The truth about Chris Ashton, Toulon and the £1.35m Saracens property deal which Sale Sharks paid off
A ‘grace period’ afforded to Chris Ashton regarding repayments to Saracens on a property deal at the heart of the salary cap scandal was only given after Toulon refused to continue paying the former England star’s wages.
The property deal between Ashton and two Saracens directors was one of the main breaches in the salary cap scandal, which caused to Saracens to over-run the salary cap by £98,249.80 in 2017/18.
What’s more, the payment of the £319,600 debt owed to the two Saracens directors by Ashton over the deal was paid off by the owner of Sale Sharks and appears to have been counted twice under the salary cap regulations.
In 2018, Ashton had the balance on outstanding payments to Nigel Wray and Saracens director Dominic Silvester repaid by Sale Sharks owner Simon Orange. It appears that amount (£319,600) was counted towards the salary caps of both clubs across two different seasons.
(Continue reading below…)
WATCH: A damning report reveals the extent of the Saracens salary cap breaches
The details of both the situation at Toulon and the repayment by Sale were redacted from the published Dyson report.
The deal dated back to 2015. Ashton jointly purchased a residential property in Harpenden worth £1,350,000 (valued two years later at £1.6m) with Wray and Silvester. According to the terms of the deal, Ashton owned 80 per cent of the property, while Wray and the other investor had a ten per cent stake each (£159,800).
As it stood it was a legal deal under the salary cap year 2015/16, and it was disclosed to Andrew Rogers, the Premiership Rugby salary cap manager.
In 2017, Ashton then joined Toulon, at which point the England star agreed to buy out the directors’ stakes in the property through monthly instalments over the course of an 18-month period, amounting to a hefty £13,500 a month split between the two directors.
However, in the final month of his stay in France in June 2018, he was unable to make any further instalments after Toulon owner Mourad Boudjellal refused to pay him his final salary instalment.
Ashton had originally signed for three years on a fee reported to be in the region of £700,000 a season. Toulon were angry that the winger – who broke the Top 14’s try-scoring record in his first season in France – had decided to leave just one year into his three-year contract.
The infamously belligerent Boudjellal wasn’t pleased. But the reality was the England star and his young family hadn’t settled well in the south of France, and Ashton actively disliked the club environment.
As a result of Ashton’s situation, Saracens then agreed with him ‘a short delay’ in the repayments which appears to have been their downfall.
As Ashton was already an ex-player, allowing him a ‘grace period’ was of no benefit to Saracens and, if anything, it came at the expense of the two directors. Ashton was no longer on their books and Wray has claimed: “We wanted to help him and his family so agreed to a short delay in the repayments.”
‘What is blatantly clear is that Scottish Rugby cannot allow this to fester any further. CEO Mark Dodson is being paid nearly £18,000 a week and he ought to take responsibility for bringing about an amicable resolution,’ writes @JLyall93https://t.co/3GY7ClKRgW
— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) January 28, 2020
Ashton was moving to Sale but he still needed to buy out the remaining equity in his house. He approached Sale Sharks and their owner Simon Orange, the brother of Take That band member Jason, agreed in 2018 to pay off the full outstanding amount to the two Saracens directors directly.
The payment counted towards the Sharks salary cap in 2018/19 and was fully legal, a fact Sale confirmed to RugbyPass. Sharks told us that the payment was declared under their 2018/19 salary cap and was “fully compliant under all regulations”.
When the deferment on the payments came to light in 2019 following the PRL investigation, the salary cap disciplinary panel determined that the eight-month period where Ashton didn’t make payments effectively made the deal “a loan from connected parties of Saracens” to Ashton and that it was effectively a benefit in kind to the former player.
The Dyson Report noted that decision “may seem unrealistic and even unfair” and RugbyPass understands that Saracens, of all the contested breaches, are most sour about the Ashton deal as they felt they were punished for being understanding to an ex-player after the fact.
Ashton spoke about the deal this week on BBC Radio 5 Live’s Rugby Union Weekly podcast: “It was completely separate to my contract. Nigel likes property, he invests in property. He came along to the house to see it with me, we had a look round and he gave some thoughts on what we could do.
“I can completely understand why people are annoyed about it because it is a benefit that you don’t get at other clubs. Now I do understand. I do see it. At the time, I didn’t.”
According to Saracens and the PRL report, all parties contributed equity for the purchase equal to their shares in the property. According to Wray, the PRL had “previously confirmed that equity investments of this nature are outside of salary for the purposes of the regulations”.
Ashton now says he saw the deal as a loan, even if at the time it was counted as an equity investment and was legal under the cap when it was first signed off on.
“Nigel was never involved in any negotiations of contracts or anything like that. I saw Nigel as a businessman outside of rugby that I went to see to get a loan like I would from the bank.”
What’s remains unclear is how £319,600 could have been counted on both the Saracens salary cap for 2017/18 as a loan and Sale Sharks the following season in 2018/19.
RugbyPass requested clarification on the matter from Premiership Rugby and a spokesperson said: “The strict confidentiality clauses within the salary cap regulations mean we are unable to comment.”
WATCH: The Rugby Pod sets the scene ahead of the 2020 Guinness Six Nations and reflects on yet more Saracens fallout
Comments on RugbyPass
Sorry Morgan you must have been the “go to for a quote” ex player this week. Its rnd 6 and there is plenty of time to cement a starting 15 and finishing 8 so I have no such concerns.
1 Go to commentsGreat read. I wish you had done this article on the ROAR.
2 Go to commentsThe current AB coaching team is basically the Crusaders so it smacks of wanting their familiar leaders around. This is not a good look for the future of the ABs or the younger players in Super working their way up the player ladder. Razor is touted as innovative, forward looking but his early moves look like insecurity and insular, provincial thinking. He is the AB's coach not the Golden Oldies.
10 Go to commentsSimple reason for wanting him back. Robertson wants him as captain. Otherwise he wouldn’t be bothering chasing him. Not enough reason to come back just to mentor.
10 Go to commentsI had not considered this topic like this at all, brilliant read. I had been looking at his record at the Waratahs and thought it odd the Crusaders appointed him, then couple that with all that experience and talent departing and boom. They’ve got some great talent developing though, and in all honesty I don’t think anyone would be over confident taking them on in a playoff match, no matter how poor the first half of their season was. I think they can pull a game out of their ass when it counts.
2 Go to commentsNot a bad list but not Porecki and not Donaldson. Not because they are Tahs, or Ex Tahs, they are just not good enough. Edmed should be ahead. Far more potential. Wilson should be 8 and Valentini 6. Wilson needs to be told by his father and his coach, stop bloody running in to brick wall defence. You’re not playing under the genius Thorn any more. He’s a fantastic angle runner. The young new 8 from the Brumbies looks really good too. The Lonegrans are just too small for international rugby as is Paisami, as is Hamish Stewart at 12. Both great at Super Rugby level. Stewart could have been a great 10 if not for Brad Thorn. Uru should be there and so should Tupou. Tupou just needs good Australian coaching which he hasn’t been getting. I don’t think Schmidt will excite him.
2 Go to commentsIf he wants to come back then he should. He will be a major asset to the younger locks and could easily be played as an impact player off the bench coming on in the last 30. He is fit, strong and capable and has all the experience to make up for any loss in physical prowess. He could also be brought back with a view to coaching within the structures one day. Duane Vermeulen played until he was 37 or 38. He is now a roaming coach within the South African coaching structures. He was valuable in the last world cup and has been a major influence on Jasper Wiese and other young players which has helped and accelerated their development and growth. Whitelock could do the exact same thing for NZ
10 Go to commentsBrett Excellent words… finally someone (other than DC) has noted that Hanigan is very hard and very good at doing what Backrow should do… his performance via the Drua sauna was quite daunting for those on the other side… very high tackle count… carries with good end result… constant threat to make a good 20-25 meters with those long legs… providing his mass effectively to crunching the Drua pack… Finally he is returning to quality form… way to much injury time over the last 2 years… smart-strong-competent in his skills… caught every lineout throw aimed at him and delivered clean pass to whoever was down below… and he worked hard for the whole 80 minutes… Ned has to be in the top 5 for backrow honors… He knows what is required as he has been there before…
20 Go to commentsI think Sam Whitelock should not touch a return with a bargepole. He went out on a high, playing in the RWC Final. He would be coming back into a team that will be weaker than last years, and might even be struggling to win games, especially against the Boks. Stay in France, enjoy another year with Pau, playing alongside his brother.
10 Go to commentsRyan Coxon has been very impressive considering he was signed by WF as injury cover whilst Uru has been a standout for QR, surprised neither of those mentioned
2 Go to commentsIt’s the massive value he brings with regard team culture/values, preparation, etc. Can’t buy that. I’m hoping to see the young locks get their chance in the big games though.
10 Go to commentsAll good, Gregor, except that you neglected to mention Sam Darry amongst that talented pool of locks. In fact, given Hannah’s inexperience and the fact that Holland won’t be eligible until next year, Lord and Darry might be the frontrunners this year, to join Barrett, Tuipoluto, Va’ii and possibly Whitelock. In fact there might be room for all of them if Barrett played 6 (like Ollie Chessum).
10 Go to commentsHis value is stabilizing the ship 20 - 40 minutes out from the final whistle plus his valuable experience to the underlings coming through.
10 Go to commentsWhat is criminal is she acts like it's no problem her actions have have cause the Italian player to lose her playing career, lose salary, if she did this in day to day life she would be in jail, she is a complete thug!!!
3 Go to commentsCorrect me if i’m wrong but the sadas have to win all games running into the finals yeh nah?
1 Go to commentsDon’t like Diamond but the maul is a joke, the sight of a choke tackle creating a maul then players in offside positions flopping on it killing the ball but then getting the put in? Banal.
3 Go to commentsHopefully Tabai Matson returns to Crusaders as head coach next season.
1 Go to commentsstorm in a teacup really. Penalty only so play on as the try was scored. Now the real question is: why was Maitland allowed to pass the ball off the floor? That is illegal but refs never pick it up.
1 Go to commentsWhen Beauden Barrett signed his contract before the 2023 RWC to play in Japan in 2024, it was NOT part of a sabbatical agreed to with NZRU prior to his signing, as was Ardie Savea and Sam Cane. Barrett changed his mind after the fact and negotiated his return to NZ Rugby and he was given permission to be eligible for All Black selection straight away once he signed a new contract to return to the Blues in 2025. Therefore, why would anyone argue against Whitelock returning to the All Blacks straight away after his season is France is finished if he signs a new contract with NZRU which includes a Super Rugby contract in 2025? If Barrett can, Whitelock should be allowed too.
10 Go to commentsThe All Blacks will select 5 locks this season. Scott Robertson will most likely want to select 2 veteran locks who can start right away in 2024 and 3 young promising locks who he would like to be pushing hard for selection in the starting XV in two years time- 2026. Scott Barrett is a world class lock. Who would you rather start beside him this season against England, South Africa, Ireland, and France- Sam Whitelock or Patrick Tuipulotu? I would choose Whitelock over Tuipulotu all day, every day.
10 Go to comments