The independent agronomist have produced a report which apparently says a new pitch need to be installed. Sounds like it is worse than a council pitch, no root growth. Football club have offered to help with cash flow to achieve that, but wasps not interested. Another indicator they are broke?
Dispute resolution process had been triggered as wasps have a responsibility to provide an appropriate surface. Cost of a “lay and play” pitch is around £5000,000.
1. Just how "independant" is an agronomist hired by CCFC & EFL? What question was the agronomist asked because if it was "is this pitch going to be premiership football standard within a week?" then we all know the answer is no. If it was "could this pitch recover to division 2 standard given 3 weeks and assuming the current heatwave ends?" then maybe they'd get a different answer
2. CCFC have offered to contribute to the cost of relaying the pitch. How much? Have they offered to fully fund and absorb the £500k cost or just a couple of quid on temporary loan which they will deduct from rent so they can look good in media statements?
3. How do you write a contract about pitch quality that is acceptable to both sides, is measurable, allows for unprecedented heatwaves, and recognises that it is almost impossible to have a top football surface on a multi use pitch?
It was inevitable that CCFC would complain about the pitch. Given their track record it was also inevitable they'd start talking about legal challenges. I admit I'm surprised it's happened quite so severely and quickly!
In my dreams the contract should have said "wasps will provide a rugby pitch. CCFC may do whatever they like to upgrade and maintain it to a higher standard but fully at CCFC cost including any costs of repairing it after Wasps have damaged it again and again"