Wasps 'not part of Premiership salary cap settlement'
Saturday 24 October 2015 12:02, UK
Wasps have insisted they are not of the Aviva Premiership clubs forced into "settlements" with league bosses over salary cap concerns.
Premiership Rugby dismissed claims earlier this week that three of the league's 12 clubs had breached the salary cap last season.
However, rugby's governing body did admit to "certain issues" regarding access to information and commercial contracts, while also confirming more hikes in the self-imposed squad wage limits.
Wasps moved to clarify their situation on Friday, with owner Derek Richardson adamant the club had not been forced into any agreements, financial or otherwise, over salary issues.
Wasps have declared themselves among the world's richest clubs after their lucrative move to Coventry's Ricoh Arena, but Richardson continues to defend the importance of the salary cap.
"I am sure that many rugby supporters have read the statement issued by Premiership Rugby," said Richardson.
"I would like to reassure Wasps' supporters that Wasps are not one of the clubs to which Premiership Rugby refers when it states: 'Premiership Rugby can confirm that certain issues were pursued last season with some clubs relating to access to information and to commercial contracts where there were differences of opinion as to the inclusion or not in the salary cap'.
"Consequently we are not one of the clubs mentioned in the statement who have reached a settlement with Premiership Rugby.
"We are strong supporters of the salary cap and believe that it is vital to the Aviva Premiership to be the most competitive league in world rugby and at the same time protecting the long-term financial sustainability of clubs."
The basic salary cap will rise from £5.5m to £6.5m for 2016, and increase again to £7m in 2017-18.
Speculation had raged for months over multiple salary cap breaches at different clubs, and rumours had been rife that the main culprits would receive bans.
Premiership Rugby has insisted no clubs flouted the regulations, but would not comment further, citing confidentiality agreements.
