CBS issues (5 Viewers)

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't wasps have to agree to that, i can't see a cash strapped business agreeing to offset rent against a new pitch.
We're also a cash strapped business and making ourselves worse, you can only try and find a settlement and it doesn't feel like either party has

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Johnnythespider

Well-Known Member
We're also a cash strapped business and making ourselves worse, you can only try and find a settlement and it doesn't feel like either party has

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I'm not saying i don't think it's a workable solution, the question of when is also an issue, Boddy says it was june when we were informed they weren't laying a new pitch, even if we'd have come to an agreement i don't think I'd have paid for a new pitch and then watched 66 games of 7s played on it before city get to play on it. I agree that both sides pointing at each other as to who sorts this out isn't going to get us playing there anytime soon.
 

Johnnythespider

Well-Known Member
Better that than being litigated for the rest I think.
Would imagine it would placate the EFL, whether they have any pressure or sanctions somehow the the ACL arm and not the team.
Is there any circumstance where the freeholder becomes responsible for upkeep and maintenance of the stadium
 

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
I'm not saying i don't think it's a workable solution, the question of when is also an issue, Boddy says it was june when we were informed they weren't laying a new pitch, even if we'd have come to an agreement i don't think I'd have paid for a new pitch and then watched 66 games of 7s played on it before city get to play on it. I agree that both sides pointing at each other as to who sorts this out isn't going to get us playing there anytime soon.

66 games I'd misleading- its 66 games of 7's

That's about the same impact on the pitch as 5 full games
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
I'm not saying i don't think it's a workable solution, the question of when is also an issue, Boddy says it was june when we were informed they weren't laying a new pitch, even if we'd have come to an agreement i don't think I'd have paid for a new pitch and then watched 66 games of 7s played on it before city get to play on it. I agree that both sides pointing at each other as to who sorts this out isn't going to get us playing there anytime soon.
Which is exactly what I think wasps view was.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
66 games I'd misleading- its 66 games of 7's

That's about the same impact on the pitch as 5 full games
Their own support seemed shocked at the damage from the very start of the 7s which suggest the pitch was poor to start with.
 

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
Kinell.. this was ‘fun’ to wake up to. Grendel managing to drag some posters down his rabid Boddy/SISU rabbit hole.

Wasps said they were ‘going to re-lay the pitch’.
- Rotherham game called off.

Wasps make a statement saying they ‘have a contingency plan’
- Wigan game off

Some of the suggestions on here are beyond fucking brainless. Ownership lay a new pitch and don’t pay rent? What? So Wasps can claim that we’re in breach of contract too?

Pay for a new pitch instead of buying Palmer?
Fuckinell.. I’ve got to say, this even trumps the Kenny Jackett bollox
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Yes, but then that’s irrelevant if the plan is to distress wasps into admin, which, to my mind, is a reckless strategy which does us significant damage also.
Certainly high risk. I'm not sure I agree with the argument you sort the pitch yourself, but there is a certain logic that, given the potential to lose major income for potentially a few weeks, you take the action to avoid it even if it's not technically or legally your responsibility. Who, after all, wants to be right but bankrupt?
 

djr8369

Well-Known Member
Certainly high risk. I'm not sure I agree with the argument you sort the pitch yourself, but there is a certain logic that, given the potential to lose major income for potentially a few weeks, you take the action to avoid it even if it's not technically or legally your responsibility. Who, after all, wants to be right but bankrupt?
Yeah, as much as it has angered people I am sympathetic to Gs argument. It’s all well and good saying wasps should provide a useable pitch but it’s doesn’t solve anything when they have no money to do so.
 

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
Absolutely

Any real CEO would way up benefits and risks.

We were told the two respective occupants of the role were on good terms

The problem would have been obvious months ago. The football club could have negotiated at that point. It didn’t have to be a total new pitch but a solution that would make the pitch workable. The clubs could have worked together and negotiated a sensible solution to benefit both parties.

If the football club did a proper risk valuation analysis on the situation it’s clear that they will be the ones this will have a potentially disastrous impact on - in fact almost to the point of zero income for weeks on end.

So a worked solution would easily have been achieved where up front costs are negotiated and long term rental adjustments made.

No normal companies would act like spoilt children sending strongly worded statements on their websites

It’s pathetic


But the two parties did discuss the pitch and WASPs agreed to spend at least £100k and have only spent £7k and carry out maintenance

I think that is called negotiation? Risk analysis builds in all known and reasonable risks - I suppose that should include the inability of WASPs to honour any agreement
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
66 games I'd misleading- its 66 games of 7's

That's about the same impact on the pitch as 5 full games
Someone on here worked it out as 11 nornal rugby because of stoppages, etc. Not to mention warm ups etc.

And whilst they have no rucks and mauls, they scoring and number constant restarts mean the same pitch Was getting hammered constantly for 3 days.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

Sky Blue Heaven

Well-Known Member
Just listening to Boddy on the radio, this problem isn’t getting resolved quickly! Trying to move Huddersfield fixture….. you couldn’t make it up! Season is jeopardy already, very disappointing, very frustrating.
 

shepardo01

Well-Known Member
New pitch 100% needed- pitch totally ruined.
...wasps refusing to accept clubs financial support to lay a new pitch.
Triggered a dispute stage in contract.
 

djr8369

Well-Known Member
Just listening to Boddy on the radio, this problem isn’t getting resolved quickly! Trying to move Huddersfield fixture….. you couldn’t make it up! Season is jeopardy already, very disappointing, very frustrating.
Didn’t catch it all as was in the car but to me it sounded like he was very strongly hinting we’ll be moving grounds?
 

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
Someone on here worked it out as 11 nornal rugby because of stoppages, etc. Not to mention warm ups etc.

And whilst they have no rucks and mauls, they scoring and number constant restarts mean the same pitch Was getting hammered constantly for 3 days.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

7s games are 14 mins
Full games are 80+ mins so 6 times longer
Equivalent of 66 is 11

There are no 16 man heavy scrums

Only 14 people on pitch not 30 so half

11/ 2 = 6 comparable use of pitch
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
New pitch 100% needed- pitch totally ruined.
...wasps refusing to accept clubs financial support to lay a new pitch.
Triggered a dispute stage in contract.
missed that, hopefully that part will make it to iplayer or whatever they call the radio thing but am I reading that right, we've tried giving financial help to get the pitch sorted and Wasps have refused.

I know Wasps fans will want to frame this as SISU always wanting to drag everyone into court, ignoring how we had no issues at Sixfields or St Andrews, but if the landlord is unable / unwilling to meet basic requirements and won't even allow the tenant to fix the issue themselves I'm not sure how it can be framed as anyone but Wasps fault.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top