and in accordance with the regulations.

Similar to a judicial review, you don't empirically prove you're correct, just that your decision was reasonable. I was not impressed with the "arguments" Saracens barrister made, basically quoting a text book with no supporting statements or further info.

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Was it not Saracens choice to be relegated rather than submit to a full audit? Their decision in that respect overrules the machinery of the disciplinary process perhaps?

That’s not the point- I’m asking how prl will implement it.

It appears just by allowing the season to proceed as normal and Saracens to reach wherever they can in the table, but with the proviso that they cannot qualify for Europe or playoffs and, if they finish in those positions, the qualification goes to the team below. Doesn't appear as though they're going to force Saracens to finish bottom with points deductions; they're just going to relegate them wherever they finish.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote: I think 5p’s point is that PRL’s own rules state that straight relegation, ie not due to a points deduction, and rescinding of title(s) are not prescribed punishments for a salary cap breach.

jimKRFC wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: I think 5p’s point is that PRL’s own rules state that straight relegation, ie not due to a points deduction, and rescinding of title(s) are not prescribed punishments for a salary cap breach.

I get that, I think that after the warning (let off) for 14/15 (?) and the continued piss taking with the salry cap the other clubs have lost patience with them and Sarries getting the most they can throw at them as deterent.

Personally, I don't really care how they do it. Sarries have behaved a lot worse than London Welsh did, by design (unlike LW), and should face a punishment at lest equal.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote: That’s not the point- I’m asking how prl will implement it.

It appears just by allowing the season to proceed as normal and Saracens to reach wherever they can in the table, but with the proviso that they cannot qualify for Europe or playoffs and, if they finish in those positions, the qualification goes to the team below. Doesn't appear as though they're going to force Saracens to finish bottom with points deductions; they're just going to relegate them wherever they finish.

Puja

That’s kind of what I’d guessed, but I’d it written down anywhere? But will PRL somehow restrict their selection pool?

Digby wrote:

jimKRFC wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: I think 5p’s point is that PRL’s own rules state that straight relegation, ie not due to a points deduction, and rescinding of title(s) are not prescribed punishments for a salary cap breach.

I get that, I think that after the warning (let off) for 14/15 (?) and the continued piss taking with the salry cap the other clubs have lost patience with them and Sarries getting the most they can throw at them as deterent.

Personally, I don't really care how they do it. Sarries have behaved a lot worse than London Welsh did, by design (unlike LW), and should face a punishment at lest equal.

But surely they're not hammering Sarries for not abiding by the rules by not abiding by the rules?

And if they are abiding by the rules why are Sarries mathematically down?

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
It appears just by allowing the season to proceed as normal and Saracens to reach wherever they can in the table, but with the proviso that they cannot qualify for Europe or playoffs and, if they finish in those positions, the qualification goes to the team below. Doesn't appear as though they're going to force Saracens to finish bottom with points deductions; they're just going to relegate them wherever they finish.

Puja

That’s kind of what I’d guessed, but I’d it written down anywhere? But will PRL somehow restrict their selection pool?

It's already written in that clubs not in the Prem next year cannot qualify for the ERC and also that, if a club finishing in the top 6 does not require a league-based ERC spot, then it goes to the 7th placed team. Granted, the latter is more designed to deal with a club in the top 6 having qualified by winning the ERC rather than one not being eligible, but the rules are there to move the qualification spot one down.

Puja

Puja wrote:
Diggers - the relegation will have nothing to do with the table. It has been decided that Saracens will be the relegated team this year by the vote of the shareholders of PRL, so there just won't be a table-based relegated side.

I get that you want things to make sense and follow logical rules, but a) these are rugby authorities we're talking about, give up the dream, and b) they genuinely don't have to as this is a decision accepted by Saracens and not being contested by anyone. Except you, apparently.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

jimKRFC wrote:
I get that, I think that after the warning (let off) for 14/15 (?) and the continued piss taking with the salry cap the other clubs have lost patience with them and Sarries getting the most they can throw at them as deterent.

Personally, I don't really care how they do it. Sarries have behaved a lot worse than London Welsh did, by design (unlike LW), and should face a punishment at lest equal.

But surely they're not hammering Sarries for not abiding by the rules by not abiding by the rules?

And if they are abiding by the rules why are Sarries mathematically down?

Diggers - the relegation will have nothing to do with the table. It has been decided that Saracens will be the relegated team this year by the vote of the shareholders of PRL, so there just won't be a table-based relegated side.

I get that you want things to make sense and follow logical rules, but a) these are rugby authorities we're talking about, give up the dream, and b) they genuinely don't have to as this is a decision accepted by Saracens and not being contested by anyone. Except you, apparently.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote:That’s the point, though. There’s nothing in their own regs/rules/bylaws that allow them to do that. As Diggers says, they’re punishing someone for breaking the rules by breaking the rules.
Demanding they give back titles is definitely not in the rules so how can’t you threaten them with that or relegation, unless you’re just making stuff up as you go along. Which is a dangerous precedent. As for the forensic look at the books. There’s a lot of IP in there. Perhaps that’s the/one of the reason for refusal? Also, who knows if that is allowed under PRL regs.
It’s also interesting that they paid a fortune for a panel of legal big wigs to decide the first breach but have just freelanced on this breach.

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:That’s the point, though. There’s nothing in their own regs/rules/bylaws that allow them to do that. As Diggers says, they’re punishing someone for breaking the rules by breaking the rules.
Demanding they give back titles is definitely not in the rules so how can’t you threaten them with that or relegation, unless you’re just making stuff up as you go along. Which is a dangerous precedent. As for the forensic look at the books. There’s a lot of IP in there. Perhaps that’s the/one of the reason for refusal? Also, who knows if that is allowed under PRL regs.
It’s also interesting that they paid a fortune for a panel of legal big wigs to decide the first breach but have just freelanced on this breach.

I've got to agree here - PRL SEEM to be making it up on the fly, (though I guess they could have enforced the forensic audit - and I still wonder if the RFU will do that bit). I was perfectly happy thinking that the previously-waived 35 point deduction had been added; even in conjunction with another 35 (or whatever) points for the current year - making relegation 100% confirmed; but it SEEMS that they've just decided to relegate, with nothing like that applied.
Equally - I would LIKE to see the Prem titles removed from Sarries - whether or not they're given to Exeter, the record should show that Saracens didn't win them. Also I don't see why there's an upper cap on what the points deduction can be. But if that wasn't in the extant regulations, then it can't be done. Re-write the regulations going forwards; but you can't just apply that retrospectively.

Of course, there may be something in there about "and any other punishment deemed appropriate by a supermajority of PRL stakeholders" which would cover this; but...

Mellsblue wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:That’s the point, though. There’s nothing in their own regs/rules/bylaws that allow them to do that. As Diggers says, they’re punishing someone for breaking the rules by breaking the rules.
Demanding they give back titles is definitely not in the rules so how can’t you threaten them with that or relegation, unless you’re just making stuff up as you go along. Which is a dangerous precedent. As for the forensic look at the books. There’s a lot of IP in there. Perhaps that’s the/one of the reason for refusal? Also, who knows if that is allowed under PRL regs.
It’s also interesting that they paid a fortune for a panel of legal big wigs to decide the first breach but have just freelanced on this breach.

I've got to agree here - PRL SEEM to be making it up on the fly, (though I guess they could have enforced the forensic audit - and I still wonder if the RFU will do that bit). I was perfectly happy thinking that the previously-waived 35 point deduction had been added; even in conjunction with another 35 (or whatever) points for the current year - making relegation 100% confirmed; but it SEEMS that they've just decided to relegate, with nothing like that applied.
Equally - I would LIKE to see the Prem titles removed from Sarries - whether or not they're given to Exeter, the record should show that Saracens didn't win them. Also I don't see why there's an upper cap on what the points deduction can be. But if that wasn't in the extant regulations, then it can't be done. Re-write the regulations going forwards; but you can't just apply that retrospectively.

Of course, there may be something in there about "and any other punishment deemed appropriate by a supermajority of PRL stakeholders" which would cover this; but...

That’s the strange thing. From what’s been reported, they (the other 12 PRL) can get what they want by sticking to the rules. So, why do this? A lot of it seems to be driven by revenge/emotion which I can understand but isn’t the way to deal with this.
If Sarries can keep the core of their squad together, this might actually suit them in the long run. If PRL had deducted another 35 points off next season it would’ve been another season of fighting relegation and having to play in the Challenge Cup. This way they get a nice little mid-career breather and come back even stronger.

Mellsblue wrote:Sarries have just released their team for Quins and I think we’ve got our answer as to what sort of team they’ll be putting out for the rest of the season. Not an England international is sight. I thought they might want to shut up the noisy neighbours but it seems not.