DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 86593--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: March 16, 2022, 1:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinten Poulsen link ---
>
> [quote author=championes]It’s a scale isn’t it? They’ve broken
the rules just enough to make sure it couldn’t beach the
threshold
--- End Quote ---
I've seen this said elsewhere but with no reference to the data
- is it really true?
[/quote]
Not sure if this is what you're referring to but they kept well
below the threshold. They were far nearer the cap than the
threshold.
#Post#: 86600--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: Quinten Poulsen
Date: March 16, 2022, 4:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Brown Bottle link ---
>
> I've seen this said elsewhere but with no reference to the
data - is it really true?
>
>
> Not sure if this is what you're referring to but they kept
well below the threshold. They were far nearer the cap than the
threshold.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks BB, that's indeed what I was wondering.
#Post#: 86604--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: March 16, 2022, 7:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: championes link ---
>
> It’s a scale isn’t it? They’ve broken the rules just enough to
make sure it couldn’t beach the threshold - right in the middle
of the Sarries scandal.
>
> So it’s not about how appalling the unforgivable cheats of
Sarries are - but about where the scale begins.
>
> Tigers didn’t do this by accident or just once, or during a
period where they could claim ignorance of the rules - since the
spotlight was firmly on this kind of rule breaking.
>
> Either way as there’s no deductions - PRL gets to move on once
again pretending all is well.
>
> I’m not saying Tigers should be relegated - the point here is
about governance.
>
> As with promotion/relegation there seems to be an expectation
the world will just move on.
>
> It doesn’t stink - but it smells.
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't think hitting them with big fines and it being in the
papers is PRL pretending all is well.
If you have set out rules regarding salary cap, and you punish
teams accordingly, what's the problem?
#Post#: 86611--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: East Sussex Chris
Date: March 17, 2022, 3:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What is not fully appreciated is Tigers broke the cap by small
amounts that is agreed, but those amounts are significant enough
to make it believable that players may have stayed or signed for
tigers because they could earn an extra £500 - £1000 a week, its
not trivial and all salary cap breaches should carry a points
deduction on a sliding scale.
#Post#: 86623--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: March 17, 2022, 6:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: East Sussex Chris link ---
>
> What is not fully appreciated is Tigers broke the cap by small
amounts that is agreed, but those amounts are significant enough
to make it believable that players may have stayed or signed for
tigers because they could earn an extra £500 - £1000 a week, its
not trivial and all salary cap breaches should carry a points
deduction on a sliding scale.
>
--- End Quote ---
I think everyone's aware it has a meaningful impact. I agree
that points deductions should come in sooner in the punishment
scale. I guess there's no point complaining about the process
working as written and agreed, though - especially when people
start being conspiratorial about Saracens, of all teams!
#Post#: 86625--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: Sketchley
Date: March 17, 2022, 6:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's an odd one. It sounds like there is a permitted overrun
each year which you pay a tax on if you use and it's only a
breach if you go over the permitted amount. So this doesn't
appear to in fact be a breach. Tiger's did however get a 17k
fine for non disclosure.
#Post#: 86630--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: Yareet
Date: March 17, 2022, 7:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: East Sussex Chris link ---
>
> What is not fully appreciated is Tigers broke the cap by small
amounts that is agreed, but those amounts are significant enough
to make it believable that players may have stayed or signed for
tigers because they could earn an extra £500 - £1000 a week, its
not trivial and all salary cap breaches should carry a points
deduction on a sliding scale.
>
--- End Quote ---
All breaches do incur a points deduction on a sliding scale.
The scale starts at 0 (up to £200k it seems)
#Post#: 86631--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: March 17, 2022, 7:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I fear that's semantics at best - saying "there's no points
deduction up to 200k" is not the same as "all breaches should
carry a points deduction" :-)
#Post#: 86634--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: MadMax
Date: March 17, 2022, 7:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinky link ---
>
> Apart from their (very reliable) word, is there any proof that
they were advised their schemes were legal? Or was it a case of
"nothing to see here, move along, my friend said it's OK so I
don't need to show you"?
>
--- End Quote ---
I have no idea if anyone told them their schemes were legal but
in 2015 they were told their schemes were illegal by PRL for the
first time (as far as it is known).
#Post#: 86640--------------------------------------------------
Re: Another Cap break
DIR By: Yareet
Date: March 17, 2022, 7:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JammyGit link ---
>
> I fear that's semantics at best - saying "there's no points
deduction up to 200k" is not the same as "all breaches should
carry a points deduction" :-)
>
--- End Quote ---
So how many points should Quins have had deducted? For me 0 is
the fair answer for what was seemingly an honest mistake flagged
by the club and a small amount.
FYI, the scale is currently:
Level of breach (£) Points deduction
0 - 99,999.99 0
100,000 – 199,999.99 0
200,000 – 399,999.99 15
400,000 – 599,999.99 35
600,000 and over 50
It would seem that we just debating at what level clubs receive
0 points deduction
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page