A war of words has broken out between the Rugby Football Union and Saracens over a disputed disciplinary case.
Sarries criticised the way boss Brendan Venter was handed a misconduct charge following an incident at Leicester.
The RFU blasted the Saracens management calling their criticisms "unfounded", with Saracens then hitting back again.
"Perhaps it is time for English rugby to be run like a modern professional sport and not a rural prep school," said chief executive Edward Griffiths.
Director of rugby Venter received a 14-week ban on Tuesday for "making provocative and inappropriate gestures" at Leicester two weeks ago – a decision against which Sarries have now confirmed they will appeal.
The South African was cleared of another charge of pushing a female Leicester fan but Saracens were unhappy with the manner in which Venter was handed a misconduct charge by the RFU.
"It is astonishing that the RFU has brought and publicised these charges after requesting statements only from Leicester supporters and stewards and so hearing only one side of the story," added Griffiths in a statement on Tuesday.
"Brendan, a medical doctor, is rightly appalled that charges have been brought before anybody has even had the courtesy of speaking to him." Saracens also went on to ask for the process to be "revised".
The RFU dismissed the complaint, pointing out that the statements they had gathered meant Venter would have faced a disciplinary hearing regardless of any counter-arguments from the Vicarage Road club.
"Any criticism that they should first have interviewed Saracens staff before deciding to lay the charge is unfounded," said Judge Jeff Blackett, the RFU’s disciplinary officer, in his summary comments on Thursday.
"There was sufficient evidence from the complainant and others to provide a strong prima facie case and gathering contrary statements would not have prevented a hearing.
"In fact, by listing an early hearing, Saracens was galvanised into action to gather other statements. It was much more important to the image of the sport, and it was in both Dr Venter and the RFU’s best interests, that this case was brought expeditiously.
"We are satisfied that there has been no procedural unfairness."
The RFU also called on Saracens to accept responsibility for their actions after criticising their statement.
"The response of the Saracens management to these proceedings has been very disappointing," said the RFU.
"Statements on their website criticising these proceedings do the club no credit.
"Their staff were clearly involved in some unpleasant events on 8 May which could have led to significant crowd trouble, but they have sought to lay blame elsewhere.
Why did the RFU provide biscuits if they were not to be eaten?
"All clubs have a responsibility to maintain the core values of the game and to ensure their staff’s conduct is exemplary.
"On this occasion Saracens should have done more to ensure better behaviour amongst their own staff and to reprimand them for their poor behaviour afterwards."
Venter was cleared of allegedly striking the female Leicester supporter after it was deemed that he had accidentally struck her whilst gesticulating at what was happening on the pitch.
But Saracens posted a further statement on Wednesday expressing their surprise at the length of Venter’s ban.
That suspension will prevent him from attending the re-match against the Tigers in the Premiership final on Saturday 29 May, and the comments from Blackett have infuriated Saracens.
"This kind of public attack on a leading club does the RFU no credit at all," added Griffiths in a statement on Thursday.
"We find ourselves in a ludicrous situation where Brendan Venter, our director of rugby, has been banned from attending the Premiership final because, during our recent match at Leicester, he was given a seat with a restricted view… he stood to follow the play… he was shouted down and abused by home supporters… in response, he did not swear at anybody and did not make any obscene gestures.
"Blackett’s judgement borders on self-parody, citing Venter eating a biscuit as alleged evidence of disdain for the process. Why did the RFU provide biscuits if they were not to be eaten?"
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.