nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Saracens Salarygate: Automatic Relegation?

thomond2006

It's probably worth its own thread by now.

RugbyPass reporting that Saracens could be set for automatic relegation after failing to reduce their salaries in time.

https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/saracens-stand-on-brink-of-automatic-relegation-as-nightmare-season-set-to-continue/?__twitter_impression=true

Now this is Rugbypass who are quite clickbaity so let's see if more media run with this.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

molloyjh

Former Former wrote: »

They were different

Different offences with different contexts. I dont see how anyone can have any issue with this judgement. It makes perfect sense, ither than maybe the suspension of half the fine. Not sure what the reasoning behind that is.

stephen_n

molloyjh wrote: »

Different offences with different contexts. I dont see how anyone can have any issue with this judgement. It makes perfect sense, ither than maybe the suspension of half the fine. Not sure what the reasoning behind that is.

Good behavior and a nice suit

pickarooney

The whole area of work permits is a load of old ****e and a bane on the game. Anyone profiting from a team's admin error, especially if they make a legal case of it, is acting the bollocks and should feel bad.

There's no honour in that.

irishbucsfan

Former Former wrote: »

It's a fair outcome.

Absolutely. People losing the run of themselves here because It’s Sarries.

Eod100

Racing not happy at all but seem to be leaving it at a snarky press release. https://twitter.com/racing92/status/1226184169086234625?s=19

prawnsambo

The above in English. Shots (or perhaps salvoes) fired.

BBDBB

And they are spot on, it’s a bloody farce

molloyjh

BBDBB wrote: »

And they are spot on, it’s a bloody farce

It really isnt.

pickarooney

Shoestring Lorenzetti with his team of brave local boys cobbled together on a 30 million euro a year budget, your heart would bleed for the injustice.

prawnsambo

pickarooney wrote: »

Shoestring Lorenzetti with his team of brave local boys cobbled together on a 30 million euro a year budget, your heart would bleed for the injustice.

Well, to be fair, it's not as though he's dealing with the paupers of English club rugby.

[Deleted User]

I think the punishment handed down was fair enough in this case. For once I don't think there was any intent to cheat. The guy was in their Euro squad and he was eligible at the time they named their squad, but his permit elapsed between then and the game. It's not exactly crime of the century stuff.

Rigor Mortis

Interested Observer wrote: »

I think the punishment handed down was fair enough in this case. For once I don't think there was any intent to cheat. The guy was in their Euro squad and he was eligible at the time they named their squad, but his permit elapsed between then and the game. It's not exactly crime of the century stuff.

In relation to this particular rule breach, do you think there is ever an intention to cheat. Given the sanctions, it is always going to be accidental.

However, the question is, what is the precedent? The answer is to deduct points. The sole reason for this decision is impact on fans and broadcasters who have already made commitments.

What was noticeable on the Sarries forum in advance of the ruling was that no one thought that this was a witch hunt. They were, to a man, accepting that they would be kicked out for a stupid mistake.

I take the point that the proper penalty would have been tough, but not that it was the wrong one.

prawnsambo

Rigor Mortis wrote: »

In relation to this particular rule breach, do you think there is ever an intention to cheat. Given the sanctions, it is always going to be accidental.

However, the question is, what is the precedent? The answer is to deduct points. The sole reason for this decision is impact on fans and broadcasters who have already made commitments.

What was noticeable on the Sarries forum in advance of the ruling was that no one thought that this was a witch hunt. They were, to a man, accepting that they would be kicked out for a stupid mistake.

I take the point that the proper penalty would have been tough, but not that it was the wrong one.

There's also the sneaking suspicion that they knew if they left it long enough, it would make it harder for EPCR to deduct points for the reasons you cite. I know that's a very conspiratorial viewpoint, but that's the problem when you're dealing with serial cheats.

damianmcr

Allianz scraps Saracens sponsorship

molloyjh

damianmcr wrote: »

Allianz scraps Saracens sponsorship

Just read that there. Dropping them entirely a year early. Although it's still not official. That's another massive, albeit expected, blow. Having to find another sponsor at this late stage with the tarnished reputation will see them lose a massive amount of revenue. Can Wray really keep this operation afloat having already sunk tens of millions into it?

Squidgy Black

According to The Thistle Rugby podcast Sarries reached out to the SRU to see if they wanted to take over contracts for Scottish players, £550k for Maitland and £350 for Duncan Taylor.

No idea how reliable of a source they are though.

Bridge93

350k for Duncan Taylor is an astounding amount of money. If that’s what they were paying average players they deserve to go bust. Maitland not worth close to 550k either

Squidgy Black

Bridge93 wrote: »

350k for Duncan Taylor is an astounding amount of money. If that’s what they were paying average players they deserve to go bust. Maitland not worth close to 550k either

I'd say it's probably a contract buyout for two years of remaining contracts, so 175k a year for Taylor and 275k for Maitland. Or at least that's the only logical explanation for those sums I can think of

Buer

I'd argue that £350k for Taylor isn't as bad as £550k for Maitland (if true). Maitland is a mercenary who has jumped around and is at his 4th team. He's an extremely solid, reliable player without being spectacular. A high end Dave Kearney.

prawnsambo

Squidgy Black wrote: »

I'd say it's probably a contract buyout for two years of remaining contracts, so 175k a year for Taylor and 275k for Maitland. Or at least that's the only logical explanation for those sums I can think of

Anything I can find online for Sean Maitland says he signed a contract extension in May 2017 with Saracens until 2020. However RugbyPass looked at some of the Saracens players back in November and said that Maitland was likely to sign another contract extension at that time.

Taylor (according to the Saracens website) signed a contract extension in May 2018 to keep him at the club until 2021. I'd assume that's to the end of 2020/21 season.

RobbieRuns

The RFU have slashed funding for the English Championship next year. The good news keeps on coming for Saracens.

Going to be hard for other clubs in that league. Think they go from £500k per club down to £288k. Not going to kill Sarries or anything, but every little helps.

Shefwedfan

RobbieRuns wrote: »

The RFU have slashed funding for the English Championship next year. The good news keeps on coming for Saracens.

Going to be hard for other clubs in that league. Think they go from £500k per club down to £288k. Not going to kill Sarries or anything, but every little helps.

Its the start of the end for the Championship. The Premiership team will soon cut if off and have no relegation

irishbucsfan

It’s the ring fencing PRL wanted. No way a Championship club could ever afford promotion or pass the tests required now unless they had an external benefactor

Quin_Dub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Its the start of the end for the Championship. The Premiership team will soon cut if off and have no relegation

Yep..

Saracens and Wray have no friends in the rest of PRL

Apply the full premiership rules , thereby keeping Saracens down in Championship for minimum of 2 years , which then loses them their seat and votes in PRL.

Once they are out of the way , vote for ring-fencing and that's that.

Shefwedfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It’s the ring fencing PRL wanted. No way a Championship club could ever afford promotion or pass the tests required now unless they had an external benefactor

The championship team will end up een the reserve team for Premiership teams. Just use their salary cap......

Podge_irl

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Yep..

Saracens and Wray have no friends in the rest of PRL

Apply the full premiership rules , thereby keeping Saracens down in Championship for minimum of 2 years , which then loses them their seat and votes in PRL.

Once they are out of the way , vote for ring-fencing and that's that.

PRL have already said that the salary cap rules mean Sarries can come straight back up.

jacothelad

Isn't there a pretty good parachute payment for the relegated team. Will Saracens be eligible.

Dave_The_Sheep

Podge_irl wrote: »

PRL have already said that the salary cap rules mean Sarries can come straight back up.

Must've missed that one.

Pity, it'd have been nice to see them stuck down there for two years.

Squidgy Black

Podge_irl wrote: »

PRL have already said that the salary cap rules mean Sarries can come straight back up.

Have they? I couldn't find any source on it, the only thing I saw was a tweet from someone saying people were misunderstanding the wording of regulation but no official statement saying they would be eligible for promotion at the end of next season

Podge_irl

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Have they? I couldn't find any source on it, the only thing I saw was a tweet from someone saying people were misunderstanding the wording of regulation but no official statement saying they would be eligible for promotion at the end of next season

I can't remember where I saw it so perhaps I am misremembering, but I recall reading something that either stated or suggested they had said that all that was required was for them to be under the cap for their year in the championship and show that they would be under it when in the premiership.