CBS issues (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter pusbccfc
- Start date
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It is the apprentice role I assume that was advertised and it included some work experience at the ground but reporting to the CBS groundsman who is employed by the Arena - we seem to have a grounds manager but his brief has nothing to do with the arena
Nick
Administrator
So it's CCFC staff based at the CBS then?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
NEWS: Marking Grounds Week 2022, we speak to apprentice groundsperson Pete Dawson
To mark Grounds Week 2022, we spoke to Apprentice Groundsperson Pete Dawson about his journey into the industry and his development so far.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No he is on an apprentice contract and has work experience there to learn a trade but under the management of the Arena staff - our actual ground staff do not work there - he works on the pitch for football and rugby. If he remains as a CCFC employee after the apprenticeship he would no longer work there. I assume we agreed to be part of an apprentice scheme with the collaboration of wasps ground staff to train up someone as a skill.
Unless you think a £5 an hour apprentice can be responsible for managing the pitch.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
There are staff at Ryton and Higgs, there is a Junior staff member at the CBS full time...
Nobody has said how senior they are, just that there is somebody there.
I assumed he was now doing the job based at the CBS that was advertised as his Twitter looks to be doing stuff there now (even for non football).
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
I'd be very surprised if we got a points deduction. Here's the EFL rules and regs on fixture postponement:
32 PENALTY FOR NON-FULFILMENT OF FIXTURE OBLIGATIONS
32.1 Each Club will use its best endeavours to ensure that each match under the jurisdiction of The League takes place on the date and at the time fixed for it.
32.2 Any Club failing to fulfil its fixture obligations in respect of any match under the jurisdiction of The League on the appointed date or dates or causing The League to suspend any fixture shall be deemed guilty of misconduct, unless the Club is successfully able to demonstrate that Regulation 32.2 applies . The burden of proof will rest with the Club.
32.3 The Club will not be deemed to be guilty of misconduct in accordance with Regulation 32.1 where it is able to demonstrate that:
32.3.1 the dominant and effective cause of the non-fulfilment was the occurrence of an event which was outside the control of the Club (an ‘Event’); and
32.3.2 the Club could not have been reasonably foreseen or reasonably anticipated and remediedremedy the consequences of the Event prior to the match despite using its best endeavours to do so.
32.4 The Club failing to fulfil its fixture or causing The League to suspend such fixture shall be liable to pay compensation for any expenses actually incurred by the opposing Club as a direct result of the failure or suspension. The amount of compensation will be at the discretion of the Board who will consider every such case on its merits. The Board may refer the amount of compensation to be paid to the Disciplinary Commission dealing with the misconduct by the Club failing to fulfil its fixture or causing The League to suspend the same.
Now, I'm no legal expert but I would think points 32.3.1 and 32.3.2 would cover us. If we we were given assurances about a new pitch, assurances that the pitch would be in a playable condition and that our groundstaff weren't allowed into the CBS, there's no way we can be saddled with a points deduction.
Worst case scenario, a fine and I'm sure big D will be taking that up with the 'sects.
32 PENALTY FOR NON-FULFILMENT OF FIXTURE OBLIGATIONS
32.1 Each Club will use its best endeavours to ensure that each match under the jurisdiction of The League takes place on the date and at the time fixed for it.
32.2 Any Club failing to fulfil its fixture obligations in respect of any match under the jurisdiction of The League on the appointed date or dates or causing The League to suspend any fixture shall be deemed guilty of misconduct, unless the Club is successfully able to demonstrate that Regulation 32.2 applies . The burden of proof will rest with the Club.
32.3 The Club will not be deemed to be guilty of misconduct in accordance with Regulation 32.1 where it is able to demonstrate that:
32.3.1 the dominant and effective cause of the non-fulfilment was the occurrence of an event which was outside the control of the Club (an ‘Event’); and
32.3.2 the Club could not have been reasonably foreseen or reasonably anticipated and remediedremedy the consequences of the Event prior to the match despite using its best endeavours to do so.
32.4 The Club failing to fulfil its fixture or causing The League to suspend such fixture shall be liable to pay compensation for any expenses actually incurred by the opposing Club as a direct result of the failure or suspension. The amount of compensation will be at the discretion of the Board who will consider every such case on its merits. The Board may refer the amount of compensation to be paid to the Disciplinary Commission dealing with the misconduct by the Club failing to fulfil its fixture or causing The League to suspend the same.
Now, I'm no legal expert but I would think points 32.3.1 and 32.3.2 would cover us. If we we were given assurances about a new pitch, assurances that the pitch would be in a playable condition and that our groundstaff weren't allowed into the CBS, there's no way we can be saddled with a points deduction.
Worst case scenario, a fine and I'm sure big D will be taking that up with the 'sects.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Who is managed by Wasps hierarchy - SBB is correct we have no ground staff there - but our groundsman in an interview said that he has day tp day contact with the Head Groundsman at the arena
The real question is if the CWG pitch maintenance was indeed done by the normal ground staff as had been claimed and they were not locked out at all and if so why this person could not phone and express concerns about the pitch
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I think we are trying to stir the pot but the ground staff bit clearly is a red herring
Skybluebeliever
Well-Known Member
EFL will want to know the communication between the Club and Wasps from when the last game was played in May to when the CWG took over
Nick
Administrator
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well it doesn't to me as ironically if he moves to work for the club full time he won't go to the CBS.
Its like a placement to learn the job - he was probably there when the CWG were on ironically
Nick
Administrator
Yeah, so CCFC have ground staff at the CBS....... Regardless of whether you try to move it to head groundsmen or pitch experts.
Skybluebeliever
Well-Known Member
They would all work at the CBS full time
They would have known who would and who wouldn’t have been allowed access ages ago, this would not have been a last minute decision
CWG have not suddenly put a complete new grounds team in place , that would not make sense , they would want personnel that do know the pitch
Nick
Administrator
Well yeah that's what I am saying. It does look to be at the CBS full time.
No idea about the denied access though, think I saw something about not being allowed to get equipment in but that's it?
Saddlebrains
Well-Known Member
Right can anyone say whats come of the talks between boddy and vaughan?
Will we be playing Tuesday?
Will we be playing Tuesday?
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
Probably Boddy or Vaughan.
Gynnsthetonic
Well-Known Member
I've worked on the concourse the last 2 pre seasons and we do have groundsman working on the pitch constantly. All wearing CCFC clothing.
Saddlebrains
Well-Known Member
Skybluebeliever
Well-Known Member
I do not think there would be a points deduction at all
It’s the given assurances about a new pitch I think will be looked at . If the wasps have said this verbally , quite a while ago and then there has been no communication since then from either side . The EFL could ask the club why they have not followed this up to find out if this happening . You would also think the club would be consulted in the type of pitch to be installed
if you rented a property and the landlord promised to put a new kitchen in 12 months ago , in that 12 months would you not ask when’s the kitchen coming?
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
When do wasps fixtures start? This pitch needs some time away from rugby
usskyblue
Well-Known Member
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="100px" width="58px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
steve cooper
Well-Known Member
Looks like Wasps first home game is 17th Sept,
Key words financially and physically and post CWG a new PITCH.
CCFC and Wasps to work together to provide best possible pitch
Sky Blues and Wasps CEOs Dave Boddy and Stephen Vaughan insist the Ricoh Arena pitch will be the best it possibly can be as the two clubs join forces on renovation and maintenance
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Wasps need some time away from Coventry. Like, 100 plus years.
Bugsy
Well-Known Member
KenilworthSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Yes, but this was over a year ago.
Boddy also says the club and Wasps will work very closely together and that there will be a real working partnership as to how the pitch is prepared moving forward.
Yet somehow seemingly no one from the club's end seems to know why the pitch has been re-laid.
Something is clearly very amiss and clarity is needed as previous comments just aren't matching up with current statements from Boddy and Robins at the minute.
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Ground staff uncertainty aside, it's obvious that there should've been a new pitch.
It would also be interesting to hear about the 'Pitch Committee' mentioned on the article that Wingy just posted.
Surely they need the boot?
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Maybe it's the fact that Wasps have no money and cannot afford the intended renovations/upkeep/new surface?
KenilworthSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Obviously that's the case. But that's not the point.
In their statement it's said: "Promised investment by the Arena into a new pitch has unfortunately not materialised over the Summer, which has been compounded by concerts on the pitch and then a huge amount of use at the Commonwealth Games last weekend.”
Surely I'm not the only one that thinks this raises a number of questions... Why are the club only finding out now that the pitch hasn't been relaid? Surely that was something to follow up in the summer no? Have the club had any dialogue with Wasps this year?
steve cooper
Well-Known Member
People keep going on about the pitch not being re-laid, but that's not the issue here. The pitch could and should have been playable without the need to re-lay it. If the cost of the work could not be met this summer that doesn't mean at all that the current pitch wouldn't be safe to play on.
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Oh yeah, totally. I don't disagree - lots of questions about the apparent breakdown in communication between them and us - and what that means going forward.
That said, the agreement was that we had a pitch that was worthy of playing on. Communication or no communication, the pitch isn't worthy of playing on. I guess the expectation would be that we assumed we'd be told of any issues in poor pitch condition.
Should there be a liability with us to ask that the pitch is/was in good condition. I'm not sure to be honest but I'd expect the owner of something that isn't right, to tell anyone using it, that it isn't right.