RugbyRebels

Anyone think sarries should be punted from the hec cup.

Cheating bastards.

I know the same rules do not apply but allowing them to continue is a fuck you to all clubs who lost out due to their cheating


And the piss poor TMO/Nigel combo of the last 10 mins of the game on Sunday

Present a viable alternative on what happens to the points lost or gained against sarries in the HC group stages and how that impacts progression and final standings and come back to us on your "punted from the cup" idea.

I don't think it should happen as the cap doesn't apply but if they were kicked out I don't think it would be that outrageous to just let in the next best second place team.

I think that makes more sense than awarding all their games 28-0 to the opposition (thereby letting Munster through) but, if a team was kicked out, I could see an argument for that approach.

I don't think either approach would be unworkable but agree that for future they should have a rule in place if they don't already as there are all sorts of, albeit unlikely, scenarios that could lead to a team being kicked out (e.g. playing ineligible players or simply going bust mid season).

Sarries are safely over the English league cap, but what if they're under the French cap? Not that I think what they've done has much bearing on Europe, but if Europe wants a standard what should it be and can/should it apply unequally?

No. English domestic matter. If it were related to steroids or something, it would be different, but it isn’t.

I think they should get automatic qualification if they win it, too. Just as the Cheetahs should be permitted to represent the PRO14 if they qualify. Neither will happen though.

I don’t see how it can be said what they’ve done doesn’t affect Europe.

There are other GP teams playing in Europe. Those who can’t afford a squad to compete on both fronts because of the cap, because they’re chasing Sarries in the GP, because Sarries were somehow able to afford to buy some of their best players despite having a far more valuable squad already.

These teams are affected by that when they go in to European games, win or lose. How could anyone claim this doesn’t affect games outside of those involving Saracens?

Whoops. Not sure why I’m posting that on the Scottish board.

General Zod wrote:No. English domestic matter. If it were related to steroids or something, it would be different, but it isn’t.

I think they should get automatic qualification if they win it, too. Just as the Cheetahs should be permitted to represent the PRO14 if they qualify. Neither will happen though.

They cannot qualify if relegated, you have to be in the Premiership to be eligible (or Pro14 or Top 14)

Digby wrote:

General Zod wrote:No. English domestic matter. If it were related to steroids or something, it would be different, but it isn’t.

I think they should get automatic qualification if they win it, too. Just as the Cheetahs should be permitted to represent the PRO14 if they qualify. Neither will happen though.

They cannot qualify if relegated, you have to be in the Premiership to be eligible (or Pro14 or Top 14)

Even if you win it
Thats mental

Digby wrote:Sarries are safely over the English league cap, but what if they're under the French cap? Not that I think what they've done has much bearing on Europe, but if Europe wants a standard what should it be and can/should it apply unequally?

Here here - if EPRC want a salary cap in place for EPCR squads - then let them put one in place.
Currently, they don't, so I see no legal or ethical way for them to do anything about it currently.

whatisthejava wrote:Even if you win it
Thats mental

You could have called it mental when it was a competition formed by the unions, who then dictated who get to play. Since it all changed, and is now a competition formed by the 3 leagues, and the leagues get to decide, then it's not exactly mental that a team who doesn't represent any of those leagues can't play.

Now, you could argue that changing it from unions to leagues was mental - and I'd agree... strongly... but it is what it is.

Digby wrote:

General Zod wrote: I think they should get automatic qualification if they win it, too. Just as the Cheetahs should be permitted to represent the PRO14 if they qualify. Neither will happen though.

They cannot qualify if relegated, you have to be in the Premiership to be eligible (or Pro14 or Top 14)

I know. Hence “neither will happen though”. There are rules against Cheetahs or Kings qualifying too, which is a shame. Although it keeps the global footprint down.

General Zod wrote:

Digby wrote:

General Zod wrote: I think they should get automatic qualification if they win it, too. Just as the Cheetahs should be permitted to represent the PRO14 if they qualify. Neither will happen though.

They cannot qualify if relegated, you have to be in the Premiership to be eligible (or Pro14 or Top 14)

I know. Hence “neither will happen though”. There are rules against Cheetahs or Kings qualifying too, which is a shame. Although it keeps the global footprint down.

I did consider you might know but figured someone might not so make the addition anyway. I am btw surprised at the lack of suggestions Sarries should join a Pro15 to avoid relegation and continue in the European Cup, pleasantly surprised, but still surprised

Digby wrote:

General Zod wrote:

Digby wrote:
They cannot qualify if relegated, you have to be in the Premiership to be eligible (or Pro14 or Top 14)

I know. Hence “neither will happen though”. There are rules against Cheetahs or Kings qualifying too, which is a shame. Although it keeps the global footprint down.

I did consider you might know but figured someone might not so make the addition anyway. I am btw surprised at the lack of suggestions Sarries should join a Pro15 to avoid relegation and continue in the European Cup, pleasantly surprised, but still surprised

Am in a bad mood this morning. 2 hours staring out the fucking window in a meeting at work wondering if it is worth jumping off the roof to see if there is more than this.

Anyway, I have texted my SARU contact (get me) and the 2 pro14 teams may be able to qualify, but only as a result of the 2020/21 season onwards. So if Glasgow finish 4th behind the cheetahs this season, they’re in Europe anyway.

Sky reckon they have seen the report. Some players don’t come out well.

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how ... s-11915269

Wonder if the taxman will be wanting a word with Itoje.

General Zod wrote:Sky reckon they have seen the report. Some players don’t come out well.

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how ... s-11915269

Wonder if the taxman will be wanting a word with Itoje.

I think the players come out ok to be honest. There is nothing to suggest they or their own companies are acting illegally regarding any payments. Regarding the corporate stuff sure it clearly dodges the salary cap and they have been pulled up for it but not sure that reflects all that badly on the player tbh.

The report basically calls out PWC for over valuing Itojes image rights is notable.

Big D wrote:

General Zod wrote:Sky reckon they have seen the report. Some players don’t come out well.

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how ... s-11915269

Wonder if the taxman will be wanting a word with Itoje.

I think the players come out ok to be honest. There is nothing to suggest they or their own companies are acting illegally regarding any payments. Regarding the corporate stuff sure it clearly dodges the salary cap and they have been pulled up for it but not sure that reflects all that badly on the player tbh.

The report basically calls out PWC for over valuing Itojes image rights is notable.

What could the taxman do? If there's no commercial benefit to the payments you could try to void transactions as being company transactions, but whilst you might be able to do that if the shareholders wouldn't approve director transactions I suspect in this case the shareholders would approve.

Digby wrote:

Big D wrote:

General Zod wrote:Sky reckon they have seen the report. Some players don’t come out well.

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how ... s-11915269

Wonder if the taxman will be wanting a word with Itoje.

I think the players come out ok to be honest. There is nothing to suggest they or their own companies are acting illegally regarding any payments. Regarding the corporate stuff sure it clearly dodges the salary cap and they have been pulled up for it but not sure that reflects all that badly on the player tbh.

The report basically calls out PWC for over valuing Itojes image rights is notable.

What could the taxman do? If there's no commercial benefit to the payments you could try to void transactions as being company transactions, but whilst you might be able to do that if the shareholders wouldn't approve director transactions I suspect in this case the shareholders would approve.

It was more around the possibility of the (non) appearance fees having the characteristics of wages, but not having been declared and taxed/NIC’d as such.

However, they’re not opening the books, so we are unlikely to find out. It means saracens and the individuals involved leave themselves open to speculation from Internet gobshites like me.

General Zod wrote:

Digby wrote:

Big D wrote:
I think the players come out ok to be honest. There is nothing to suggest they or their own companies are acting illegally regarding any payments. Regarding the corporate stuff sure it clearly dodges the salary cap and they have been pulled up for it but not sure that reflects all that badly on the player tbh.

The report basically calls out PWC for over valuing Itojes image rights is notable.

What could the taxman do? If there's no commercial benefit to the payments you could try to void transactions as being company transactions, but whilst you might be able to do that if the shareholders wouldn't approve director transactions I suspect in this case the shareholders would approve.

It was more around the possibility of the (non) appearance fees having the characteristics of wages, but not having been declared and taxed/NIC’d as such.

However, they’re not opening the books, so we are unlikely to find out. It means saracens and the individuals involved leave themselves open to speculation from Internet gobshites like me.

That's assuming the payments are directly to Itoje. They could be to a company set up for his image rights etc. It would be extremely lax of the players and their own "teams" if they didn't have accountants working on their behalf to stay on the right side of the law.

That’s kinda what I’m saying. As in a payment to a limited company which is, in reality, something that should be taxed as salary.

Just because some lawyer/ accountant says it one thing, doesn’t mean another set of accountants/ lawyers will agree. See the now defunct Rangers football club for a similar story (am aware EBTs and all that are different - am just saying that professionals will get it wrong from time to time, particularly if daft enough to be seduced by the glamour of association with high profile clients).

Anyway, we don’t know anything really.

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

Not buying some of it, but the parts about CA's house and the MI image rights parts seem harsh to me.

If he is in the habbit of going halters for houses with people who aren't Saracens players on an interest free basis then it would be fair enough. I might get in touch with him actually

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

Not buying some of it, but the parts about CA's house and the MI image rights parts seem harsh to me.

It's probably worth noting that the papers today are reporting Itoje is not in the top 10 highest paid locks in the Premiership, a contract coincidentally signed at the same time that his inage rights apparently spiralled up to be worth £1.6m. So he's somehow not one of the biggest assets in the Prem at the same time as the Sarries directors wanting to pay loads of money for his image rights.

Puja