On the day that the International Monetary Fund announced it was upping its growth forecast for the UK’s economy to a dizzying 2.4 per cent, the players and agents of English rugby were mulling over a rather more significant increase in the funds available for their payment – 11.7 per cent.
That's the increase in the salary cap announced by Premiership Rugby Ltd, taking the wage ceiling per club up to £5 million for the 2014-15 season.
The topic of the salary cap is an old favourite of mine. Will the latest increase mean bigger squads for Premiership sides, or will it just result in the same number of players receiving more dosh (along with their agents, of course)? My thoughts are here.
Showing posts with label salary cap. Show all posts
Showing posts with label salary cap. Show all posts
Monday, 27 January 2014
Tuesday, 15 October 2013
The oddities and contradictions of Premiership Rugby's salary cap enforcement
Have Premiership turkeys just voted for Christmas? My thoughts on Premiership Rugby's tough-talking over the policing of the salary cap.
A flimsy regulation that is easily circumvented by canny financial directors or a useful way of ensuring that Premiership teams compete on a level playing field?
Whatever your view, the salary cap remains as hotly-debated now as it was in 1999 when it was first introduced by the top-flight English clubs.
Whispers, nudges and chin-stroking surround the cap on the players’ wage bill. Sit in a rugby press box or a rugby-loving pub and the subject of which club is flouting the cap and by what means will, in the normal course of things, pop up before you can say ‘Pay-him-extra-by-slipping-a brown-envelope-in-his-training-bag-on-his-birthday-and-by-paying-his-missus-to- do-phantom-shifts-in-the-club-shop’.
Coaches aren’t immune from making nudges, either. Every so often, a director of rugby or a head coach will lob an innuendo about a breach of the cap in another club’s direction, usually in the run up to them playing that coming Saturday.
Now we all have a chance to snitch. Premiership Rugby announced this week that it has set up a salary cap hotline phone number. It’s like Crimestoppers, only for rugby. Capstoppers, you might say. Anyone with intel about a club being in breach of the £4.26million cap is urged to email salarycap@ premiershiprugby.com or call 07583 826343.
Hot air and posturing? Not if Premiership Rugby is to be believed. The umbrella group representing top sides has said there will be “increased monitoring, investigation and transparency” of the cap. Moreover, the organisation has said it will “now undertake an Investigatory Audit in addition to the current annual Salary Cap audit which can involve using independent experts, to access relevant records held by a club who are suspected of breaching the regulations”.
To my ears, that is the toughest Premiership Rugby has ever sounded on enforcing the cap. Great news, you might say.
The problem, however, is this. The salary cap is voted for by the clubs. So if one or more clubs has voted for the beefed-up enforcement of the salary cap despite being in contravention of the wage limit, then at least one turkey has voted for Christmas. But turkeys of this sort don’t vote for Christmas – not unless they have a cheeky escape route from the turkey pen already in mind.
Also, is it right that those clubs suspected of breaching the cap will have a confidential disciplinary hearing, as the current terms state?
Would the integrity of the game not be better served if the names of such clubs were made public before such hearings took place, thereby enabling those with potentially corroborating information to come forward?
But however flawed the policing of the cap might be, this muscle-flexing is welcome.
You never know, with enough calls to the hotline before Advent, one of the turkeys could be roasted by Christmas.
A flimsy regulation that is easily circumvented by canny financial directors or a useful way of ensuring that Premiership teams compete on a level playing field?
Whatever your view, the salary cap remains as hotly-debated now as it was in 1999 when it was first introduced by the top-flight English clubs.
Whispers, nudges and chin-stroking surround the cap on the players’ wage bill. Sit in a rugby press box or a rugby-loving pub and the subject of which club is flouting the cap and by what means will, in the normal course of things, pop up before you can say ‘Pay-him-extra-by-slipping-a brown-envelope-in-his-training-bag-on-his-birthday-and-by-paying-his-missus-to- do-phantom-shifts-in-the-club-shop’.
Coaches aren’t immune from making nudges, either. Every so often, a director of rugby or a head coach will lob an innuendo about a breach of the cap in another club’s direction, usually in the run up to them playing that coming Saturday.
Now we all have a chance to snitch. Premiership Rugby announced this week that it has set up a salary cap hotline phone number. It’s like Crimestoppers, only for rugby. Capstoppers, you might say. Anyone with intel about a club being in breach of the £4.26million cap is urged to email salarycap@ premiershiprugby.com or call 07583 826343.
Hot air and posturing? Not if Premiership Rugby is to be believed. The umbrella group representing top sides has said there will be “increased monitoring, investigation and transparency” of the cap. Moreover, the organisation has said it will “now undertake an Investigatory Audit in addition to the current annual Salary Cap audit which can involve using independent experts, to access relevant records held by a club who are suspected of breaching the regulations”.
To my ears, that is the toughest Premiership Rugby has ever sounded on enforcing the cap. Great news, you might say.
The problem, however, is this. The salary cap is voted for by the clubs. So if one or more clubs has voted for the beefed-up enforcement of the salary cap despite being in contravention of the wage limit, then at least one turkey has voted for Christmas. But turkeys of this sort don’t vote for Christmas – not unless they have a cheeky escape route from the turkey pen already in mind.
Also, is it right that those clubs suspected of breaching the cap will have a confidential disciplinary hearing, as the current terms state?
Would the integrity of the game not be better served if the names of such clubs were made public before such hearings took place, thereby enabling those with potentially corroborating information to come forward?
But however flawed the policing of the cap might be, this muscle-flexing is welcome.
You never know, with enough calls to the hotline before Advent, one of the turkeys could be roasted by Christmas.
Monday, 13 February 2012
And to cap it all...
Depending on your perspective (which in turn depends on how deep your pockets are), the Premiership’s salary cap is either a market-distorting piece of red tape that prevents English sides from competing on a level playing field in Europe, or a precious regulation that prevents the Chelseafication of rugby.
Whatever your thoughts on the cap’s existence, if it is there then it has to be enforced. Toothless regulations only muddy the waters.
For too long – to my mind, at least – the cap has been unsatisfactorily policed. It took too long to appoint a cap manager, and when he was appointed it was all a bit too low key.
Which is why it is good news that Premiership Rugby has now appointed big-hitting law firm Charles Russell to beef up its monitoring process.
The rumours of some clubs having previously embarked on sharp practices in order to skirt the cap are legion and it would be disingenuous of the authorities to pretend otherwise.
No doubt a great number of the ‘cap dodge’ tales are apocryphal – a birthday card stuffed full of cash was a wheeze that one player once jokingly mentioned to me – but for the sake of fairness, every side in the Premiership needs to know that all the others are complying with the wage ceiling.
Looking at their CV, few would doubt that Charles Russell are the ideal practice with which to ensure clubs remain whiter than white when it comes to the cap. Its clients include the Football Association, the British Horseracing Authority, the Scottish Football Association, the Rugby Football Union and the Welsh Rugby Union.
Contract scrutiny, spot checks and annual assessments should all be part and parcel of cap regulation. And rather like the judicial system at large, I suspect the rugby- supporting public would like cap assessment to not only be done, but be seen to be done.
Which is why an annually published cap report – with the necessary figures and sensitive information redacted – would be a welcome move.
With the addition next season of a regulation that will allow clubs to place one player outside of the cap, plus a modest increase in the basic cap, efficient monitoring will become more crucial. Charles Russell, get cracking.
Whatever your thoughts on the cap’s existence, if it is there then it has to be enforced. Toothless regulations only muddy the waters.
For too long – to my mind, at least – the cap has been unsatisfactorily policed. It took too long to appoint a cap manager, and when he was appointed it was all a bit too low key.
Which is why it is good news that Premiership Rugby has now appointed big-hitting law firm Charles Russell to beef up its monitoring process.
The rumours of some clubs having previously embarked on sharp practices in order to skirt the cap are legion and it would be disingenuous of the authorities to pretend otherwise.
No doubt a great number of the ‘cap dodge’ tales are apocryphal – a birthday card stuffed full of cash was a wheeze that one player once jokingly mentioned to me – but for the sake of fairness, every side in the Premiership needs to know that all the others are complying with the wage ceiling.
Looking at their CV, few would doubt that Charles Russell are the ideal practice with which to ensure clubs remain whiter than white when it comes to the cap. Its clients include the Football Association, the British Horseracing Authority, the Scottish Football Association, the Rugby Football Union and the Welsh Rugby Union.
Contract scrutiny, spot checks and annual assessments should all be part and parcel of cap regulation. And rather like the judicial system at large, I suspect the rugby- supporting public would like cap assessment to not only be done, but be seen to be done.
Which is why an annually published cap report – with the necessary figures and sensitive information redacted – would be a welcome move.
With the addition next season of a regulation that will allow clubs to place one player outside of the cap, plus a modest increase in the basic cap, efficient monitoring will become more crucial. Charles Russell, get cracking.
Thursday, 19 January 2012
English clubs go (salary) cap in hand as Euro campaigns falter
Bath Rugby have one last chance this weekend to ensure their European campaign ends with a bang rather than a kitten-like whimper. But whether or not they manage to beat Glasgow on Saturday, this season's campaign has seen Bath's value among the continent's big boys fall faster than the Euro.
If Bath were a European economy, they would have endured a triple dip recession in recent years. A new Heineken Cup campaign always heralds fresh positivity, but Bath have nosedived in each of the last three seasons.
Bath have won four Heineken Cup matches during those three campaigns, an embarrassing stat for former champs however you dress it up.
Two of those wins were against Italian whipping boys, with the other two coming at home against Edinburgh in 2009-10 and Montpellier this season. Neither of those last two victories was convincing.
Put another way, very few scalps have been claimed by a side with the self-professed goal of rubbing shoulders with the likes of Toulouse, Munster and Leinster.
But Bath are not the only side whose stock has plummeted on the European bourse. Investors in that traditionally defensive stock, Leicester Tigers, also have cause to feel jittery.
Tigers director of rugby Richard Cockerill partly blamed the salary cap for his side's woes after they were on the end of a beating in Ulster last Friday.
In Cockers' book, the cap prevents English sides from having sufficient depth to compete with those French and Irish sides which have greater wherewithal.
There is certainly something that separates Irish clubs and English clubs at the moment. For proof of that, just cast your eye over the tables.
Three Irish provinces sit at the top of their pools. And the only province that isn't, Connacht, came within a gnat's crotchet of beating Gloucester at Kingsholm, a location not exactly known for its warm welcome.
The cap will lose some of its potency as an excuse next season when it rises. A more compelling explanation for the Anglo-Irish divide, I think, is that the provinces don't have to worry about demotion from the relegation-free Pro12.
If English sides want a level playing field, the Premiership needs a fixed composition. Until then, the dice are unfairly loaded against them.
If Bath were a European economy, they would have endured a triple dip recession in recent years. A new Heineken Cup campaign always heralds fresh positivity, but Bath have nosedived in each of the last three seasons.
Bath have won four Heineken Cup matches during those three campaigns, an embarrassing stat for former champs however you dress it up.
Two of those wins were against Italian whipping boys, with the other two coming at home against Edinburgh in 2009-10 and Montpellier this season. Neither of those last two victories was convincing.
Put another way, very few scalps have been claimed by a side with the self-professed goal of rubbing shoulders with the likes of Toulouse, Munster and Leinster.
But Bath are not the only side whose stock has plummeted on the European bourse. Investors in that traditionally defensive stock, Leicester Tigers, also have cause to feel jittery.
Tigers director of rugby Richard Cockerill partly blamed the salary cap for his side's woes after they were on the end of a beating in Ulster last Friday.
In Cockers' book, the cap prevents English sides from having sufficient depth to compete with those French and Irish sides which have greater wherewithal.
There is certainly something that separates Irish clubs and English clubs at the moment. For proof of that, just cast your eye over the tables.
Three Irish provinces sit at the top of their pools. And the only province that isn't, Connacht, came within a gnat's crotchet of beating Gloucester at Kingsholm, a location not exactly known for its warm welcome.
The cap will lose some of its potency as an excuse next season when it rises. A more compelling explanation for the Anglo-Irish divide, I think, is that the provinces don't have to worry about demotion from the relegation-free Pro12.
If English sides want a level playing field, the Premiership needs a fixed composition. Until then, the dice are unfairly loaded against them.
Friday, 17 June 2011
The Socialist Republic of the Premiership
My musings on Gloucester shareholder Tom Walkinshaw's declaration that Premiership Rugby has its roots "somewhere in socialism"
Those volatile elements, sport and politics, need to be handled carefully whenever there's the slightest whiff that they might be about to combine. Otherwise there can be an unholy combustion.
Inevitably, the debate over the impending increase of the Premiership salary cap has generated a political debate with a small 'p'. Some clubs want it, others aren't so keen. One club has x agenda, another has y agenda.
Such internal politics are bound to occur within Premiership Rugby, the organisation which comprises the top dozen English sides.
What isn't inevitable is the manner in which certain clubs chose to publicly vent their views on the matter.
Ryan Walkinshaw, a major shareholder at Gloucester and the son of former owner Tom, this week gave a revealing interview which was as frank as it was engaging.
Walkinshaw clearly has a passion for the game that rivals his father's and the 23-year-old's views on its future are both well articulated and, in many cases, plausible.
But one of his remarks will no doubt prompt a few raised eyebrows.
"The whole idea of Premiership Rugby as a body has a base somewhere in socialism, in that we are all in it together, for the good of the sport."
During my time as an amateur player, and during my time as a rugby writer, I have to say I haven't had that many discussions about socialism. So it was intriguing to discover that one of the biggest players in the domestic game believes aspects of English professional rugby have their roots in Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto.
I can understand Walkinshaw's sentiments – English clubs do, to a degree, need to co-operate for the good of the game – but the problem is that the game is not played in an English bubble. There is Europe to worry about, too.
Holding back other English clubs because you don't have the money that they have (as Gloucester seem to want to do) might serve your self-interest but it will have the wider effect of harming English clubs' prospects on the European stage.
In that regard, Walkinshaw's proposals are inward-looking and redolent of a 'closed shop' mentality. That attitude won't help an English club lift the Heineken Cup. And would that be "for the good of the sport"?
Those volatile elements, sport and politics, need to be handled carefully whenever there's the slightest whiff that they might be about to combine. Otherwise there can be an unholy combustion.
Inevitably, the debate over the impending increase of the Premiership salary cap has generated a political debate with a small 'p'. Some clubs want it, others aren't so keen. One club has x agenda, another has y agenda.
Such internal politics are bound to occur within Premiership Rugby, the organisation which comprises the top dozen English sides.
What isn't inevitable is the manner in which certain clubs chose to publicly vent their views on the matter.
Ryan Walkinshaw, a major shareholder at Gloucester and the son of former owner Tom, this week gave a revealing interview which was as frank as it was engaging.
Walkinshaw clearly has a passion for the game that rivals his father's and the 23-year-old's views on its future are both well articulated and, in many cases, plausible.
But one of his remarks will no doubt prompt a few raised eyebrows.
"The whole idea of Premiership Rugby as a body has a base somewhere in socialism, in that we are all in it together, for the good of the sport."
During my time as an amateur player, and during my time as a rugby writer, I have to say I haven't had that many discussions about socialism. So it was intriguing to discover that one of the biggest players in the domestic game believes aspects of English professional rugby have their roots in Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto.
I can understand Walkinshaw's sentiments – English clubs do, to a degree, need to co-operate for the good of the game – but the problem is that the game is not played in an English bubble. There is Europe to worry about, too.
Holding back other English clubs because you don't have the money that they have (as Gloucester seem to want to do) might serve your self-interest but it will have the wider effect of harming English clubs' prospects on the European stage.
In that regard, Walkinshaw's proposals are inward-looking and redolent of a 'closed shop' mentality. That attitude won't help an English club lift the Heineken Cup. And would that be "for the good of the sport"?
Friday, 3 June 2011
Changes to the Premiership salary cap could create a two-tier league - but change was the only option
Have the turkeys voted for Christmas? The unanimous support for the changes to the Premiership's salary cap took me by surprise, as I can only see the league's less wealthy clubs suffering as a result. But perhaps they have been motivated by a commendable spirit of altruism... Here's my weekly column for The Bath Chronicle on the issue
There is now no question that Bath Rugby have become a major force when it comes to running the domestic game.
The announcement by Premiership Rugby last week that the salary cap is to be modified is a victory for the club's negotiating powers behind the scenes.
Less than a year ago, Bath chief executive Nick Blofeld and others began the task of reviewing the cap as part of a Premiership Rugby initiative.
Now, following the unanimous support for the review's findings, Bath have got pretty much what they want – albeit the changes will not take full effect until the 2012-13 season.
In essence, the cap will be lifted to £4.5 million, with clubs also free to pay whatever they want for one player whose wages will fall outside the cap.
As events in Zurich have shown in recent days, the internal politics of sporting organisations can be unsavoury, bitchy and shady.
But Premiership Rugby's negotiations over the cap changes appear to have been a polite Georgian tea party compared with FIFA's bun fight.
Ever since chairman Bruce Craig bought the club last April, Bath have made cogent arguments about why the English club game would suffer in Europe unless the cap was raised or modified.
It is a sign of Bath's clout and astuteness that they have negotiated their way to a settlement which gives them the power to deepen their squad with top drawer stars. That will apply to other clubs with deep pockets too, though, such as Northampton.
But will the changes herald the beginning of a two-tier Premiership, with the wealthy clubs leaving their poorer cousins behind?
As a number of Bath supporters have said to me, the likes of Newcastle and Sale voting for the cap changes is akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.
It is inconceivable that they will be able to afford the cap-exempt players which Bath, Saracens et al are likely to fly in.
But the English Premiership does not operate in a vacuum, and it would seem that the less wealthy clubs have recognised that. If the English game is to maintain its profile, its reputation and its ability to compete in Europe, then these changes are necessary, even if there is the danger of a financial elite emerging.
Read my interview with Bath CEO Nick Blofeld on the impact of the changes to the cap.
There is now no question that Bath Rugby have become a major force when it comes to running the domestic game.
The announcement by Premiership Rugby last week that the salary cap is to be modified is a victory for the club's negotiating powers behind the scenes.
Less than a year ago, Bath chief executive Nick Blofeld and others began the task of reviewing the cap as part of a Premiership Rugby initiative.
Now, following the unanimous support for the review's findings, Bath have got pretty much what they want – albeit the changes will not take full effect until the 2012-13 season.
In essence, the cap will be lifted to £4.5 million, with clubs also free to pay whatever they want for one player whose wages will fall outside the cap.
As events in Zurich have shown in recent days, the internal politics of sporting organisations can be unsavoury, bitchy and shady.
But Premiership Rugby's negotiations over the cap changes appear to have been a polite Georgian tea party compared with FIFA's bun fight.
Ever since chairman Bruce Craig bought the club last April, Bath have made cogent arguments about why the English club game would suffer in Europe unless the cap was raised or modified.
It is a sign of Bath's clout and astuteness that they have negotiated their way to a settlement which gives them the power to deepen their squad with top drawer stars. That will apply to other clubs with deep pockets too, though, such as Northampton.
But will the changes herald the beginning of a two-tier Premiership, with the wealthy clubs leaving their poorer cousins behind?
As a number of Bath supporters have said to me, the likes of Newcastle and Sale voting for the cap changes is akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.
It is inconceivable that they will be able to afford the cap-exempt players which Bath, Saracens et al are likely to fly in.
But the English Premiership does not operate in a vacuum, and it would seem that the less wealthy clubs have recognised that. If the English game is to maintain its profile, its reputation and its ability to compete in Europe, then these changes are necessary, even if there is the danger of a financial elite emerging.
Read my interview with Bath CEO Nick Blofeld on the impact of the changes to the cap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)