BigDan50 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 9:47 pm
Zzzzzzzzzz this discussion has become boring, let’s move on, Saracens have been found guilty, paid the price, accepted their guilt.
We need all the teams in the premiership to continue the great league we have, if we delve too deeply I think you will find that quite a lot of the clubs have sailed close to the wind with the salary cap including us.
To many posters on here think we are whiter than white, we are not, we have had warnings from the salary cap investigators about the way we pay players as have three other clubs.
These "let's move on" and "I find this boring" posts are very boring. And not really conducive to the thread topic.
So, with regard to danger if playing clubs in leagues below: Saracens have managed, through cheating, to load their side with even more bigger, stronger players than all the other sides in the Premiership - therein also lies a danger, does it not?
fentiger wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 12:52 pm
So, with regard to danger if playing clubs in leagues below: Saracens have managed, through cheating, to load their side with even more bigger, stronger players than all the other sides in the Premiership - therein also lies a danger, does it not?
If that’s your opinion fair enough.
It’s not so much the size and power in the premiership but more the intensity, which should be matched by other premiership clubs.
You’ll find equally as big lumps in the national leagues it’s how they use that power and their skill base
Traveller wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:06 am
I do respect your right to express an opinion, it just doesn't seem to be a very coherent position. It might be me being slow. But the logical extension of your argument seems to be: a) IF at some stage in the future any very strong premiership club team seriously transgresses and has its premiership share removed, they can only be demoted to the Championship because the squad would be too strong to play in a lower league. Presumably this will also mean that they would then be automatically promoted the following year, because they are so strong thereby denying a club that hasn't cheated the opportunity to be promoted.
b) IF saracens are relegated this year those same conditions will apply when playing Doncaster, Yorkshire Carnegie, Ampthill, Bedford Blues. If it's unsafe. It's unsafe.
Relegating Sarries would be stupidly dangerous for the weaker Championship teams.
It'd also be financially dangerous for the Premiership.
It's all fairly easy to understand.
The Rowe brigade seems to be trying to squeeze every ounce of sympathy out of this situation that it possibly can do.
I had some sympathy for a short while but not enough to forget that they ****** our team up when they took Parling, Salvi and Waldrom!
Saracens have picked only 3, what people would consider starters away to Ospreys. Still a strong side, but with Racing at home week 6 thought they have taken it more seriously
Traveller wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:06 am
I do respect your right to express an opinion, it just doesn't seem to be a very coherent position. It might be me being slow. But the logical extension of your argument seems to be: a) IF at some stage in the future any very strong premiership club team seriously transgresses and has its premiership share removed, they can only be demoted to the Championship because the squad would be too strong to play in a lower league. Presumably this will also mean that they would then be automatically promoted the following year, because they are so strong thereby denying a club that hasn't cheated the opportunity to be promoted.
b) IF saracens are relegated this year those same conditions will apply when playing Doncaster, Yorkshire Carnegie, Ampthill, Bedford Blues. If it's unsafe. It's unsafe.
Relegating Sarries would be stupidly dangerous for the weaker Championship teams.
It'd also be financially dangerous for the Premiership.
It's all fairly easy to understand.
The Rowe brigade seems to be trying to squeeze every ounce of sympathy out of this situation that it possibly can do.
I had some sympathy for a short while but not enough to forget that they ****** our team up when they took Parling, Salvi and Waldrom!
One of my sisters is a Chiefs STH (as is one brother) along with their mates, some of who are quite close to players, ex-players and management - close enough to have them round for parties/dinner/drinks etc. Rowe is still in a rage simply because he personally feels cheated of titles, and knows he could have cheated like Sarries but didn't. It is allegedly very personal and enduring - he is getting on, and Chiefs is his life's work (not SW Comms).
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.
Traveller wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:06 am
I do respect your right to express an opinion, it just doesn't seem to be a very coherent position. It might be me being slow. But the logical extension of your argument seems to be: a) IF at some stage in the future any very strong premiership club team seriously transgresses and has its premiership share removed, they can only be demoted to the Championship because the squad would be too strong to play in a lower league. Presumably this will also mean that they would then be automatically promoted the following year, because they are so strong thereby denying a club that hasn't cheated the opportunity to be promoted.
b) IF saracens are relegated this year those same conditions will apply when playing Doncaster, Yorkshire Carnegie, Ampthill, Bedford Blues. If it's unsafe. It's unsafe.
Relegating Sarries would be stupidly dangerous for the weaker Championship teams.
It'd also be financially dangerous for the Premiership.
It's all fairly easy to understand.
The Rowe brigade seems to be trying to squeeze every ounce of sympathy out of this situation that it possibly can do.
I had some sympathy for a short while but not enough to forget that they ****** our team up when they took Parling, Salvi and Waldrom!
One of my sisters is a Chiefs STH (as is one brother) along with their mates, some of who are quite close to players, ex-players and management - close enough to have them round for parties/dinner/drinks etc. Rowe is still in a rage simply because he personally feels cheated of titles, and knows he could have cheated like Sarries but didn't. It is allegedly very personal and enduring - he is getting on, and Chiefs is his life's work (not SW Comms).
We're in the realms of fantasy now. So according to your logic Sarries can't be relegated, even if they come bottom because it would be dangerous for the teams in the championship? So what's the point of the points deduction? What's the point of the matches that are being played now. That's not easy to understand, unless incoherent arguments are easy to understand.
As for the 'Rowe brigade' (that would be the club that makes a surplus and doesn't cheat), I thought the Rowe brigade offered contracts to Paling, Salvi and Waldrom and three grown men accepted the contracts. Or were they tied up and put in the back of a transit van and driven down to Exeter against their wishes. There must have been opportunities to escape.
fentiger wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 12:52 pm
So, with regard to danger if playing clubs in leagues below: Saracens have managed, through cheating, to load their side with even more bigger, stronger players than all the other sides in the Premiership - therein also lies a danger, does it not?
If that’s your opinion fair enough.
It’s not so much the size and power in the premiership but more the intensity, which should be matched by other premiership clubs.
You’ll find equally as big lumps in the national leagues it’s how they use that power and their skill base
Hence that word! Not so much an opinion just it's an interesting thought?
Traveller wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:06 am
I do respect your right to express an opinion, it just doesn't seem to be a very coherent position. It might be me being slow. But the logical extension of your argument seems to be: a) IF at some stage in the future any very strong premiership club team seriously transgresses and has its premiership share removed, they can only be demoted to the Championship because the squad would be too strong to play in a lower league. Presumably this will also mean that they would then be automatically promoted the following year, because they are so strong thereby denying a club that hasn't cheated the opportunity to be promoted.
b) IF saracens are relegated this year those same conditions will apply when playing Doncaster, Yorkshire Carnegie, Ampthill, Bedford Blues. If it's unsafe. It's unsafe.
Relegating Sarries would be stupidly dangerous for the weaker Championship teams.
It'd also be financially dangerous for the Premiership.
It's all fairly easy to understand.
The Rowe brigade seems to be trying to squeeze every ounce of sympathy out of this situation that it possibly can do.
I had some sympathy for a short while but not enough to forget that they ****** our team up when they took Parling, Salvi and Waldrom!
One of my sisters is a Chiefs STH (as is one brother) along with their mates, some of who are quite close to players, ex-players and management - close enough to have them round for parties/dinner/drinks etc. Rowe is still in a rage simply because he personally feels cheated of titles, and knows he could have cheated like Sarries but didn't. It is allegedly very personal and enduring - he is getting on, and Chiefs is his life's work (not SW Comms).
It's a sad situation and what's done is done.
There is not a lot more punishment that could've been sensibly handed out, perhaps awarding titles to the runners up during the period of transgressions but realistically there isn't anything else.
Traveller and others (Rowe himself) repeatedly banging on that Sarries should've been relegated is very shortsighted, it is overlooking the fact that Sarries players are contracted and can't simply leave, it would put weaker players in the league below in serious physical danger.
Surely no-one really wants this kind of risk for what in reality would be little more than empty satisfaction!
Relegating Sarries would be stupidly dangerous for the weaker Championship teams.
It'd also be financially dangerous for the Premiership.
It's all fairly easy to understand.
The Rowe brigade seems to be trying to squeeze every ounce of sympathy out of this situation that it possibly can do.
I had some sympathy for a short while but not enough to forget that they ****** our team up when they took Parling, Salvi and Waldrom!
One of my sisters is a Chiefs STH (as is one brother) along with their mates, some of who are quite close to players, ex-players and management - close enough to have them round for parties/dinner/drinks etc. Rowe is still in a rage simply because he personally feels cheated of titles, and knows he could have cheated like Sarries but didn't. It is allegedly very personal and enduring - he is getting on, and Chiefs is his life's work (not SW Comms).
It's a sad situation and what's done is done.
There is not a lot more punishment that could've been sensibly handed out, perhaps awarding titles to the runners up during the period of transgressions but realistically there isn't anything else.
Traveller and others (Rowe himself) repeatedly banging on that Sarries should've been relegated is very shortsighted, it is overlooking the fact that Sarries players are contracted and can't simply leave, it would put weaker players in the league below in serious physical danger.
Surely no-one really wants this kind of risk for what in reality would be little more than empty satisfaction!
Do you have any evidence that championship teams that play against demoted premiership clubs suffer more injuries? It’s an interesting question but I suspect a team totally dominant in a league is actually less likely to push the envelope so it is probably safer.
jgriffin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:00 pm
One of my sisters is a Chiefs STH (as is one brother) along with their mates, some of who are quite close to players, ex-players and management - close enough to have them round for parties/dinner/drinks etc. Rowe is still in a rage simply because he personally feels cheated of titles, and knows he could have cheated like Sarries but didn't. It is allegedly very personal and enduring - he is getting on, and Chiefs is his life's work (not SW Comms).
It's a sad situation and what's done is done.
There is not a lot more punishment that could've been sensibly handed out, perhaps awarding titles to the runners up during the period of transgressions but realistically there isn't anything else.
Traveller and others (Rowe himself) repeatedly banging on that Sarries should've been relegated is very shortsighted, it is overlooking the fact that Sarries players are contracted and can't simply leave, it would put weaker players in the league below in serious physical danger.
Surely no-one really wants this kind of risk for what in reality would be little more than empty satisfaction!
Do you have any evidence that championship teams that play against demoted premiership clubs suffer more injuries? It’s an interesting question but I suspect a team totally dominant in a league is actually less likely to push the envelope so it is probably safer.
No evidence, but is it really a risk worth finding out?
It is Sarries we are talking about here who but for the 35 point deduction would be near the top of the league.
A team packed full of internationals who play a very physical game.
Were they relegated I'm assuming that they would come under whatever spending rules exist in the Championship.
Could they earn promotion and spend an absolute fortune the following season?
Anyway as far as I can tell regarding certain punishments, regulations didn't allow.
By using the logic of not relegating Sarries due to the players being too powerful for the Championship, what happens if Tigers were to get relegated? Would Manu become less powerful? Genge? Would Jonny May become slower?
