Can we please see our own salary cap announcement like this

[JackFlashJonny]

I believe it could be as reported by Neil Fissler in The Rugby Paper a few weeks ago Tigers did a deal with Sarries regarding this so they stopped offering Manu £400,000k per year and that is why we can't say anything?

What do we think does that sound plausible?

[Noggs]

TBF Cockers only says he dosnt know, he dosnt handle that stuff.

Diamond prob does handle that stuff at sale TBF.

Not sure he said he didn't know. I thought he said he wasn't personally aware that the club had cheated, suggesting that the question be referred to the board. You would have thought that if we were 'cheating' he would have known, hence, I would conclude we aren't.

[trendylfj]

Just listen again to the podcast and RC didn't actually say that he didn't know or that he was personally aware or not, but that he left all that to the board and just gets on with it. He did say that we know our squad and what we did. Make of that what you will.

[vin rouge]

Gloucester's statement:

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/latest-n ... y-cap-row/

[trendylfj]

Well Done Glaws - we are still being left behind - should be an interesting AGM

Here is today's guardian article on the matter ( sorry it is so big)
SALARY CAP SETTLEMENT CLEARED UP NOTHING

The Aviva Premiership has gurgled into life during the latter stages of the World Cup, an unwelcome guest given the farce over the investigation into alleged salary cap irregularities. It revealed to those who pay for their involvement in the game – supporters, sponsors and stationmasters, with the club or clubs in question not named or counted – the square root of nothing.

The words investigation and settlement were used as well as the common one in affairs like this, lawyers. M’learned Friends 7 Rugby 0 was the outcome, or perhaps if those clubs who were not involved in the inquiry follow Wasps and detach themselves from Premiership Rugby’s statement, merely the latest score.

Mark McCafferty, the Premiership Rugby chief executive, gave an excruciatingly painful media interview on a conference call following the board meeting that lifted up the carpet and then substantially raised the cap for the next two seasons. The bewigged ones had so gagged him that most questions were answered in the same way: there were no breaches of the salary cap regulations and a settlement had been reached.

Eh? Nothing was amiss but it has been resolved?! Nothing is allowed to be said because, like so much involving Premiership Rugby, it is mired in confidentiality clauses and the belief of the rich that the fewer people who know about something the better. And these are clubs who believe they should have a say in the running of the England team and the appointment of the next national head coach. The RFU should keep them at the longest of arm’s length.

McCafferty has helped drag the Premiership clubs away from the war footing they used to be on, fostering a workable relationship with the Rugby Football Union and he helped broker the deal that gave the two European club competitions a better chance of maximising their commercial potential, a success that seems to have curdled the thought processes of some club owners and made McCafferty’s job considerably harder. He deserved better than having to recite the indefensible while those who had poked around to see if there were any salary cap loopholes or grey areas to exploit did not identify themselves, never mind put themselves forward to explain to fans who over the years have paid to watch what they thought was a game played on a broadly level playing field and have been, allegedly, ripped off.

The salary cap should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute. It is not fit for purpose. One revelation of the call with McCafferty was the fact that payments to players can be made outside the salary cap if they have contracts with companies or individuals directly, with the money not washed through their club. That, together with all the add-ons that make the current £5.5m a minimum rather than maximum spend for those clubs who do not have to worry about only spending the money they generate, makes the cap of relevance only to those clubs who tend to find themselves scrapping in the bottom half of the table each season and trying to balance the books.

When it has finished analysing why England failed to get out of a pig of a World Cup pool, the RFU should turn its attention to its leading clubs and say that there will be no renewal of the elite-player agreement, never mind the huge financial hike that has been demanded to help fund the arms race with French clubs, until Premiership Rugby shows it is a responsible organisation, not a cartel.

[fleabane]

"One revelation of the call with McCafferty was the fact that payments to players can be made outside the salary cap if they have contracts with companies or individuals directly, with the money not washed through their club." The Guardian

What hope is there of any honesty with a loophole like that? It makes me wonder if there are any players making floor sweepers, our working in insurance and investments. I hope nobody is moonlighting making earth moving equipment or health supplements.

We will only know if the club SPEAKS UP!

[JackFlashJonny]

Cheers Trendy great work...If only more people would stand beside us..

Iain has been very quiet this week do I take it he is implicated in the salary cap in some way

I want to do anything I can do for transparency the only issue being I don't really see what I can do that will make any difference..We need numbers (If everyone didn't turn up to say Sarries or Bath's games that would make everyone sit up)

[LE18]

Is it not time for us to stop asking this question? Now we know that players can be paid directly by a company if they have a direct contract, would it not be sensible to accept that Tigers might just have used this loophole, after all in the old amateur days we know that many of our best players were found jobs at some of the old established companies in Leicester. Are we not in danger of the Pot calling the Kettle?

[RagingBull]

TBH I want to know regardless if it is good or bad for Leicester.

[JackFlashJonny]

TBH I want to know regardless if it is good or bad for Leicester.

Ditto I just want to know and be punished if it is the case and move on....

Being lied to is my main issue and lack of transparency...In essence I want a similar and correct outcome as per below:

http://www.nrl.com/melbourne-storm-brea ... fault.aspx

I believe Sarries should be stripped of the title as should Bath their second place and any others that have done wrong given similar fines and points deductions etc

However from the looks of things these laws were not enforceable and due to the ilk of Wray and Craig would end up in the courts costing millions...If only I was a billionnaire

[RagingBull]

Honestly I don't really mind so much about stripping previous honours etc just that it was announced and a points deduction for this season would happen.

[ourla]

Let us assume for a second that 10 of the 12 say they have not entered into a settlement leaving Bath and Saracens as the two clubs that don't make a statement and therefore are the two clubs that did make a settlement. Then what...?

Any sort of "protest" has to have an aim/purpose and a plan of how to achieve that aim/purpose.

[LE18]

But they did not break the rules according to the report, sounds like they over used the get out loophole of company direct contracts, did all clubs know about this loophole and if so being a bona fide loophole how many used it?

[Bundy]

As a Club that have always spoken about our integrity and responsibility to all the supporters of the Club/Tigers Family, I can't see why anyone does not regard this a serious issue. I, certainly, want the Club to make a statement on this or we risk looking at best naïve and at worst culpable - even if it is to stay that are prevented from making a full statement i.e. they have been legally prevented from doing so in some way. Whatever the scenario the Tigers Family deserves a statement.

[kend]

Let us assume for a second that 10 of the 12 say they have not entered into a settlement leaving Bath and Saracens as the two clubs that don't make a statement and therefore are the two clubs that did make a settlement. Then what...?

Any sort of "protest" has to have an aim/purpose and a plan of how to achieve that aim/purpose.

Agree, particularly as McCafferty has stated categorically that no club has breached the cap - in which case there is no question of points deductions and so on. All that would be apparent is the names of the clubs investigated and, apparently, found innocent.

The more interesting issue is if the 'loophole' that allows players to be paid by third parties remains in place (which effectively means the salary cap is meaningless to those with the resources). If it does then I imagine even those clubs that were not exploiting it are busy working out if they can. Perhaps that might explain Tigers reluctance to comment.