ay2oh wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:31 pm
Some “supporters” on here make me laugh. Let those without sin cast the first stone . No-one knows the facts of the case so let’s just speculate. All I know is the investigation is complete and we have been fined. The sun will still rise tomorrow and life goes on.
Don’t denigrate me as a ‘supporter’ I have been for 30 years. I am just not going to be a hypocrite and chastise Sarries but then say ‘it’s done now let’s forget about it. We can move forward now which is the right thing to do but that doesn’t mean we should forget this event. Otherwise we are just as fickle as every other sports fan who throw stones at others but not at ourselves.
No one is bigger than the club but no club is bigger than the game.
I think the move on comments for me come with the stipulation that lessons are learned,...
From what I know from a very reliable senior source
* The club viewed the payments as being eligible for being outside of the cap - look at the image rights rules, they are not the clearest..... so the investigation viewed this as more in the incompetent camp rather than an attempt to cheat.
* These payments were included in the salary cap reviews of the seasons in question and declared as out of the cap - however history teaches us that the checks used to be less than water tight but there was no attempt to hide them.
* The club opened up all avenues in the investigation and offered more than was ever likely to be found - therefore the clause in the regulations accounted for this "guilty" plea.
However you look at it - the club have broken the rules. They have been caught breaking them and punished according to the regulations as they stand. That's not a great chapter in our history......
Whether we cheated or were incompetent- or whether that distinction matters is for individuals to decide.... given the transparency I have been told happened, i lean towards incompetent more than cheating - but that's just my view. I lean that way because of the general incompetence in the club at the time....
I'm happy to move on in the knowledge that those in charge now seem to have it in hand and maybe aren't as shandy or incompetent.
We've been sanctioned and hopefully learnt our lesson, I fully support this team, which bar 2 or 3 players is not the team who broke the rules.
In the [s]scathing attack[/s] BBC article by Adam Whitty he says that under current regs we'd have suffered a lot worse sanction. Now we know the figures involved does any one know what would happen under the current regs?
Bunchy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:02 am
I think the move on comments for me come with the stipulation that lessons are learned,...
From what I know from a very reliable senior source
* The club viewed the payments as being eligible for being outside of the cap - look at the image rights rules, they are not the clearest..... so the investigation viewed this as more in the incompetent camp rather than an attempt to cheat.
* These payments were included in the salary cap reviews of the seasons in question and declared as out of the cap - however history teaches us that the checks used to be less than water tight but there was no attempt to hide them.
* The club opened up all avenues in the investigation and offered more than was ever likely to be found - therefore the clause in the regulations accounted for this "guilty" plea.
However you look at it - the club have broken the rules. They have been caught breaking them and punished according to the regulations as they stand. That's not a great chapter in our history......
Whether we cheated or were incompetent- or whether that distinction matters is for individuals to decide.... given the transparency I have been told happened, i lean towards incompetent more than cheating - but that's just my view. I lean that way because of the general incompetence in the club at the time....
Excellent post really does put things into perspective. Lessons must be learnt
It’s really interesting to read just how divided the forum is on this one.. I guess that’s life. Let’s not forget in all this we are all on the same side and everyone is entitled to their own opinion
Oakham lad born and bred, Tigers season ticket holder who is enjoying steady progression back towards the good old days!
Bunchy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:02 am
I think the move on comments for me come with the stipulation that lessons are learned,...
From what I know from a very reliable senior source
* The club viewed the payments as being eligible for being outside of the cap - look at the image rights rules, they are not the clearest..... so the investigation viewed this as more in the incompetent camp rather than an attempt to cheat.
* These payments were included in the salary cap reviews of the seasons in question and declared as out of the cap - however history teaches us that the checks used to be less than water tight but there was no attempt to hide them.
* The club opened up all avenues in the investigation and offered more than was ever likely to be found - therefore the clause in the regulations accounted for this "guilty" plea.
However you look at it - the club have broken the rules. They have been caught breaking them and punished according to the regulations as they stand. That's not a great chapter in our history......
Whether we cheated or were incompetent- or whether that distinction matters is for individuals to decide.... given the transparency I have been told happened, i lean towards incompetent more than cheating - but that's just my view. I lean that way because of the general incompetence in the club at the time....
Excellent post really does put things into perspective. Lessons must be learnt
ads wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:14 am
I'm happy to move on in the knowledge that those in charge now seem to have it in hand and maybe aren't as shandy or incompetent.
We've been sanctioned and hopefully learnt our lesson, I fully support this team, which bar 2 or 3 players is not the team who broke the rules.
In the [s]scathing attack[/s] BBC article by Adam Whitty he says that under current regs we'd have suffered a lot worse sanction. Now we know the figures involved does any one know what would happen under the current regs?
Only difference would’ve been for the 2016/17 season as that was the only time we went over 100k so that would be £2 for every £1 over.
So still no points and hardly a lot worse in the grand scheme of things just lazy journalism.
Even our worst season for overspend was still over 100k away from that points threshold.
Would love to hear from Whitt why he says it’s just within…
If I relate the 'offences' and subsequent punishment to playing rules:-
The salary manager has gone beyond "just a pen", bent arm and straight arm on-field pens;
Issued on-field yellow with consequences (including financial and image damage). Appears current judgement suggests no further additional penalties; however I'm sure a
2nd yellow will go to red with potential of;
a) citing; and
b) serious punishment!!!
Mitigation appears cooperation, previous record and possible self declaration. If supplying biscuits and nice cakes helped I know not.
In case - set against Sarries who appeared to obstruct process with far greater breach, a reduced penalty to the defendant (Tigers) delivered.
If I consider probability against 'beyond all reasonable doubt ' I must air toward other clubs being/having been in similar breach.
Yes guilty, be that through neglect Inc ignorance or intent. Take the punishment which the club has with no appeal, and let's get on with the game.
In 14/15, 2 clubs broke the salary cap and were all but confirmed to be us and Saracens.
So basically in the last 8 seasons, we’ve broke the salary cap 5 times. Really not a good look, especially given how poor we were on the field for some of those seasons.
But no one will remember or say anything by next season - we’ve paid the fine, time to move on onwards and upwards hopefully.
Leicestertinytiger wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 10:32 amIn 14/15, 2 clubs broke the salary cap and were all but confirmed to be us and Saracens.
So basically in the last 8 seasons, we’ve broke the salary cap 5 times. Really not a good look, especially given how poor we were on the field for some of those seasons.
But no one will remember or say anything by next season - we’ve paid the fine, time to move on onwards and upwards hopefully.
Actually it was viewed as Bath and Sarries.
Three clubs never said anything and it was Bath, Sarries and Tigers.
Leicestertinytiger wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 10:32 am
In 14/15, 2 clubs broke the salary cap and were all but confirmed to be us and Saracens.
So basically in the last 8 seasons, we’ve broke the salary cap 5 times. Really not a good look, especially given how poor we were on the field for some of those seasons.
But no one will remember or say anything by next season - we’ve paid the fine, time to move on onwards and upwards hopefully.
Don’t remember anything confirming that we were over the cap in14/15 only speculation over various clubs.
RagingBull wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:44 am
Only difference would’ve been for the 2016/17 season as that was the only time we went over 100k so that would be £2 for every £1 over.
So still no points and hardly a lot worse in the grand scheme of things just lazy journalism.
Even our worst season for overspend was still over 100k away from that points threshold.
Would love to hear from Whitt why he says it’s just within…
Leicestertinytiger wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 10:32 am
In 14/15, 2 clubs broke the salary cap and were all but confirmed to be us and Saracens.
So basically in the last 8 seasons, we’ve broke the salary cap 5 times. Really not a good look, especially given how poor we were on the field for some of those seasons.
But no one will remember or say anything by next season - we’ve paid the fine, time to move on onwards and upwards hopefully.
Like The Hand of Back, Lander falling over, Bloodgate, Salarycens & the assault on Rob Hawkins etc aren't remembered?
