DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 18562--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: harlequins
Date: March 9, 2019, 3:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Saracens, if they are guilty, will just pay off someone and
continue breaching the cap. PRL won’t do anything.
#Post#: 18563--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Bolly-Quin
Date: March 9, 2019, 4:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
They are innocent until proved otherwise.
#Post#: 18573--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Mayor West
Date: March 10, 2019, 3:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Like OJ and MJ.
#Post#: 18574--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Blucherquin
Date: March 10, 2019, 3:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bolly-Quin link ---
>
> They are innocent until proved otherwise.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes however last time they were proven to be cheating it was
swept under the carpet, so if we’re keen to apply the principles
of justice - the other primary one is that it is seen to be
done.
#Post#: 18673--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: DOK
Date: March 10, 2019, 12:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes - if we're going to apply "innocent until proven guilty" can
we have "the guilty will be punished"? I'm not sure how many
people have actually said Saracens are breaking the salary cap
(this time). Are we saying that unless people are already proved
guilty we cannot question their innocence?
As I pointed out, if there were people you'd think Saracens
might have difficulty fitting under the salary cap, then
Farrell, the Vunipolas and Itoje might come up somewhere in your
top five. Not sure about Wrigglesworth, is he in the same league
or was he a late signing where perhaps the cap had already been
reached?
Anyway, the Mail has spent four months looking at this, and
simply claims there may be something for PRL to look at. As I
said earlier, if the company assets are owned by the directors
and the amount put into those assets reflect their shareholding,
then I don't see any salary cap problem with them. If the
players stick their earnings in a savings account, the interest
earned doesn't count towards the salary cap. If someone else
puts money into a savings vehicle for them, then of course it
should.
#Post#: 18885--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: March 13, 2019, 4:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Wray speaks in The Daily Wail
HTML https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-6801555/Premiership-Rugby-maintain-silence-investigation-Saracens.html
#Post#: 18894--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: harlequins
Date: March 13, 2019, 6:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
looks like Saracens have got away with it again...if it is all
true of course.
#Post#: 18896--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Blucherquin
Date: March 13, 2019, 6:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There's nothing like hiding in plain sight.
#Post#: 18898--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: T-Bone
Date: March 13, 2019, 7:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
From what I can see he's saying that the players have set up
companies with the benefit of our advice and we think that all
these companies sound like fantastic investment opportunities,
so we've invested our own cash in them, just like we could
invest our cash in any other business. Is that right? If so, I
guess they're probably allowed to do it under the cap
regulations, but it clearly stinks.
The long post he wrote, which has been lapped up by the likes of
Greenwood, Flatman and the other sycophants, is fairly
laughable. He waffles on for ages about how well they look after
their players and engage in the community, which I'm sure is
perfectly true and is indeed laudable. Then there's a short
paragraph where he seems to suggest that they help players set
up companies and then they inject loads of cash as an
investment, but that's fine, because it's a genuine investment
decision which they've weighed up, comes with its own risk, etc.
So the way to get round the cap is to tell a player you'll pay
them, say, £500k over 2 years. Suggest that they inject some of
that cash and some other cash into a new company which holds a
property portfolio. The club's owner will then invest in your
new property business because they think it looks like a really
promising investment opportunity (because by sheer coincidence a
lot of the top international players are also very savvy
businessmen and property experts).
Use the investment to buy some more properties, get some advice
from rich owner's mates, property portfolio grows, investment
looks like a sound and legitimate one.
Helping with work placements, being flexible to allow studying,
sharing expertise to help players start a business such as the
coffee, lager, jolly hog, etc, is one thing. It is indeed
laudable and I know we do do it and think all clubs should. Just
pumping investment capital into someone's business which you
have helped set up is another thing entirely.
#Post#: 18904--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Quinky
Date: March 13, 2019, 8:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: T-Bone link ---
>
> From what I can see he's saying that the players have set up
companies with the benefit of our advice and we think that all
these companies sound like fantastic investment opportunities,
so we've invested our own cash in them, just like we could
invest our cash in any other business. Is that right? If so, I
guess they're probably allowed to do it under the cap
regulations, but it clearly stinks.
>
> The long post he wrote, which has been lapped up by the likes
of Greenwood, Flatman and the other sycophants, is fairly
laughable. He waffles on for ages about how well they look after
their players and engage in the community, which I'm sure is
perfectly true and is indeed laudable. Then there's a short
paragraph where he seems to suggest that they help players set
up companies and then they inject loads of cash as an
investment, but that's fine, because it's a genuine investment
decision which they've weighed up, comes with its own risk, etc.
>
> So the way to get round the cap is to tell a player you'll pay
them, say, £500k over 2 years. Suggest that they inject some of
that cash and some other cash into a new company which holds a
property portfolio. The club's owner will then invest in your
new property business because they think it looks like a really
promising investment opportunity (because by sheer coincidence a
lot of the top international players are also very savvy
businessmen and property experts).
>
> Use the investment to buy some more properties, get some
advice from rich owner's mates, property portfolio grows,
investment looks like a sound and legitimate one.
>
> Helping with work placements, being flexible to allow
studying, sharing expertise to help players start a business
such as the coffee, lager, jolly hog, etc, is one thing. It is
indeed laudable and I know we do do it and think all clubs
should. Just pumping investment capital into someone's business
which you have helped set up is another thing entirely.
>
--- End Quote ---
As I said earlier in the thread, it may well stink (it does) but
it may also be perfectly permissible.
I haven't read the article that was mentioned a few posts back.
My initial response to the comments on here is that some of the
companies were not set up by the players concerned, but were
transferred into their names. This casts a shadow of what has
been suggested.
Secondly, business advice, help etc usually comes at a price.
Has this been assessed for value and included in the salary cap?
*****************************************************
Page 11 of 13
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page