Saracens sanction

Re: Saracens sanction

Sky blue 08 Nov 2019 21:21 pm said..

Not1eyed wrote:Maybe they suspected maybe they didn’t. My point is when offered the deal IF they asked question is this above board and we’re told yes then they have no blame cause everyone in their position would sign contract and take money. Therefore for me no blame can be apportioned. I understand some will feel different


Yes, I feel differently.

Not everyone would sign and take the money just because someone said it was ok - all evidence indicated it was not ok.

They signed because their greed was stronger than their morals. They are complicit.
Posts: 2284
Sky blue
Hall of Famer

Re: Saracens sanction

Not1eyed 08 Nov 2019 21:24 pm said..

Fair enough Sky Blue. I understand your opinion but respectfully disagree
Posts: 1785
Not1eyed
Hall of Famer

Re: Saracens sanction

DieTrying 08 Nov 2019 21:39 pm said..

The other thing that intrigues me is that :

1995/96: Wray buys Saracens.

2009 ish: He sell 50% to S African Investors.

2018: He buys back the 50% to become the 100% owner or is he??: Saracens Limited info sheet ( see people tab and then look at persons with significant control tab ) : https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03110665

2019: Saracens Loan debt pile of £45M converted to shares now owned by Premier Team Holdings Limited ( see people tab and then look at persons with significant control ): https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05530017

Now I'm not suggesting that any Law has been broken, but both sets of names seem to be "similar". For me if you own an asset with Loan debt and then convert said Loan Debt for Equity shares to be owned by a Company, you also in effect own, makes no sense at all. I mean, "selling" your own debt to yourself for shares is going above and beyond. To a degree I admire his support for Saracens but his attitude to ethics/ moral codes is repugnant.
Posts: 4392  Location: Gloucester
User avatar
DieTrying
Moderator

Re: Saracens sanction

PeteG 08 Nov 2019 21:50 pm said..

DieTrying wrote:The other thing that intrigues me is that :

1995/96: Wray buys Saracens.

2009 ish: He sell 50% to S African Investors.

2018: He buys back the 50% to become the 100% owner or is he??: Saracens Limited info sheet ( see people tab and then look at persons with significant control tab ) : https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03110665

2019: Saracens Loan debt pile of £45M converted to shares now owned by Premier Team Holdings Limited ( see people tab and then look at persons with significant control ): https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05530017

Now I'm not suggesting that any Law has been broken, but both sets of names seem to be "similar". For me if you own an asset with Loan debt and then convert said Loan Debt for Equity shares to be owned by a Company, you also in effect own, makes no sense at all. I mean, "selling" your own debt to yourself for shares is going above and beyond. to a degree I admire his support for Saracens but his attitude to ethics/ moral codes is repugnant.

+1
Posts: 105
PeteG
Senior squad member

Re: Saracens sanction

TheOptimistSenior 08 Nov 2019 21:53 pm said..

I suspect the players had some doubts, as did a number of players from other clubs.
I wonder if Mark McCall had any thoughts on the number of international standard players joining the club - or was he completely thunderstruck by the recent course of events?! (Understatement used on purpose).
I am grateful to all those posters who have put forward such cogent views to question the motives of all those involved with Saracens and the debacle that they have produced.
As many have said, they should be deeply ashamed of their actions or acquiescence in what has happened. Rugby is poorer for it.
Cue further comments from Saracens apologists.
Posts: 420  Location: Mayhill Slopes
TheOptimistSenior
Vice-Captain

Re: Saracens sanction

King Prawn Bhuna 08 Nov 2019 22:03 pm said..

We're playing their seconds tomorrow...but in a couple of weeks time, clubs are going to be playing a full strength team that is a salary cap breaking (cheating) team....how can a legit DoR reconcile that he is not playing on a level playing field?

Something surely has to give?...or are they allowed to continue playing as cheats? They play Bath on 29/11 there's an irony for those who purport to be fans who bang on about Gloucester allegedly breaking the salary cap....I wonder what Guscott has to say on the topic?
Here's to the nights I'll never remember with the friends I'll never forget...
Posts: 7050  Location: Probably in the bar....
User avatar
King Prawn Bhuna
Moderator

Re: Saracens sanction

DieTrying 08 Nov 2019 22:40 pm said..

The timing of dropping Wolfpiss is unfortunate, especially as I loathe the stuff and spent last season drinkless during matches,bar the odd half of Stella, another dire lager. The bland "circumstances beyond our control" is, for me, a bit weak from the Club and could be interpreted as spite. Whilst Wray is an Investor, I believe Wyles and Hargreaves started it themselves and the Wray money came in post retirement and yes I can see how that may look post " Salarygate", especially as this article: https://www.standard.co.uk/business/ent ... 40956.html

uses the quote: Hargreaves adds: “We did have other options but we thought why wouldn’t we work with one of our mentors? A guy like Nigel, who makes every single investment based on what he sees in the market — it could go well, it could go badly. Why should he not be allowed to do that?” Hmm not sure "mentor" is the correct word to use. :D
Posts: 4392  Location: Gloucester
User avatar
DieTrying
Moderator

Re: Saracens sanction

Oxford Glaws 08 Nov 2019 22:43 pm said..

I think he meant to say "dementor".
1Thes.5 [14] Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feeble-minded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.
Posts: 2078
User avatar
Oxford Glaws
Hall of Famer

Re: Saracens sanction

CMGC 08 Nov 2019 23:07 pm said..

Surely the issue with the players is quite straightforward. Any Prem player in discussion with his agent will have a fairly firm idea of their "Salary Value". When doing a new contract you either get what you deem your "correct rate" or a bit higher perhaps. If not you look elsewhere. Almost no one is going to sign for a significant monetary deal below this " perceived value" UNLESS there is a sweetener " in the pot somewhere. The SC regs are drawn up to include all these other options. (just a with our own tax ( Co Cars, etc.) So the players MUST have known they were getting true value and this was a club ruse to get "under the cap" . If they didn't work it out themselves then their agents would have explained it to them. The only excuse they can have is that they had it explained to them that this was all legit and legal and that their rich owner was able to do this for lucky old Sarries because he was Santa.
I can just believe that some players would have thought this was ok and they had a loophole . However once the journos got hold of it they must have realised where this was going. I am sure for the last 3-4 weeks the Sarries players would have had a pretty sick feeling of impending gloom and insecurity for the future. None of which would have helped in the WC final.
Posts: 4110  Location: In the sticks
CMGC
Moderator

Re: Saracens sanction

Steve M 09 Nov 2019 00:14 am said..

CMGC wrote: I am sure for the last 3-4 weeks the Sarries players would have had a pretty sick feeling of impending gloom and insecurity for the future. None of which would have helped in the WC final.


Didnt seem to bother them too much the previous week ? They lost the final to a far better team on the day ...
The only problem with doing nothing is not knowing when you have finished.
Posts: 1236  Location: Longlevens, Gloucester
Steve M
Hall of Famer
PreviousNext

Return to Gloucester Rugby

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Glawsinwuss, glos stirrer, stu, stuartjames and 24 guests