Recent Salary cap stories...

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Craig in talks with Pro12 if AP don't stop clubs making statements according to Moore.

If true he can fuk off.

 

[ncurd]

I think it's more to do with Craig's involvement in the European Cup or trying to bring about a Europe Super League where Bath still exists (because most people plans mean it won't). He's probably using the statement as leverage.

Plus conspiracy buts love this kind of stuff.

Don't know what would do if Bath broke away over this though. I support them because they are part of the English league if they weren't I'd struggle to find a reason to continue to just because I always have.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Craig in talks with Pro12 if AP don't stop clubs making statements according to Moore.

If true he can fuk off.

Too right... he can do one.

Hope this situation provides the impetus needed for the RFU to step in and take formal control of domestic rugby.

Buying Gloucester would be a good start.

<iframe id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" style="position: static; visibility: visible; display: block; width: 100%; height: 294.75px; padding: 0px; border: none; max-width: 500px; min-width: 220px; margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" data-tweet-id="659347251723157505" ***le="Twitter Tweet"></iframe>
<script async="" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Interesting to see Foy and Smith seeming to acknowledge the rumour.

And said Smith article: http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/newcastle-falcons-guilty-anyone-premierships-10346778<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;"></iframe>

 

[ncurd]

Craig in talks with Pro12 if AP don't stop clubs making statements according to Moore.

If true he can fuk off.

Just wanted to point out Moore has deleted the tweet saying "Brian Moore Retweeted
I am deleting this as it turns out to be unfounded & why it was heavily caveated; other comments not so guarded. "

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Just wanted to point out Moore has deleted the tweet saying "Brian Moore Retweeted
I am deleting this as it turns out to be unfounded & why it was heavily caveated; other comments not so guarded. "

Shame I want him and Bath gone.

Smelly team.

 

[j'nuh]

Stephen Vaughan and Ryan Walkinshaw have announced Gloucester will release a statement sometime this week.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Hey <a href="https://twitter.com/gloucesterrugby">@gloucesterrugby</a> we hear you and will be obviously making a statement, just want to make sure we do it in right way, hence the delay!</p>&mdash; Ryan (@RyanWalkinshaw) <a href="https://twitter.com/RyanWalkinshaw/status/659423947293872132">October 28, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Besides I have hardly been shy in the past to express my views in support of salary cap and have fought hard last 9 months in support!</p>&mdash; Ryan (@RyanWalkinshaw) <a href="https://twitter.com/RyanWalkinshaw/status/659424479895007233">October 28, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We fully understand <a href="https://twitter.com/gloucesterrugby">@gloucesterrugby</a> fans concerns re media speculation around salary cap. Club update to follow this week.</p>&mdash; Stephen Vaughan (@StevieV1874) <a href="https://twitter.com/StevieV1874/status/659418515192041472">October 28, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Hope this situation provides the impetus needed for the RFU to step in and take formal control of domestic rugby.

Buying Gloucester would be a good start.

I think buying up clubs would be a bad move. There are various reasons, but the biggest would be that you don't want the RFU to be financially linked to the clubs. If a club tanks then it will put tremendous pressure on the RFU. I prefer someone else taking on this financial risk. Also, Gloucester's value, as I understand, is partly because of the scope for development on various pieces of land owned by the club, and I'm not sure that the RFU have the expertise to fully realise this.

If we are to set up a franchise system, then I'd like independent franchises and clubs overseen by a watchdog, where the RFU's financial link is merely to dual contract internationals (and a lot of them... I'm thinking around 50).

 

[ratsapprentice]

If we are to set up a franchise system, then I'd like independent franchises and clubs overseen by a watchdog, where the RFU's financial link is merely to dual contract internationals (and a lot of them... I'm thinking around 50).

Same difference as clubs then....<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;"></iframe>

 

[Mattybuck]

I'm surprised that anyone ever thought that no team had broken the cap.

The same scams were used at the end of the amateur era as players were in paid employees of sponsors or had houses bought.

Plenty of clubs were up to that and it was ignored.

Now you have multi-millionaire owners who will have ensured that any payments above the cap were hidden or paid in a round about fashion.

AP probably could have looked at points deduction etc but that would have got messy and ultimately been even more damaging.

Personally I don't care if the cap has been breached. As long as the owners are covering the club's commitments.

Bruce Craig has turned Bath around and on top of that wants to build and impressive new stadium at the rec.

If people had their way they'd drive the likes of him out of the game.

It may have been wrong to breach the cap, but it's time to move on I think.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

No one has explicitly breeched the cap!!!

If they had they wouldn't have needed a settlement.

They settled because neither party could prove their case 100% so what the clubs did (or sponsors for that matter) was not explicitly outside the rules.

I'm all for the cap but you have to expect the above when they don't audit things deeply enough.

 

[ratsapprentice]

********.

The idea that there are "grey areas" is absolute rubbish - the agreement on the cap makes this practically impossible.

 

[j'nuh]

Same difference as clubs then....<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;"></iframe>

The RFU will decide who gets the franchises and will be involved in the decision making of the Euro league in some capacity, as opposed to having effectively no control over the Premiership.

And the watchdog part of my vision is rather more important IMO. Rather than the RFU/Premiership Rugby enforcing the rules, an independent body should. It removes the temptation of complicity e.g. Premiership Rugby may worry about the effect that enforcing the salary cap might have on corporate sponsors, whereas the watchdog will not have the same concerns. The watchdog itself will have full control over its own hiring and day-to-day running so that neither the RFU nor the Premiership can control it.

 

[ratsapprentice]

The more independent parts you have in the system the more scope there is for a clash of interests.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I'm surprised that anyone ever thought that no team had broken the cap.

The same scams were used at the end of the amateur era as players were in paid employees of sponsors or had houses bought.

Plenty of clubs were up to that and it was ignored.

Now you have multi-millionaire owners who will have ensured that any payments above the cap were hidden or paid in a round about fashion.

AP probably could have looked at points deduction etc but that would have got messy and ultimately been even more damaging.

Personally I don't care if the cap has been breached. As long as the owners are covering the club's commitments.

Bruce Craig has turned Bath around and on top of that wants to build and impressive new stadium at the rec.

If people had their way they'd drive the likes of him out of the game.

It may have been wrong to breach the cap, but it's time to move on I think.

I hate this attitude from bath and sarries fans.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I hate this attitude from bath and sarries fans.

Almost as toxic as the Tigers forum.

 

[j'nuh]

I hate this attitude from bath and sarries fans.

Word. The time to move on is when justice has happened - a points deduction, a ***le removal and a fine. And tbh, compensation for fans that have been deceived into paying for a product that isn't as advertised.

If I were a Bath/Sarries fan, I'd be even more angry than I am now, bringing such disrepute onto the club.

The more independent parts you have in the system the more scope there is for a clash of interests.

Whereas creating a behemoth out of the RFU which controls everything rugby-related, from grassroots, to clubs, franchises and international team, means there are absolutely no bodies left to challenge the RFU. Imagine a Sepp Blatter-like figure in control of the entirety of English rugby. A clash of interests isn't always so bad, as it keeps both parties more honest than they otherwise would be.

The watchdog would have nothing to do other than enforce the rules at club and franchise level. There is no conceivable way it would have a clash of interests with anyone, because the only interest it has is in enforcing rules.

 

[Mattybuck]

I'm not condoning it, sticking up for Bath or trying to justify what has happened.

But, the justice people seek is not going to happen. Too much money, too much at stake.

It's just an unpleasant fact of modern sport.

Take away the investment and the standards will drop!

I just think that people need to move past this now.

 

[j'nuh]

Ignoring it is condoning it and if it goes unpunished, it'll just happen again. The worrying thing isn't that cheating has happened. I feel it's a line that will have to have been crossed at some point. It's the limp approach by the Premiership in dealing with it, showing complicity. Who actually has confidence in the Premiership to deal with future salary cap matters, or any other matter? Also, Craig and his ilk are trying hard to remove the cap and make the Premiership uncompetitive, and they appear to be succeeding. The Premiership's reaction to teams cheating the cap appears to be raising the cap. We can't have a league that relaxes the rules to appease rule-breakers.

It's great that he's investing so heavily in Bath, and Bath fans must be chuffed. But for the rest of us, he's a plague to competitive rugby.

 

[ncurd]

Let's be absolutely clear here we don't know how the teams breached the cap here and might be and probably is a legal loophole they found.

If you thousands possibly even million of pounds on legal cases and they are adjudged to have not broken the rules as written it could cost the RFU a fair whack. And be extremely public with months of headlines more than just us rugby fans are paying attention tom

Added on top of that with all these calls of fines, points deductionso or ***le removals. Again you need to be sure they breached rules as set out.


Anyone who follows F1 will tell you there's a massive gulf usually between the rules as intended and rules in reality. I'd rather in the end not see rugby become a laughing stock dragged through the courts. I would like to know who was investigated but don't expect anything to come from it.

 

[Raggs]

Let's be absolutely clear here we don't know how the teams breached the cap here and might be and probably is a legal loophole they found.

If you thousands possibly even million of pounds on legal cases and they are adjudged to have not broken the rules as written it could cost the RFU a fair whack. And be extremely public with months of headlines more than just us rugby fans are paying attention tom

Added on top of that with all these calls of fines, points deductionso or ***le removals. Again you need to be sure they breached rules as set out.


Anyone who follows F1 will tell you there's a massive gulf usually between the rules as intended and rules in reality. I'd rather in the end not see rugby become a laughing stock dragged through the courts. I would like to know who was investigated but don't expect anything to come from it.

The cap wording was actually pretty clear that any payment made to the player, from the club or 3rd party, that was made on the basis he played for the club, should be included. This also includes payments made to family etc. Further to that, it explicitly stated that any loopholes should be reported, and not exploited.

The fact that there are settlements being made, clearly means that there were breaches going on, but for one reason or another (I suspect lawyers) calling it what it is, a fine, has not been allowed.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I'm not condoning it, sticking up for Bath or trying to justify what has happened.

Oh okay just thought you were.

Almost as toxic as the Tigers forum.

Aye that is true.

They were right about Lancaster though.