Bristol Rovers at Home (4 Viewers)

[italiahorse]

Ask the people trying to push that we just pay a low rent (yes, you included. Nice contradiction)

Have a day off again, you are embarrassing. Not clever enough to pull off what you try, just contradict yourself.

Still not bothering to talk about ccfc I take it?

We do pay a low rent that’s not in dispute.
But if we saw the figures on matchday costs we could give a reasoned opinion on whether the overall package is expensive or not.
You are not clever enough to show me the figures but keep quoting matchday costs as a problem. Bringing up CCFC posts is just deflection because you can’t supply the details.

 

---

[italiahorse]

You couldn’t see a reasoned judgement if it ran you over at high speed

Not going to happen on here where people keep quoting unreasonable matchday costs but can’t actually quote them. Tim Fisher excluded.

 

[Nick]

We do pay a low rent that’s not in dispute.
But if we saw the figures on matchday costs we could give a reasoned opinion on whether the overall package is expensive or not.
You are not clever enough to show me the figures but keep quoting matchday costs as a problem. Bringing up CCFC posts is just deflection because you can’t supply the details.

I pointed out yet again that people try to make out we just give wasps a low rent. It isn't just that at all.

I'm pointing out that people like you try to spin it that wasps are doing us a massive favour for not much in return and go on about the low rent.

How is it deflection to point out you are a Tesco value version of a pr machine trying your best not to let anybody say anything bad about whoever it is blowing smoke up your arse at that time?

 

[italiahorse]

On their forum though they generally want Sunday fixtures

Seems to be the favoured day, particularly with me and I have yet to see Wasps explanation why Saturday is best. It’s been mentioned that playing Sundays means that for most away games only gives them 6 days to recover but not by Wasps as far as I can remember.

 

[Nick]

Not going to happen on here where people keep quoting unreasonable matchday costs but can’t actually quote them. Tim Fisher excluded.

Point out where I have said anything about unreasonable matchday costs in this thread. I haven't, I have just said it isn't just the rent that people bang on as if wasps are doing us a favour.

Like I said, you aren't clever enough to try and catch people out.

 

[italiahorse]

I pointed out yet again that people try to make out we just give wasps a low rent. It isn't just that at all.

I'm pointing out that people like you try to spin it that wasps are doing us a massive favour for not much in return and go on about the low rent.

How is it deflection to point out you are a Tesco value version of a pr machine trying your best not to let anybody say anything bad about whoever it is blowing smoke up your arse at that time?

It’s not necessary bad what you are saying as much as incorrect information or not actually quoting details that you are forcing your argument with. All I’m asking is that you show me the matchday costs figures or you will be seen as only preaching to the converted.

 

[italiahorse]

Point out where I have said anything about unreasonable matchday costs in this thread. I haven't, I have just said it isn't just the rent that people bang on as if wasps are doing us a favour.

Like I said, you aren't clever enough to try and catch people out.

So the rent is reasonable then ?

 

[Nick]

It’s not necessary bad what you are saying as much as incorrect information or not actually quoting details that you are forcing your argument with. All I’m asking is that you show me the matchday costs figures or you will be seen as only preaching to the converted.

What incorrect information have I pushed?

I'm not the one on here with no interest in CCFC trying as hard as possible to push that Wasps are doing us a favour and won't have a bad word said.

Is it fact or not that it isn't just rent we give to Wasps, we also pay matchday costs to cover putting our games on as well as them having a share of the food profits from our fans.

 

[italiahorse]

What incorrect information have I pushed?

I'm not the one on here with no interest in CCFC trying as hard as possible to push that Wasps are doing us a favour and won't have a bad word said.

Is it fact or not that it isn't just rent we give to Wasps, we also pay matchday costs to cover putting our games on.

You bought up quoting low rent as a problem in this fixture thread.
You keep quoting matchday costs as on costs to this and feeding them that think its unreasonable without ever asking the question if the package if fair or not.
If you are going to mention them at least know what they are.

I’m a season ticket holder of many years and have no interest in CCFC. Really?
You need to question your reasoning in general.

 

[Nick]

You bought up quoting low rent as a problem in this fixture thread.
You keep quoting matchday costs as on costs to this and feeding them those that think its unreasonable without ever asking the question if the package if fair or not.
If you are going to mention them at least know what they are.

I’m a season ticket holder of many years and have no interest in CCFC. Really?
You need to question your reasoning in general.

Yes, I point out when people try to make out Wasps are doing us a favour because we pay a low rent that it isn't just rent as we also pay matchday costs to cover putting the games on. I'm factually correct.

I couldn't give a shit if you walk around the house singing the Michael Doyle song all day, I am on about your interest in terms of CCFC on here. You are far more interested in nobody badmouthing Wasps and don't bother discussing anything to do with CCFC.

I need to question my reasoning? Let's refer back to you demanding everybody supports SISU shall we and you piping up if anybody tried to slag them off? (Strangely like you do now with wasps but not as committed)

Like I said, you aren't clever enough to pull off what you try to.

 

[italiahorse]

Yes, I point out when people try to make out Wasps are doing us a favour because we pay a low rent that it isn't just rent as we also pay matchday costs to cover putting the games on. I'm factually correct.

I couldn't give a shit if you walk around the house singing the Michael Doyle song all day, I am on about your interest in terms of CCFC on here. You are far more interested in nobody badmouthing Wasps and don't bother discussing anything to do with CCFC.

I need to question my reasoning? Let's refer back to you demanding everybody supports SISU shall we and you piping up if anybody tried to slag them off? (Strangely like you do now with wasps but not as committed)

Like I said, you aren't clever enough to pull off what you try to.

You rate my CCFC loyalty on posts on here rather than attendance.
Your delusional.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Your delusional.

His delusional what?

 

[Nick]

You rate my CCFC loyalty on posts on here rather than attendance.
Your delusional.

I rate your agenda on here based on posts on here, yes.

You used to get the benefit of the doubt because you at least posted about CCFC as well. Nowadays you are an illiterate version of Peeler and any others who signed up just to post about Wasps.

 

[italiahorse]

I rate your agenda on here based on posts on here, yes.

You used to get the benefit of the doubt because you at least posted about CCFC as well. Nowadays you are an illiterate version of Peeler and any others who signed up just to post about Wasps.

I’m not posting on CCFC because I can’t be bothered to research possible theoretical signings, I can’t be bothered to research new signings until I see them in a CCFC shirt. A lot of the threads on here are just discussions on nothing important but hats off to you guys who can discuss it all day. I’ll just read the interesting threads from guys that are watching the developing team until the thread deteriorates into the usual non entity and like the positive contributions.
But actual news that effects me,in the closed season, like fixture changes, ticketing and standing I’ll make a contribution. I can also offer explanation from a Wasps point of view on their reasoning and how I see it from being a season ticket holder there.
Its not the forum admins agenda but I prefer to voice my point of view.
Sometimes it’s not always CCC/Wasps are wrong and CCFC/Sisu are right.

 

[chiefdave]

Why would Wasps put the interests of CCFC above their own....... if it were reversed CCFC wouldn't? It is not about keeping a tenant happy, when it comes down to hindering your own team or business, someone else's interest or business will come second at best.

But nobody is saying Wasps shouldn't put their interests ahead of ours. Quite simply this is a situation that need never arise. Premiership Rugby no longer requires its clubs to have primacy of tenure, and even when they did Wasps were one of the clubs who were exempt from that requirement.

It is very easy (its taken me about 5 minutes to work out looking at the fixtures) to avoid clashes without moving our games.

Our fixtures were released a long time before Wasps, and I have no doubt if required the FL would have indicated which weekends we would be playing to Wasps earlier or even, as they did when we were at Sixfields, arrange the fixtures so as not to clash with any weekends Wasps require.

Both teams can play Saturday or Sunday as suits. Both teams can move games for TV if required. The pitch is not used on back to back days. Surely that is the better option all round.

I don't think there is much point referring to past assurances

There might not be much point but the likes of the local media and the Sky Blue Trust shouldn't give Wasps and the council a free ride. Promises were made, both to us and CRFC, when the Ricoh was sold and they have been broken. You can be certain questions would be asked if the roles were reversed.

I would assume included in there is the supply of stadium staff, an element of insurance and utilities, security cost & licence fees etc and contribution wear and tear.

Wouldn't agree with that. If I hired a venue for a football match I'd expect the basics to be included. Imagine hiring a pitch at the Higgs and you then get presented with another bill for multiple times hire charge for 'extras' such as the staff turning up to sell you drinks or there being electricity. I wouldn't be expecting to cover additional wear and tear or utilities charges over and above the hire charge either. If that kind of thing has been shifted from the rent column to the matchday costs column then we're getting treated even worse than I think anyone imagined.

 

[hill83]

His delusional what?

World class that. One of my favourites.

 

[italiahorse]

World class that. One of my favourites.

Both of us can be delusional it’s not an either or

 

[Nick]

I’m not posting on CCFC because I can’t be bothered to research possible theoretical signings, I can’t be bothered to research new signings until I see them in a CCFC shirt. A lot of the threads on here are just discussions on nothing important but hats off to you guys who can discuss it all day. I’ll just read the interesting threads from guys that are watching the developing team until the thread deteriorates into the usual non entity and like the positive contributions.
But actual news that effects me,in the closed season, like fixture changes, ticketing and standing I’ll make a contribution. I can also offer explanation from a Wasps point of view on their reasoning and how I see it from being a season ticket holder there.
Its not the forum admins agenda but I prefer to voice my point of view.
Sometimes it’s not always CCC/Wasps are wrong and CCFC/Sisu are right.

What are you on about now you smack head?

You aren't posting about CCFC because you don't want to, it's as simple as that. You post when somebody mentions wasps because you want to.

There's plenty of discussion about CCFC.

 

[hill83]

Both of us can be delusional it’s not an either or

 

[letsallsingtogether]

But nobody is saying Wasps shouldn't put their interests ahead of ours. Quite simply this is a situation that need never arise. Premiership Rugby no longer requires its clubs to have primacy of tenure, and even when they did Wasps were one of the clubs who were exempt from that requirement.

It is very easy (its taken me about 5 minutes to work out looking at the fixtures) to avoid clashes without moving our games.

Our fixtures were released a long time before Wasps, and I have no doubt if required the FL would have indicated which weekends we would be playing to Wasps earlier or even, as they did when we were at Sixfields, arrange the fixtures so as not to clash with any weekends Wasps require.

Both teams can play Saturday or Sunday as suits. Both teams can move games for TV if required. The pitch is not used on back to back days. Surely that is the better option all round.

There might not be much point but the likes of the local media and the Sky Blue Trust shouldn't give Wasps and the council a free ride. Promises were made, both to us and CRFC, when the Ricoh was sold and they have been broken. You can be certain questions would be asked if the roles were reversed.

Wouldn't agree with that. If I hired a venue for a football match I'd expect the basics to be included. Imagine hiring a pitch at the Higgs and you then get presented with another bill for multiple times hire charge for 'extras' such as the staff turning up to sell you drinks or there being electricity. I wouldn't be expecting to cover additional wear and tear or utilities charges over and above the hire charge either. If that kind of thing has been shifted from the rent column to the matchday costs column then we're getting treated even worse than I think anyone imagined.

I believe the Higgs did charge the club for wear and tear that is one of the reasons that the academy were going to move out.
As for matchday costs wouldn't we have had them anyway if we owned the stadium, I'm sure every club in the country has them?
Also wasn't that how it worked when we rented from council?

When I hired a room for my birthday I paid for just that if you wanted doormen or any other extra I had to pay for it.
Just saying not sure how this deal works.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

When I hired a room for my birthday I paid for just that if you wanted doormen or any other extra I had to pay for it.

You have more... interesting birthday parties than me, if you need bouncers!

 

[italiahorse]

There's plenty of discussion about CCFC.

There’s discussion and interesting discussion.
I’ll follow others that are there and like what I find interesting.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

You have more... interesting birthday parties than me, if you need bouncers!

Tbf going back a few years and yes I did need them

 

[chiefdave]

I believe the Higgs did charge the club for wear and tear that is one of the reasons that the academy were going to move out.

Maybe Higgs was a bad example as I meant more if me or you hired a pitch for a couple of hours. Not the academy being there 6 days a week.

As for matchday costs wouldn't we have had them anyway if we owned the stadium, I'm sure every club in the country has them?

Yes every club has matchday costs but its not a set definition with every club paying the same thing. That's exactly the problem.

People throw around the phrase matchday costs and the everyone pays them line like we're all paying the same thing. Things that were part of the rent are now classed as matchday costs so the likes of Italia can shout about how low the rent is.

How many clubs are buying in F&B for hospitality at full retail price with no room for margin? How many clubs have to pay retail price for parking spaces for media etc they are obligated to provide under FL regulations? How many clubs have to pay a premium every time they want to open an extra block?

Look at what's happening with the stewarding. Thats a prime example.

Also wasn't that how it worked when we rented from council?

That's exactly the point, we had bigger crowds then yet we paid less in matchday costs.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Maybe Higgs was a bad example as I meant more if me or you hired a pitch for a couple of hours. Not the academy being there 6 days a week.

Yes every club has matchday costs but its not a set definition with every club paying the same thing. That's exactly the problem.

People throw around the phrase matchday costs and the everyone pays them line like we're all paying the same thing. Things that were part of the rent are now classed as matchday costs so the likes of Italia can shout about how low the rent is.

How many clubs are buying in F&B for hospitality at full retail price with no room for margin? How many clubs have to pay retail price for parking spaces for media etc they are obligated to provide under FL regulations? How many clubs have to pay a premium every time they want to open an extra block?

Look at what's happening with the stewarding. Thats a prime example.

That's exactly the point, we had bigger crowds then yet we paid less in matchday costs.

But the rent was 10 fold when we rented off the council, The stewarding situation is shit,

Problem is we rent so the landlord charges what he wants or you just don't pay it and move on.
It is a situation that is not going to go away we will pay them or someone else as a new stadium is officially off the cards now.

Wasps know that another move away will kill off the Club,could really charge a lot more we would have no choice.
Where would we go they have us by the balls at the moment never know might win in court then things might turn.

 

[GlastoSkyBlue]

As an ST holder for next year I was worried about this...

Wasps said last year that they were considering what was better financially for them... It looks like they believe it is a Saturday... Once that decision was made it is completely down to the RFU to plan fixtures. I wish Wasps hadn't made that decision, however they are empowered to do so, and given that they are feeling the squeeze trying to make ACL finances work I can't say I'm surprised.

As for rent, unless we know the detail around match day costs it is difficult to guage value for money. Basic rent is pretty cheap if it is £100k per year, that is less than 4k per game. If I wanted to have an event it would cost more than 4k. Adding extras is nothing special and no surprise, you couldn't expect a landlord to make a loss from its Tennant - the caveat is that the landlord doesn't swing too much lead and Ive not seen evidence that they do or dont. We can't complain that we bring additional event days to boost other commercials because SISUs continued legal battle and lack of long term Ricoh deal may well be costing them. I don't feel sorry for them, but I certainly don't expect our backs to be scratched.

Ultimately as a L1 or L2 club we couldn't afford to run ACL and the Ricoh, it doesn't make enough money as it is. Therefore to play in cov, rental is the only option other than build new and own the ground without the shackles of ACL. Get back to the championship mind and I'd like to think that SISU could find an adequate investment partner.

I think they (Wasps) are trying to hurt SISU and unfortunately stepping on us fans to do so. That is wrong, but again, is an outcome of working against rather than with the owner.

Personally, I think if it wasn't Wasps, we'd be complaining about the distress being caused by another owner of ACL. Before Wasps we moaned about the council and higgs, who again acted against the club in response to action started by SISU. Ultimately the behaviour of SISU will always affect how the club is directed and us fans. Fortunately we've been better under bodily and with Robins having wider control of the club has made sporting elements much better. However until SISU move on this sort of shit will continue.

That said Im not missing out going to see the team I've supported for 50 years because of that bunch.

 

[chiefdave]

Wasps said last year that they were considering what was better financially for them... It looks like they believe it is a Saturday... Once that decision was made it is completely down to the RFU to plan fixtures.

Which is fine. They can play Saturdays, but they should certainly be questioned about broken promises to both ourselves and CRFC. But that doesn't mean they have to play the Saturdays we have games. Clubs up and down the country avoid clashes. There are more than enough Saturdays in the season for there to only be one game per weekend scheduled at the Ricoh. To not do that is just making things deliberately difficult.

you couldn't expect a landlord to make a loss from its Tennant

Nowhere has anyone suggested that should be the case.

Ultimately as a L1 or L2 club we couldn't afford to run ACL and the Ricoh, it doesn't make enough money as it is. Therefore to play in cov, rental is the only option other than build new and own the ground without the shackles of ACL.

Why not? There will be more people at the Ricoh this year to see us than to see Wasps yet if you question their ability to run the Ricoh you get shot down. And who says the club would run it directly anyway. I would like to see anyone put up a decent argument that someone like AEG couldn't run the stadium.

I think they (Wasps) are trying to hurt SISU and unfortunately stepping on us fans to do so.

They aren't hurting SISU, they are hurting the club. Do you think Joy is sat in her office upset that games are being moved or someone can't sit in block 14? The damage is being done to the club while our fans defend the people doing it!

 

[chiefdave]

But the rent was 10 fold when we rented off the council

That's the whole point! It was higher but it was still rent and there was still matchday costs on top. The rent going down is no reason for the matchday costs to go up. We rent the ground then, we rent the ground now. Nothing about that has changed. Its the same ground with the same stands and the same facilities.

Same with arranging fixtures, we aren't the only club in the country who shares and others don't have these issues. Its clearly Wasps being deliberately awkward but some just want to blame the club and even more bizarrely some actively defend and praise Wasps for treating our club like shit.

Problem is we rent so the landlord charges what he wants or you just don't pay it and move on.

And they watch the reaction to things like this and know they can chuck us out and still our fans wouldn't place the blame on them.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Just out of interest how many rugby teams rent their stadium to a PL or EFL team? I cant think of any. It has always been the other way round hasn't it? It would seem, given the FA/EFL rules on primacy, that rugby teams where tenants have always played second fiddle because the football team own or control the stadium. Not sure there is any evidence of any EFL fixtures being moved to accommodate a rugby team tenant.

Unfortunately Wasps own or control the stadium, it isn't about what's fair to the tenant, or who got the fixtures out first, or how fixtures could be changed to suit CCFC or what was said 4 years ago Things have moved on, circumstances have changed, and yes they may be a certain amount of bloody mindedness involved but it doesn't change what is now. Clearly the one year contract that CCFC have at the stadium gives them very few rights. They do not get primacy of fixtures, and there is little goodwill between the two sides for accommodation of arrangements. The reality is under the present set up CCFC have no alternative and because of it little say. Yes rugby fixtures could be moved and it would work, the point is Wasps do not have to...... they are the owner of the site not the tenant. What is their encouragement to do so? Wasps can do what they like, and no amount of gnashing of teeth or history is going to change that

As for this the rent is the rent...... well yes but it depends what has been agreed by the parties in the rent contract. It could very well be that the rent agreement gives access to the site for a certain amount of time and that the contract is specific on the other charges that will become payable for that access. That still leaves the rent as the rent. It depends how it has been defined doesn't it. We also now have a situation that a new arrangement with new terms must be agreed annually, a complete nonsense when trying to build a stable club (CCFC or for that matter Wasps)

When comparing other clubs rent is there much or any information available that details the other stadium costs they pay? It would seem there are other costs associated at the Ricoh which have been paid and always have been. If, and none of us know the breakdown but for example, energy costs are included then over the last 4 or 5 years everyone knows they have increased. Crowd numbers may well have dropped but you don't just light the part of the stadium where the crowd are (just a for instance). Power usage for a match would be significant, a night game even more so. A 5% increase per annum from suppliers (some price rises have been higher) would put the current price up by 21% compared to 2014. Say energy costs in 2014 were £1000 per game that figure now be £1210 per game (an additional annual cost of £4830+) Wasps are supposed to just swallow that are they as part of the rent? Not going to happen. Matchday costs will go up.

I don't like it, Wasps control the stadium, Wasps will put what they perceive as their best interests first, as they are entitled to do, and will be awkward if they choose to - not sure why anyone should be surprised by that. Will that damage CCFC or CRFC who knows but both seem on the up at the moment despite Wasps

It is all still a mess and it is the fans that get inconvenienced as usual no matter whose fault it is. We are stuck with it

 

[Nick]

Just out of interest how many rugby teams rent their stadium to a PL or EFL team? I cant think of any. It has always been the other way round hasn't it? It would seem, given the FA/EFL rules on primacy, that rugby teams where tenants have always played second fiddle because the football team own or control the stadium. Not sure there is any evidence of any EFL fixtures being moved to accommodate a rugby team tenant.

Unfortunately Wasps own or control the stadium, it isn't about what's fair to the tenant, or who got the fixtures out first, or how fixtures could be changed to suit CCFC or what was said 4 years ago Things have moved on, circumstances have changed, and yes they may be a certain amount of bloody mindedness involved but it doesn't change what is now. Clearly the one year contract that CCFC have at the stadium gives them very few rights. They do not get primacy of fixtures, and there is little goodwill between the two sides for accommodation of arrangements. The reality is under the present set up CCFC have no alternative and because of it little say. Yes rugby fixtures could be moved and it would work, the point is Wasps do not have to...... they are the owner of the site not the tenant. What is their encouragement to do so? Wasps can do what they like, and no amount of gnashing of teeth or history is going to change that

As for this the rent is the rent...... well yes but it depends what has been agreed by the parties in the rent contract. It could very well be that the rent agreement gives access to the site for a certain amount of time and that the contract is specific on the other charges that will become payable for that access. That still leaves the rent as the rent. It depends how it has been defined doesn't it. We also now have a situation that a new arrangement with new terms must be agreed annually, a complete nonsense when trying to build a stable club (CCFC or for that matter Wasps)

When comparing other clubs rent is there much or any information available that details the other stadium costs they pay? It would seem there are other costs associated at the Ricoh which have been paid and always have been. If, and none of us know the breakdown but for example, energy costs are included then over the last 4 or 5 years everyone knows they have increased. Crowd numbers may well have dropped but you don't just light the part of the stadium where the crowd are (just a for instance). Power usage for a match would be significant, a night game even more so. A 5% increase per annum from suppliers (some price rises have been higher) would put the current price up by 21% compared to 2014. Say energy costs in 2014 were £1000 per game that figure now be £1210 per game (an additional annual cost of £4830+) Wasps are supposed to just swallow that are they as part of the rent? Not going to happen. Matchday costs will go up.

I don't like it, Wasps control the stadium, Wasps will put what they perceive as their best interests first, as they are entitled to do, and will be awkward if they choose to - not sure why anyone should be surprised by that. Will that damage CCFC or CRFC who knows but both seem on the up at the moment despite Wasps

It is all still a mess and it is the fans that get inconvenienced as usual no matter whose fault it is. We are stuck with it

Nobody has said they have to, people have said they will do it out of spite as by simply saying to the RFU "here's whats on at the minute can you work around it" they could have quite easily done that and still played on Saturdays as they wished.

Nobody is saying that Matchcosts shouldn't happen or anything like that, just pointing out when people say "we only pay a low rent so why should we" as if Wasps are doing us a favour and making losses on us playing there. Of course they won't be, their costs will be covered by the Matchday Costs.

 

[shmmeee]

You don't think decreasing attendances at their major sporting competitor has any possibility of getting more customers at their games?

No not really. They don't happen at the same time and people are either interested in rugby or not. I stopped attending most of last season and didn't watch a single Wasps game. That's just not how it works.

To imply its an actual business strategy is well into tin foil hat territory.

 

[Nick]

No not really. They don't happen at the same time and people are either interested in rugby or not. I stopped attending most of last season and didn't watch a single Wasps game. That's just not how it works.

I have seen people who shout they won't go because of SISU but go to watch Wasps. See that Peeler account on here and they are mostly on social media.

Make people pissed off with the club enough and it will happen. Look at how many had no interest in Rugby before but are now as well.

There are other people I know who go to Wasps over CCFC because they get free tickets to Wasps so spend their money on beer there because they can drink it outside. That's why they stopped going to CCFC as they say they can only afford to do one and they were pissed off with the club.

To think they wouldn't want to try and steal and influence our fans is a bit naive.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Don't know if this adds anything but these are the rules regarding rugby fixtures


FIXTURES AND KICK-OFF TIMES


4.1 Arrangement of Fixtures

(a) All Match weekends to be played during a Season shall be arranged as soon as reasonably practicable following the end of the immediately preceding Season by PRL (within the Season structure approved from time to time by the PGB) and a list of such Matches shall be sent to each of the Clubs.

(b) All Clubs shall confirm to PRL the dates and kick off times of the fixtures on the weekends as notified by the PGB by 1 July in each year or on such other date as determined by the PGB.

(c) All Matches shall be played on the dates scheduled in the published Fixture List save (i) where both clubs agree to rearrange a fixture and PRL has given its written approval or (ii) where PRL decides to rearrange a fixture. Before making any decision PRL shall notify the RFU’s Professional Rugby Director and keep the RFU’s Professional Rugby Director informed of all issues relating to or arising from the decision. Such decision shall be binding on the Clubs, PRL and the RFU.

(d) A Premiership League Match kick-off must, so far as possible, adhere to the time on the published fixture list or any change to that time approved by PRL and the Referee must report to PRL a delay in kick-off of more than ten Premiership Regulations 2017-2018 Page 22 of 54

minutes. Before making any decision in relation to changes in the time of any Match kick-off, PRL shall notify the RFU’s Professional Rugby Director and keep the RFU’s Professional Rugby Director informed of all issues relating to or arising from the decision. Such decision shall be binding on the Clubs, PRL and the RFU.


these are the EFL rules

26 Administration and Arrangement of Fixtures

26.1 All League Matches shall be arranged as soon as practicable. The intellectual property rights and all other rights in all lists of arrangements of such fixtures (if any) shall be vested in The League.

26.2 Any dispute between two or more Clubs as to the arrangement of League Matches shall be referred to and decided by The League, and The League shall have absolute discretion in that respect. All re-arrangements of League Matches must be submitted to and approved by The League.

26.3 However, where a Club is selected to play in a televised Match played under the auspices of The League on a Thursday evening, and that Club is also scheduled to play on the immediately following Saturday ('Saturday Match'), the Club shall have the right to request that The League reschedule the Saturday Match to the immediately following Sunday i.e. a 24 hour postponement. Approval for any such request shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Where applicable the provisions of Regulation 26.4 will also apply.

26.4 Further, where:

26.4.1 a League Match is scheduled to be played on a Tuesday (‘Tuesday Match’);

26.4.2 the Home Club and/or the Away Club in that Tuesday Match is required to play on the immediately preceding Sunday (‘Sunday Match’) because of matters outside its control including, by way of example and without limitation, police requirements, television or cup commitments;

26.4.3 the Sunday Match was not scheduled to be played on that Sunday in the first i.e. the draft fixture list published by The League in the immediately preceding Close Season;

26.4.4 neither the Home Club nor the Away Club are scheduled to play on the immediately following Thursday or Friday; and

26.4.5 either the Home Club or Away Club in the Tuesday Match requests (giving not less than 28 Clear days’ notice prior to the originally scheduled Tuesday date) that the Tuesday Match be rescheduled, (together the ‘Conditions’ and each a ‘Condition’) the, provided all Conditions are satisfied the Tuesday Match shall automatically be rescheduled to take place on the immediately following Wednesday i.e. a 24 hour postponement. For the avoidance of doubt, where one Condition (or more) is not satisfied, the
matter shall be determined by The League in its absolute discretion, whose decision shall be final and binding.

26.5 Dislocation of League Matches from any cause whatever shall be immediately reported to The League by the Clubs concerned and it shall be the duty of the Home Club in each instance immediately to notify the appointed Referee and Assistant Referees of such dislocation

EFL Ground sharing rules

13.4 Ground sharing will only be approved at the discretion of the Board.

13.5 Except in cases where a Club seeks consent to enter into a ground-sharing agreement with another Club, it shall be a condition of any such consent that the ground-sharing agreement shall contain provision to ensure that:

13.5.1 the playing of any of the Club’s first team matches will always take precedence over the activities of the other party to the agreement; and

13.5.2 the Club shall have the ability to postpone other activities scheduled to take place on the pitch in the immediately preceding 48 hour period where in the opinion of the Club, acting reasonably, there is a risk that such activity may result in the subsequent postponement or abandonment of a match to be played under the auspices of The League.

13.6 Each Club shall register its ground with The League and no Club shall remove to another ground (whether on a temporary or a permanent basis) without first obtaining the written consent of the Board, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld and the Board shall be entitled, if granting consent, to impose such conditions as it deems appropriate in all the circumstances.

13.7 In considering whether to give any consent to a permanent relocation, the Board shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case (including, but not limited to the factors set out in this Regulation 13.7) and shall not grant consent unless it is reasonably satisfied that such consent:

EFL length of agreement

13.9 Subject to any dispensations granted by the Board, a Club shall either own its ground or have a legally enforceable agreement with its ground's owner for its use by the Club, expiring not earlier than the end of the current Season.

 

[shmmeee]

I have seen people who shout they won't go because of SISU but go to watch Wasps. See that Peeler account on here and they are mostly on social media.

Make people pissed off with the club enough and it will happen. Look at how many had no interest in Rugby before but are now as well.

There are other people I know who go to Wasps over CCFC because they get free tickets to Wasps so spend their money on beer there because they can drink it outside. That's why they stopped going to CCFC as they say they can only afford to do one and they were pissed off with the club.

To think they wouldn't want to try and steal and influence our fans is a bit naive.

That's not the same thing though is it? Of course there will be people who watch both and give up on City, but they'd be watching both anyway. No one goes "oh Sisu are shit so Im going to watch a sport I have no interest in". The two are only in direct competition in certain City fan's minds.

If anything an increased population interested in sports helps both. Rising tide raises all ships and all that.

 

[chiefdave]

Just out of interest how many rugby teams rent their stadium to a PL or EFL team? I cant think of any. It has always been the other way round hasn't it? It would seem, given the FA/EFL rules on primacy, that rugby teams where tenants have always played second fiddle because the football team own or control the stadium. Not sure there is any evidence of any EFL fixtures being moved to accommodate a rugby team tenant.

Newport Country rent from the rugby lot. They had a fixture clash and the rugby team moved their game to a different ground to allow County to play.

Stockport County were tenants of Sale Sharks but I can't see any evidence of fixture clashes being an issue. Of course as tenants Stockport ended up dropping out of the league. On the plus side their council seem to have learnt from past mistakes and, as current owners of the ground, have stated they will retain the ground until County can afford to buy it back despite approaches from Sale to purchase the ground after their purchase of the AJ Bell Stadium was rejected by Salford Council despite the ground currently losing money annual and requiring a bail out loan from the council.

The Rugby Premiership also changed their rules on primacy several years ago as so many rugby clubs now share grounds. Premiership sides no longer require primacy, although Wasps, and others who shared with EFL teams, had already been granted an exception to that rule prior to it being changed.

Unfortunately Wasps own or control the stadium, it isn't about what's fair to the tenant, or who got the fixtures out first, or how fixtures could be changed to suit CCFC or what was said 4 years ago

100% disagree with this. Assurances were made when the ground was sold that it would not impact on CCFC or CRFC. Nobody said anything about it lasting 4 years and then being a free for all. Those that made the promises shouldn't be able to ignore them without the press even questioning them.

Yes rugby fixtures could be moved and it would work, the point is Wasps do not have to...... they are the owner of the site not the tenant. What is their encouragement to do so? Wasps can do what they like, and no amount of gnashing of teeth or history is going to change that

But the point is the fixtures wouldn't need to be moved if they weren't scheduled to clash in the first place which was very easy to do.

Our fixtures were published weeks before Wasps, it takes about 5 minutes to sit down and switch games so there are no clashes. Or as I've mentioned previously in this thread the FL have shown willing to work our fixtures around ground availability so if Wasps had given us weekends to avoid in advance it could have been worked around.

The only reason I can see for Wasps not taking one of those two options when every other club that ground shares seems capable of doing it is to deliberately cause an issue for our club and our fans.

And if Wasps need encouragement, as you put it, to not act like complete dicks then surely protecting the pitch is all the encouragement they should need. The pitch has been shocking since it was relaid. Not having multiple games over a weekend, when easily avoidable, is surely a good thing.