Top 14 – Toulouse attacked, Didier Lacroix (Stade Toulouse) makes a muscular response to the other presidents

“As a preamble, I would like to clarify that, although I have given my agreement to Jacky (Lorenzetti, president of Racing 92, Editor’s note) in order to open the debate, this is in no way an agreement without condition on the reduction of the Salary Cap.” From the outset, the tone is set. He will be firm, although argued on each point. In a long letter, addressed to the 29 other presidents of professional clubs and which we obtained, Didier Lacroix took the time to do things well to defend, point by point, its economic vision of French Rugby but also its institution, the Stade Toulouse, currently targeted by several palace maneuvers.

He had sent this letter ahead of the big “leaders’ meeting”, outfit Tuesday in Lyon, for which he was absent for personal reasons. There, all the decision-makers of the Top 14 and of Pro D2 had promised to put on the table the subjects that are currently causing anger: modification of the salary cap and its credits granted (in the case of international players), distribution of TV rights and remuneration of agents, for the most part.

A response to Pierre-Yves Revol

The object from Didier Lacroix’s letter, therefore ? Respond to a current that is currently being heard, behind the scenes of French rugby, and which would like brake Toulouse hegemony, in particular through a modification of the mechanics of the salary cap. “More internationals = more salary cap = better squad = guarantee of titles”, argue these opponents, for the dire schematically. What some, in the wake of Jacky Lorenzetti who first took a public position, would likeint weight to return to theleft.

They also see it as a quest for economic and ultimately sporting balance, to preserve a competitive and exhilarating Top 14. Didier Lacroix, his, sees this as an anti-competitive maneuver: “Some clubs have adapted their economy to respect the significant constraints of the salary cap, would it be normal to further regulate it at the risk of penalizing them and seeing them joineds by clubs that have not taken this route?”

Didier Lacroix also wrote this letter in response to an initial letter from the president of Castres Pierre-Yves Revol. “UMany thanks to Pierre-Yves, because obviously I wrote my note and my comments on an existing basis” indicates the Toulouse resident at the conclusion of his missive. Revol, also excused for this Tuesday’s meeting, had also taken up his pen to write to his alter egos. There was a long developmentand his views and arguments regarding a modification of the salary cap.

“Headwinds” against a cap on salary cap credits

Point by point, Lacroix therefore endeavored to respond to him. Both are rather against the introduction of a salary cap in Pro D2, they also agree on the limited effect that a reduction in the salary cap in Top 14 would have on the balance of power current; where applicable, if this modification had to intervene, they both agree on the need for‘register over a long time, “a digestible adaptation time” as he describes it.

On the other hand, the opposition is quite head-on when it comes to the subject of “salary cap credits”, these extensions of the ceiling up to 180,000 euros for each player selected in the “Premium XV of France” list. By far the club most concerned by the call-up of its players in Blue, Toulouse is, de facto, the one which has the payroll of the gamesehighest urs. And the XXL squad that goes with it. This is precisely what some of its competitors want to attack, by targeting the limitation of these “salary cap credits”. What Didier Lacroix is ​​more biting about.

To Revol, who offered “the establishment of an overall ceiling” in respect of the credits granted, the Toulouse resident responds: “I am very emptymment and in all subjectivity, headwinds against any cap, except to cap the number of players selected by theFrench team.” In short: beyondand fifth or sixth player selected, no more financial compensation would be paid – this is what some of the opponents are proposing – and Didier Lacroix then threatens to no longer make available his players exceeding this ceiling. Before tempering: “Which you all know is impossible.” since contrary to rAndWorld Rugby regulations (article 9) concerning the provision of players for their national team. Or, according to him, it would be necessary “call into question the number of matches in the year to only play with internationals.” Clearly, this would put the format of an elite of 14 clubs back on the table, to reduce it to 12 or 10 clubs and effaThis way, you can identify duplicates in the calendar.

He also responds to Florian Grill

C’is all node from French: maintaining fragile balances between the performance desires of the clubs and those of the French team, with a calendar which ultimately explodes and a distribution of remuneration between clubs and federations which further complicates the equation. On this subject, Lacroix concludes: “I’ll leave it to you to question everything, but cIt will be without my support, or even with certain opposition which will be appropriate to share with the clubs concerned, because certainly to date the concentration of internationals is significant, but is this a real obstacle to performance?

Throughout son mail, for form, Lacroix uses and abuses rhetorical questions. “Are salaries the adjustment variable in the rugby economy? On a global level, on a national level? On the balance between the amateur world and the professional world?”. Or even this one: “Should we invite the FFR and thereby the problems of the economy of world rugby into our regulations? Should we jointly review the remuneration of international players by telling them clearly that in France, they are paid too much compared to the rest of the world?”

Here, the Toulouse president seems to respond to the president of the Federation Florian Grill, and an interview he gave this Monday in the columns of Midi Olympique. “If we increase the salary cap, it is a declaration of war on other nations. This means: “we don’t care about you and we do what we want”in a sport that is already not globalized […] In an ideal world, the salary cap would be revised downwards but not increasing is an acceptable minimum. I am convinced of the global stakes on this subject.” martelait Grill. “It is here that I appeal to the responsibility of the presidents of Top 14 and Pro D2. They bear this responsibility as much towards world rugby as that of our territories. We cannot crush everyone and impose a pace that no one could follow.”

“If our salary cap was indexed to inflation…”

Lacroix, through his chosen wordssmakes it clear that global issues should not enter into the thinking that currently motivates presidents on domestic and Franco-French issues. Following, he does this mathematical demonstration: “Between 2020 and 2023, the average salary increased in France by 16% (source Insee). Forecasts this year point to an average increase of around 2.5%. If our salary cap was indexed to wage inflation (which does not seem illogical to me at all!), it should be for exercise 2024/25 of €11.3 million x 1.16 x 1.025 = €13.4 million. Instead we brought it down to €10.7M, a drop of 20%!” Clearly, for him, a further reduction in the salary cap would be outside the economic realities of the moment. Unlike Grill, then. Two opposing visions.

Still in rhetoric, Lacroix still gives: “lShould the competitiveness of clubs be measured on the extra-sporting level?”a question for which hee take care to deliver the answer: “A priori, yes, since attractiveness and its associated resources are not equal for all clubs.” In terms of attractiveness, the observation is clear: the Toulouse Stadium is quite far today in front of the competition, et for several years. Which also ensures him sporting success. Not sure that it should, however, bee “sanctioned”…