Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: bigad82 on August 05, 2022, 04:26:14 PM
-
https://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/2022/august/news-pitch-inspection-to-take-place-ahead-of-rotherham-united-game/
-
I wonder what compensation will be due if the game is called off.
-
No surprises there. This is down to Wasps seeding rather than turfing I believe. A few games on it footy wise and there will be little turf. It needs weather not constant heat.
-
We are becoming a very poorly run organisation, we are far from the richest club in Europe we were promised
-
We are becoming a very poorly run organisation, we are far from the richest club in Europe we were promised
There certainly appear to be some very strange decisions being taken.
-
To be fair not sure what management can do with a combination of countless 7’s games (no brainier to accept to have them) and the driest summer for years. Cash is tight - fact. They are making the decisions they have to.
-
Shugs ... you are a hero.
-
To be fair not sure what management can do with a combination of countless 7’s games (no brainier to accept to have them) and the driest summer for years. Cash is tight - fact. They are making the decisions they have to.
Cash may be tight but some decisions seem to be leading towards us having to pay out (possibly) stupidly.
-
I take your point completely Neils. But to be honest I’m fed up of the football club expecting everyone to bend over backwards for them. These are people who had us in court not so long back and obviously do everything possible to undermine us. They just don’t like us and as such I have trouble drumming up any sympathy or goodwill for them.
-
Shugs - the state of the pitch is nothing to do with the dry weather. There are sprinklers. It is entirely to do with the 7s and possibly poor preparation of the playing surface beforehand. Wasps have a responsibility to their paying tenants and gave assurances about the quality of the playing surface, and appear to have failed to deliver. Wasps knew the history before inviting the football club back and no doubt have reaped some benefit from the naming rights being taken up by the Coventry Building Society.
-
I take your point completely Neils. But to be honest I’m fed up of the football club expecting everyone to bend over backwards for them. These are people who had us in court not so long back and obviously do everything possible to undermine us. They just don’t like us and as such I have trouble drumming up any sympathy or goodwill for them.
well said it's not like they didn't know the 7s was taking place.
-
It’s not like wasps didn’t know there were football matches to be played, either. For which they have a regular income.
-
Shugs - the state of the pitch is nothing to do with the dry weather. There are sprinklers. It is entirely to do with the 7s and possibly poor preparation of the playing surface beforehand. Wasps have a responsibility to their paying tenants and gave assurances about the quality of the playing surface, and appear to have failed to deliver. Wasps knew the history before inviting the football club back and no doubt have reaped some benefit from the naming rights being taken up by the Coventry Building Society.
The 7’s was agreed while the football club was in Birmingham doing the nonsense they do. I’m well aware of Wasps’ commitments - my point was, as an individual I’m just not inclined to be bothered about a perceived problem surface for CCFC.
-
SBSam,
Unless they have access to untreated water chlorinated water is no substitute for rain water, but obviously better than nothing.
There’s a lot of speculation going on. We’ve no idea if there are any SLAs around pitch quality, I imagine they’re fairly difficult to write. What if there’s a continuous downpour for 48 hours and the pitch is very wet but playable? Ten days of freezing weather and the pitch is bone hard but playable?
Even if there are SLAs, we don’t know what CCFC can claim. I’d be surprised if it’s anything more than out of pocket expenses and as the game will be replayed some of those costs will be recovered.
CCFC went in to this with their eyes open and I don’t believe Wasps’ commercial team are complete idiots. I think we should stop catastrophising every time CCFC think they’ve been hard done by.
-
I am fairly sure someone invented under soil heating some time ago. Some things would clearly be outwith the landlords control. This feels as if it was within Wasps ability to have prepared for.
-
Indeed under soil heating is a thing, but when I used to watch football I remember matches being called off when it was available but couldn’t cope.
It’s not exactly environmentally friendly and with energy prices going through the roof cancellations might be the cheaper option.
-
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-wasps-pitch-concerns-24685400
-
What a helpful, fulsome response. Similar to the bonds communications.
-
Maybe they don’t want to engage in the spurious undermining games CCFC are now favouring. Back to what they like doing best. Should never have let them come back.
-
Didn’t the pitch start tearing up within a few minutes of the 7s being played?
It wasn’t up to scratch and now wonder how this can be fixed during the season now?
Do we still have a hybrid pitch with a certain percentage of plastic in place?
-
Shugs - they let them come back for one reason, money. Directly from rental income and F&B, indirectly from the CBS stadium sponsorship.
-
Didn’t the pitch start tearing up within a few minutes of the 7s being played?
It wasn’t up to scratch and now wonder how this can be fixed during the season now?
Do we still have a hybrid pitch with a certain percentage of plastic in place?
Yes. I made this point at the time. It looked great at the start but a couple of matches (or so) in it was starting to wear. After three days you could see that as players ran small clumps of grass spurting up. I watched on TV (for my sins most of the three days) and with the benefit of close up and overhead camera shots you could watch the deterioration sadly. It has to be said the competition went off superbly and with no pitch complaints but as we all know footballers are a different pampered breed. Undoubtably suffering in the heat and lack of rain but the seeding never stood a chance with such a short period since Rammstein.
-
Unless the surface is dangerous to play on then I don't see the problem. It's the same for both teams.
-
Pitch unsafe
https://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/2022/august/news-coventry-city-versus-rotherham-united-game-postponed/
-
About how many rugby players and referees played on the pitch, and was anyone injured at all?
-
I'm afraid this down to Wasps, they have a tenant and a responsibility to provide a decent playing surface. If I was CCFC i'd be extremely angry especially as promises were made to improve the playing surface.
For those blaming the football club, take off your Wasps specs for one moment and look at it from their point of view, I’m ashamed.
-
I'm afraid this down to Wasps, they have a tenant and a responsibility to provide a decent playing surface. If I was CCFC i'd be extremely angry especially as promises were made to improve the playing surface.
For those blaming the football club, take off your Wasps specs for one moment and look at it from their point of view, I’m ashamed.
We’re promises made? Not saying they were or weren’t but only have CCFC statement to say it was, I’ve also heard the agreement for for a new surface to go down after this season, so no idea which is the truth.
I don’t get the unsafe comments, yes it’s poor and yes it was inspected by a senior match official but he probably had the CCFC guys in his ear the whole time so no surprise it has been called off. I still feel this has a strong element of point scoring at the moment.
-
Totally agree, especially in your second paragraph andermt. Genuine question here - is financial compensation involved in any way?
-
Just need to focus on getting it ready for the rugby.
-
I'm afraid this down to Wasps, they have a tenant and a responsibility to provide a decent playing surface. If I was CCFC i'd be extremely angry especially as promises were made to improve the playing surface.
For those blaming the football club, take off your Wasps specs for one moment and look at it from their point of view, I’m ashamed.
+1 if the shoe was on the other foot we'd be fuming.
-
The plot thickens, from t’other thread ……
It now appears that the CG had exclusive tenancy until 14/8. If that’s the case there may well have been a clause about them handing it back in the same condition they got it, or something similar.
Either way, CCFC should have known this when they signed their tenancy agreement, so why did they even think that a home game tomorrow would be acceptable?
We’re not going to get the full story for some time and I suspect there’s a lot of commercial law firm partners rubbing their hands together in delight and thinking about their future payments.
-
Our hosting the Commonwealth Games Sevens was announced on 3rd September 2019, which meant it would have been agreed when CCFC had just walked out to share with Birmingham City.
-
The CCFC statement regarding the postponement, does not seem to be inflammatory in any way.
-
More information from the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62366363
What a mess (the situation, not the pitch, although really it applies to both).
-
I'm afraid this down to Wasps, they have a tenant and a responsibility to provide a decent playing surface. If I was CCFC i'd be extremely angry especially as promises were made to improve the playing surface.
For those blaming the football club, take off your Wasps specs for one moment and look at it from their point of view, I’m ashamed.
We’re promises made? Not saying they were or weren’t but only have CCFC statement to say it was, I’ve also heard the agreement for for a new surface to go down after this season, so no idea which is the truth.
I don’t get the unsafe comments, yes it’s poor and yes it was inspected by a senior match official but he probably had the CCFC guys in his ear the whole time so no surprise it has been called off. I still feel this has a strong element of point scoring at the moment.
Stephen Vaughan 10 March 2021
So there’s two things we’re going to be doing, firstly we’re going to be investing heavily in the maintenance of the pitch.
“It doesn’t matter how good your pitch is, you could be playing at Twickenham, but if you play at Twickenham every week, and you train on it, you’ve got no chance.
“We’re going to be investing in doubling up our lights. We’re going to be doubling up on the amount of staff on there as well.
“And after the first season of Coventry City being here and the Commonwealth Games, we’re going to be laying an entirely brand-new pitch again.”
So yes, promises were made. And not delivered.
-
How many times are you going to repeat yourself, Sky Blue Sam?
-
How many times are you going to repeat yourself, Sky Blue Sam?
I have answered a question in this thread with published information. There are two threads on the same topic, one clearly titled the other somewhat cryptic. Just making sure that both threads have this information.
So, to answer your question, just the twice.
-
So now it's goodbye to you Sam. goodbye to you Sam.
-
SBSam, do you realise that the CG still have exclusive use of the arena for another week?
How can Wasps have failed to do something after the games when they have not yet finished?
-
Why did they say they would then?
-
Why did they say they would then?
“And after the first season of Coventry City being here and the Commonwealth Games, we’re going to be laying an entirely brand-new pitch again.”
Commonwealth games aren't finished yet, so we can't criticise Wasps for that. FWIW, I think Wasps are in the wrong here regarding pitch maintenance, but can't blame them for something that hasn't happened yet.
-
They said they would do it after the games.
Maybe they will, maybe they won't, but as it is not yet after the games it's a moot point.
-
I am coming to the conclusion that the EFL have a lot to answer for.
-
I am coming to the conclusion that the EFL have a lot to answer for.
Nothing to do with the EFL and everything to do with ccfc wanting to turn a shilling.
-
According to Dave Boddy, the EFL insisted that all EFL clubs who were affected by the CWG and hence played their first matches away HAD to play their second match at home. If that is the case, it is not so much that CCFC were keen (as suggested) to play at the CBS today, but had no choice.
-
So you are saying that the spanner in the works is the EFL. Surely you can.t expect Wasps to over-ride the CG?
-
I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.
-
Of course Sam. But you take a very linear view. Sometimes circumstances disrupt plans - that’s life.
-
I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.
OK. Now write that as a contractual clause that isn't subjective.
Just saying the referee called the game off isn't something that the groundsman can work with, they need a definition and stander to work to.
-
I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.
And I'm sure they will, once the ground has been handed back by the CG, as all parties were fully aware of. You'd be as well to complain that the pitch isn't safe for football in the middle of a game of rugby, or even a concert. If it isn't safe after the 14th then you may have a point. Until then you are stirring for the sake of it.
As I understand it the main issue with rugby and football sharing the same ground is that the two sports prefer different lengths of grass. Rugby does best on relatively long grass as it makes it more resilient and softer for impact. However that kills the bounce and slows the ball for football.
I'd be very susprised if there wasn't a depressing compromise that works well for neither sport written into any agreement between Wasps and CCFC.
-
I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.
Given that the arena was block booked to the CG's, that Wasps had no idea what state it would be when handed back and ccfc wanted a favour, I would be surprised if the agreement was anything more than 'reasonable efforts' basis.
-
I suppose a clause could be written something like this:-
“The playing surface must, as a minimum, be to a standard acceptable as safe and playable by an EFL referee at 6pm the day prior to the fixture.”
That would get round the mid concert or rugby match, let those dreadful huge stock car vehicles they have had.
I do agree that there is a fundamental difference between the ideal surface for both sports. I would be surprised if any of us can understand why this always seems such an issue in Coventry when other stadia seem to manage really well. Is insufficient money is being put into it, is the fundamental substrate on which the pitch stands is inadequate, or is there some truth in the rumour that a Leicester City shirt was buried there to curse the stadium?
CCFC will try to hold Wasps to account, they have no choice as there are thousands of angry and disappointed football fans who have been looking forward to a pleasant afternoon enjoying their pastime. I don’t know if they will be successful, but steps need to be taken to ensure this never happens again. We can but hope.
-
PS Judging by some of the surprised comments from rugby fans about how the pitch was cutting up, I suspect that the damage and condition of the pitch was a shock to Wasps.
-
Sam, This is not intended to be patronising etc, but when you calm down you are really quite nice, and sensible too. I think I've gone barmy.
-
I’m not trying to be difficult or to catch you out, Sam, but I said it can’t be a referee’s subjective decision. The reason is that all ref’s will have a different opinion, even if marginally different, and that means you’d spend forever in court arguing about those differences.
Furthermore, how can a goundsman know from game to game what each referee expects. They need a very clear definition of what makes a surface dangerous and that goes in the contract definitions at the start of the contract.
FWIW, I don’t have an axe to grind and I’d prefer to see both clubs getting along amicably, it’s in the commercial interests of both. If I was still a football fan I’d probably have made CCFC my second team after Wasps moved to Coventry.
-
Speaking with a soccer hat on, I genuinely think the last 20 years obfuscate the fact that for most of the last century we played on mudflats at every level of the game. We also played in conditions that would see the games today called off.
-
I suppose you could devise something including length of grass, moisture content, pressure needed to apply to depress surface by n mm, a shear test could be devised, imitating say a 12 stone man sliding for 1 meter at 5 kph. That’s just me making something up.
You could look at rye EFL rules, which say:-
28 Playing Surface Standard / Slope of Pitch
28.1 The playing surface shall be grass and must be of a high standard, as defined by The Football League.
28.2 It must be flat and free from surface depressions and excessive undulations.
28.3 The maximum slopes allowable shall not exceed an even gradient of vertical to horizontal 1:41 in any direction.
28.4 Each Home Club shall provide full pitch frost covers and/or under soil heating (the specification of which shall meet the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive) which shall be operated to the extent necessary to procure, so far as it is reasonably possible, that the pitch is playable on the occasion of each match. A breach of this requirement which results in the postponement or abandonment of a match shall be dealt with in accordance with Regulation 28, and not Regulation 8.4.
Unfortunately I haven’t been able to find a written definition as referred to in 28.1
Or you could rely on an expert or experienced person, say a referee. The range of acceptability from such a person is likely to be relatively narrow
I’m pretty sure experienced groundsmen know what is likely to be acceptable to a referee. In any event, the state of the pitch at 6pm yesterday was very far from what would be acceptable on a council pitch, let alone for professional sport
-
WWW,
I also understand why they want good pitches. There’s no doubt they have contributed to the skill levels that are way above those when I watched regularly. Indeed, my home team, Leeds, we’re the last Div 1 winners in no small part because Old Trafford was a ploughed field by comparison to Eland Road and most other grounds.
-
Speaking with a soccer hat on, I genuinely think the last 20 years obfuscate the fact that for most of the last century we played on mudflats at every level of the game. We also played in conditions that would see the games today called off.
But the game has change enormously, no longer hoofed from the back for the centre forward to win in the air. More possession and higher speed from more highly tuned, and hence more susceptible to injury, athletes.
-
Especially when they throw themselves on the ground so much.
-
Game for gentlemen played by hooligans :)
-
None of this changes the fact that the entire arena was effectively sub-let and remains so for another week. Any judgement based on now is somewhat outside of whatever agreement was made.
-
Not disputing the game is more skilful. But more entertaining, more debatable for my money.
I am just old fashioned, I like the modern soccer game to a point, but feel it has lost something, rather like rugby. Difference is I feel the rugby product- higher scoring and more athletic- is better today when it is at its best, compared to the 70s and 80s, even if it has so much has been lost with scrums, player sizes et al. When it is a its worst, we'll that is a different kettle of fish. Soccer, well much as I enjoy the more skilful game and proper player protection, I lament the fact that the defenders don't defend and tackling is not the prime task of a defender, especially what was right and left back. The game was just better with inside rights, proper 9s, proper wingers, no win backs, and matches ending 5-3, in short it has lost more from the 80s.
But as ever, each to their own. Totally subjective!
-
None of this changes the fact that the entire arena was effectively sub-let and remains so for another week. Any judgement based on now is somewhat outside of whatever agreement was made.
If there is an underlying requirement of the arrangement between Wasps and CCFC which doesn’t expressly exclude this situation, that requirement may well remain. None of us know, there will be a discussion, contract lawyers may be consulted. Almost certainly a cock up, wasps probably dint expect the damage, pitch may not have been right beforehand, time will tell.
-
Speaking with a soccer hat
on, I genuinely think the last 20 years obfuscate the fact that for most of the last century we played on mudflats at every level of the game. We also played in conditions that would see the games today called off.
But the game has change enormously, no longer hoofed from the back for the centre forward to win in the air. More possession and higher speed from more highly tuned, and hence more susceptible to injury, athletes.
Indeed it has changed. Sophisticated coaches have squeezed the entertainment out of it. The most attacking players are full backs, one player up front, “holding” midfielders - whatever they are. Centre halves rolling the ball into midfield and receiving it back for thirty minutes. It’s boring. The odd muddy pitch might liven things up.
-
Not disputing the game is more skilful. But more entertaining, more debatable for my money.
I am just old fashioned, I like the modern soccer game to a point, but feel it has lost something, rather like rugby. Difference is I feel the rugby product- higher scoring and more athletic- is better today when it is at its best, compared to the 70s and 80s, even if it has so much has been lost with scrums, player sizes et al. When it is a its worst, we'll that is a different kettle of fish. Soccer, well much as I enjoy the more skilful game and proper player protection, I lament the fact that the defenders don't defend and tackling is not the prime task of a defender, especially what was right and left back. The game was just better with inside rights, proper 9s, proper wingers, no win backs, and matches ending 5-3, in short it has lost more from the 80s.
But as ever, each to their own. Totally subjective!
I didn’t say I preferred the game now, can be quite boring at times.