Saracens facing potential 35 point reduction and a real threat of relegation
Saracens are facing the very real possibility of a mandatory 35-point deduction this season as Premiership Rugby look to throw the book at the reigning champions over breaches of salary cap regulations.
An imminent punishment will be the result of a seven-month investigation into the club following revelations around alleged gratuities given to the top players via ‘co-investment’ opportunities with Saracens’ chairman Nigel Wray.
As the panel’s decision comes following round 22 of the 2018/19 season, the points penalty would take place this season. If a 35-point deduction had been taken off last season’s tally, Saracens would have dropped from their regular season second place position of 78 points down to a lowly 43 points, which would have seen them finish in tenth place, just two points ahead of Leicester Tigers in 11th.
A 35 point reduction would likely leave Saracens effectively needing a campaign in which they finish in the top four. Having lost the services of both Alex Goode and Liam Williams through injury, the season hasn’t gotten off the most auspicious of starts for the North Londoners.
RugbyPass understands that the 12 other Premiership Rugby Limited clubs (including Championship outfit Newcastle Falcons) are keen to stick the boot into Saracens as they feel the integrity of the competition is at stake. Saracens are furious at the impending punishment, as they maintain that they’ve not breached salary cap rules.
Within the salary cap regulations framework, there is an option of reducing up to 35 of the club’s total points at the end of the season. However, the regulations state that this framework is merely a ‘starting point’. According to their official document on the matter: “The disciplinary panel shall have the discretion to increase or decrease (to zero if appropriate).”
If it is found that the club have overspent by more than £650,000, they face – at the very least – the maximum reduction 35 points reduction. Points deduction (greater that 35pts) to the point of relegation is the most severe reprimand open to the governing body – although it is unlikely in this case.
On top of the points deduction, Saracens’ senior salary cap is also set to be punitively reduced, which will inevitably hamper the club’s efforts to hold onto and to lure new talent to Allianz Park. They also face a lump-sum fine.
The body launched an official investigation into Saracens in March, but Sportsmail reported in September that the Premiership’s salary cap manager, Andrew Rogers, had passed on the case to an independent body. That independent body is set to reveal the extent of the punishment this month.
The trouble kicked off for Saracens earlier this year following revelations in the Mail around ‘co-investments’ between the club’s top players and millionaire chairman Wray.
Wray was listed with Companies House as a director alongside players such as Owen Farrell, Richard Wigglesworth and the Vunipola brothers in companies Faz Investments Ltd, Wiggy9 Investments Limited and VunProp Ltd.
The Premiership salary cap is currently set at £7million, although that can be overspent legally through the contracting of two marquee players, the creation of credits from senior England internationals and through medical joker signings.
In April, the Premiership effectively alleged that Saracens had been less than forthcoming with information around their arrangement with players.
“Saracens had not at the time of recent media speculation shared with the Premiership Rugby salary cap manager details of all the co-investment arrangements between connected parties and players,” the Premiership said in a statement.
In response, Saracens issued the following statement defending the co-investments and saying an oversight had led to not all of the investments being shared with Premiership Rugby.
“Unprompted, we invited Premiership Rugby’s salary cap manager into the club to openly discuss matters related to player salaries.
“Whilst co-investments are not part of the salary regulations, we disclosed these transactions in good faith and indeed divulged more information than was necessary. Separately, following a minor internal oversight, Premiership Rugby was provided with details relating to some of these agreements.
“We remain confident that we comply with the salary regulations and will continue to support the entrepreneurial spirit and future of our players.”
A spokesperson for Saracens said they would not be making any statements ahead of the determination.
RugbyPass requested a comment from Premiership Rugby but none was forthcoming before this article was published.
Saracens’ finance chief Bernard van Zyl resigned last month from the club, the second key figure to exit if you include the departure of Saracens’ director property tycoon Nicholas Leslau. There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing on their parts.
Comments on RugbyPass
I wonder if Parling was ever on England’s radar as a coach? Obviously Borthwick is a great lineout coach, but I do worry he might be taking on too much as both head coach and forwards coach.
1 Go to commentsJason Jenkins has one cap. When Etzebeth was his age he had over 80 caps. Experience matters. He will never amount to what Etzebeth has because he hasn’t been developed as an international player.
1 Go to commentsSays much about the player picking this gig over the easier and bigger rewards offered to him in Japan. Also says a lot about the state sanctioned tax benefits the Irish Revenue offers pro rugby players, with their ten highest earning years subject to an additional 40% tax relief and paid as a lump sum, in cash, at retirement. Certainly helps Leinster line up the financial ducks in a row to fund marquee signings like this!!! No other union anywhere in world rugby benefits from this kind of lucrative financial sponsorship from their government…
4 Go to commentsTrue Jordie could earn a lot more in Japan. But by choosing Leinster he’ll be playing with 1 of the best clubs in the world and can win a champions cup and URC…..
6 Go to commentsThanks for that Marshy, noticed you didn't say who is gonna win it. We know who ain't gonna win it - your Crusaders outfit. They've gone from having arguably the best Super Rugby first five ever, to having a clutch of rookies. Hurricanes all the way!
1 Go to commentsGeez you really have to question the NRLs ability to produce players of quality. Its pathetic. Dont the 25mil in Aus produce enough quality womens players. Sad.
1 Go to commentsBulls fan here, and agree 100% with the conclusion (and little else) of this article. SA sides should absolutely f-off from the champs cup until we get fair scheduling, equal support for travel arrangements and home semis. You know, like all the european teams get.
23 Go to commentsI’m yet to see why Grace would be an ABs contender. He’s pedestrian and lacks the dominance required of a top flight 8.
11 Go to commentsGee my Highlanders were terrible. They have gone backwards since the start of the season. The trouble began when we left Millar behind to prep as the 10 against the Brumbies and he was disconnected from the team that came back from Aussie. We rested Patchell for that game and we blew an avalanche of ball in good attacking positions in the 1st half. Against the Rebels we seem to of gone into a pod system with forwards hanging off from the breakdown leaving Fakatava to secure our ball!
80 Go to commentsPot Kettle, the English and French teams have done it for years.
23 Go to commentsHas virtually played every minute of previous games. Back row of Li Lo Willie , Grace and Blackadder would be the 1. Crusaders issue is a very average 1st 5 who cannot run. Kicking in general play is also below par They need to put Yong Kemara in. He must have so.e talent for them to bring him down from Waikato. Hoehepa would struggle to play in so.e club sided
11 Go to commentsI hope this a good thing making all these changes!
3 Go to commentsThe Hurricanes are good, especially with a decent coach now. However, let’s be real, the Crusaders and Chiefs are clearly a good degree weaker without the players they’ve lost overseas now. The Canes lost one player. It’s also why the aussie teams ‘seem’ to be stronger.
9 Go to commentsOr you could develop your own players instead of constantly taking from the SH competition and weakening it in the process? With all the player and financial resources these unions have compared to SH countries you’d think they could manage that, or is weakening the SH comps and their national sides an added bonus? Probably.
3 Go to commentsNot so fast Aaron, we might need you in black yet lol. God knows he’d be a lot less nerve-racking than hot and (very) cold players like Perofeta. It’s really a shame Reuben Love isn’t playing 10, we’ve got enough 15 options.
4 Go to commentsAnd those from the NH still seem to be puzzled (and delighted) why NZ’s depth isn’t what it once was. Over 600 NZ players overseas, that’s insane. This sort of deal is why Super Rugby coaches have admitted they struggle now to find enough quality to fill out their squads.
6 Go to commentsArticle intéressant ! La question devrait régulièrement se poser pour les jeunes français originaires de Nouvelle-Calédonie, Wallis-et-Futuna et de Polynésie entre la Nouvelle-Zélande et la Métropole… Difficile pour la fédération française de rugby de se positionner : soit le choix est fait de dénicher les jeunes talents et de les faire venir très tôt en Métropole, au risque de les déraciner, soit on prend le risque de se les faire “piller” par les All Blacks qui, telle une araignée, essaye de récupérer tous les talents des îles du Pacifique… À la France de se défendre en développant l’aura du XV de France et des clubs français dans ses collectivités d’Outre-mer !
3 Go to commentsWrong bay. He needs to come to the REAL BAY which is Bay Of Plenty and have a crack at making the Chiefs.
3 Go to commentsIs Barrett going play full back??? They already have all the centers…
16 Go to commentsForgive my ignorance, I might not fully understand so would appreciate clarification: Didn’t the Bulls have to fly with three different carriers, paid for by the South African Rugby Union, whilst Edinburgh got a chartered flight sponsored by EPCR? Also, as far as I understand it South African teams don’t yet share in the revenue from the competition and are not allowed to host Semi-finals or Finals at home. Surely if everyone wants South Africans to “take the competition seriously” then they must make South Africans feel welcome, allow them to share in the revenue, and give them the same levels of access as the teams from the other countries. Just a reminder that South Africa has a large and passionate Rugby audience. Just by virtue of our teams being a part of these competitions means that more of us are likely to watch the knockout games, even if our teams haven’t qualified. It would be silly to alienate such a large audience by making them feel unwelcome.
23 Go to comments