Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: Heathen on September 25, 2022, 09:29:05 AM
-
Premiership must get biggest stars in front of fans or battle to balance books will never be won
Lawrence Dallaglio
Sunday September 25 2022, 12.01am, The Sunday Times
A week that was looking so gloomy for Premiership Rugby (PR) has culminated in some thrilling matches over the past two days. I was at Franklin’s Gardens on Saturday where Leicester pulled off a superb comeback to beat Northampton Saints (how good to see that the scrum can still be such a potent weapon). In fact you could have taken any sports fan to any of the five Gallagher Premiership fixtures this weekend and they would have come away thinking rugby is a great spectacle.
None of this will provide much cheer to fans of Worcester Warriors, who could see their club suspended from the Premiership on Monday, or indeed supporters of my own club, Wasps, who are also battling to resolve their financial troubles.
I can’t comment on Worcester but I will say that I expect Wasps to find a way out of their predicament. The situation is a bit different from that of the Warriors, given there are other enterprises — all equally badly affected by the loss of revenue brought on by Covid — that are folded into the same business as the Wasps rugby club. It’s complicated because of the debt structure with which the club were bought but there is no reason it can’t be a viable business. If the move to Coventry hadn’t taken place in 2014 then the administrators might have been called in a few years ago.
What last week has underlined is the need for the people who run the game to work more closely together. We have always known that club finances are precarious and that unless you have a very wealthy benefactor able to cover millions of pounds of losses — as Bath do with Bruce Craig and Saracens did with Nigel Wray — the battle of balancing the books is a constant one. If we were starting again, I’m sure we would look at a ten-club Premiership with bigger squads. But we are, as they say, where we are.
In these circumstances it is baffling that we see so little of the Premiership’s best assets — its leading England players — on show week in, week out. When I was playing it was the norm for England internationals to come up against one another regularly at club level. I used to love this period in the season: come flying out of the traps and lay down a few markers so that when you meet up with your opponents at Pennyhill Park in November it’s you who’s got the bragging rights.
This issue was brought into sharp focus last weekend when Harlequins’ Marcus Smith had to sit out a mouthwatering clash with his rival for the England No 10 jersey, Owen Farrell, of Saracens. I know player welfare was cited for him being held back and I understand that concern. But we need more joined-up thinking, more discretion to ensure that a potentially great advertisement for the game isn’t scuppered again by rigid bureaucracy.
The Premiership needs to put its stars in front of the fans more regularly and it needs to have them connect with those fans. We know that supporters not only want to see them but want to know them and to like them.
Are the clubs doing enough to make that happen? Possibly. Does PR have a marketing plan to back that up? I’d like to see it. Has the RFU done its bit when the players are on England duty? Not enough for my liking. This is nuts because everyone knows that rugby always has to operate in football’s shadow.
There are other issues working against the big promotional push that professional rugby needs. I know of incidents where players have been approached to appear in initiatives to promote the sport as a whole and their agents have responded by quoting astronomical sums for appearance money.
They don’t seem to understand that if you grow the game, more money comes in and everyone gets richer.
-
It’s exactly what I have been saying, you can’t have the top players missing for half a season.
The top players need to be more approachable, which was the case a few seasons ago. Even when I’ve done corporate, years ago you were allowed to mix with the players after the game, that is harder nowadays.
A ten team league with a mid season break for the 6 nations. Stop getting overseas players and paying them a fortune and then letting them go for half a season.
-
Completely agree. A way around this must be found.
-
Reading LBNDs article reminds me of what I've been thinking about for a while is a ring fenced 2 league professional structure with promotion and relegation (2 or 3 teams each year) run as a single entity, both televised, sharing the TV money, maybe 10 teams each. With a cross the league cup competition. Kind of a smaller version of the top14 and proD2
There are bound to be problems with it.
-
Worth a try. You’d have to do away with ground capacity and other restrictions for a few years at least.
I can’t see the top clubs wanting to take a reduction in TV money.
-
Didn't Lol also write in the Times a few weeks ago that we were on solid ground and everything was fine?
-
Reading LBNDs article reminds me of what I've been thinking about for a while is a ring fenced 2 league professional structure with promotion and relegation (2 or 3 teams each year) run as a single entity, both televised, sharing the TV money, maybe 10 teams each. With a cross the league cup competition. Kind of a smaller version of the top14 and proD2
There are bound to be problems with it.
This is my preference as well - Make 2x smaller divisions with promotion and relegation. I'm less keen on conferences and would rather see a traditional league.
Have a break from Premiership Rugby during the International period for the league and instead play an A-League/Premiership Cup type competition. Having a break in club rugby during the AIs and 6N would mean losing 4x game weekends in the Autumn and 5x in the Spring.
I think that means we'd need 2x 9 Team Divisions. Take the current Prem 13 (assuming all 13 come out intact) and throw in Ealing, Doncaster, Pirates, Jersey + Bedford/Nottingham/Jersey (or whatever it should be based on league finish). Have promotion/relegation for both divisions.
In tandem, reduce the salary cap further to force a dispersion of talent across the league. We're seeing the Chiefs squad of the last 2-3 years being quickly changed as the cap bites with Hill and O'Flaherty last year, plus Simmons and potentially Nowell/Slade exiting as well.
Short term it would mean reduced competitiveness in the Champions Cup, but longer term I think we'd end up with a more compelling competition for TV rights, more financially viable teams and also more teams capable of sustaining professional rugby with a better geographic spread across the Country.
Perhaps most importantly, I think the guarantee that the star international players (if fit) will be playing (and not rested/on Interntional Duties) will encourage more casual fans down to watch games to see players that they might not be able to get to Twickenham to watch.
Happy to be shot down if people think I'm wide of the mark, but that's my starting thought. I don't think more games (as the Clubs seem to want) is really the answer.
-
I do like the idea of 10 team league.
18 games per session instead of 24 certainly solves some player welfare issues.
Obviously the first big question is how to choose the 10 teams.
That alone would likely stop it from happening.
-
I do like the idea of 10 team league.
18 games per session instead of 24 certainly solves some player welfare issues.
Obviously the first big question is how to choose the 10 teams.
That alone would likely stop it from happening.
Well, good question although I think we need to expand the number of teams but do that by creating 2x smaller divisions.
So in my plan, it would be the Top 9 teams finishing in the Prem would make up the 'top' division. Then after that you have the remaining 4 teams, plus the top 5 in the Championship (or the 2x Welsh Teams plus the top 3-5 depending on what happens to us/Warriors).
Reduce the salary cap to, say, £4-4.5m down from £5.0m to disperse the star/international players across the 18 teams from the existing 13. That should help with finances as well as begin to bridge the gap between the upper Championship Teams and the mid-lower Prem Teams.
In theory, I think it ticks a lot of the boxes. Of course though, there's complexities like:
-- Clubs not wanting to disband squads due to a reduced cap
-- They'll be 13x PRL shareholders (or do we have 14?) how do we make 18x shareholders (and reduce the existing club income unless TV rights are automatically increased)
-- Will the remaining Championship Clubs really be happy with this? - Do we need to consider promotion/relegation from the remaining Championship teams as they are today?
-
Not a bad proposal ,inbetweener, though I think it would be better for the divisions to be 10 purely for number of games and not have the moans about a fallow week and when it falls in the season for the club. Would you still keep playoff games at end of season?
As for the issue of prem shares, IMO the easiest thing would be for them to be scrapped and the income earned by PRL given to clubs based on league position. Can’t see the shareholding clubs agreeing to this but would give end of season league position a certain edge if it meant an extra 100k in bank
-
Not a bad proposal ,inbetweener, though I think it would be better for the divisions to be 10 purely for number of games and not have the moans about a fallow week and when it falls in the season for the club. Would you still keep playoff games at end of season?
As for the issue of prem shares, IMO the easiest thing would be for them to be scrapped and the income earned by PRL given to clubs based on league position. Can’t see the shareholding clubs agreeing to this but would give end of season league position a certain edge if it meant an extra 100k in bank
The only problem with 10 is that you end up with another 2 weeks of games needed. So with 10 teams you'd have 18 games, so it's reduced by 6 on the current number but means you'd lose the internationals for at least 3 game weekends + training camps, which I think is important to avoid.
Perhaps it should be 2 Divisions of 8 Teams each. 2 up, 2 down and a grand final for the top 2 teams of the top division. That means 14 league games, so reduced by around 40%. Keeps internationals in the fold. Prem Cup games could become meaningful during intl periods. Has the jeopardy of promotion/relegation. Doesn't dilute income as much as 18-20 teams. Could allow for reduce squad sizes and still dispersion of top-tier talent meaning easier to balance the books.
I think there's legs in it, but lots to thrash out still.
-
A ten team league is fine if your team in one of the ten, not so great if it isn't.
It wouldn't be a done deal for us to be in the top ten these days.
-
Can’t see a ten teamer working myself. Most teams wouldn’t be able to survive on 9 home games a season even with a lower cap.
-
Noticing on Skulls Wasps a positive statement about the bonds to bondholders.
-
I had an email from Hargreaves Lansdown today that included the following line:
“The Issuer has made progress with these alternative options and confirms that it has received an offer which would see the Bonds fully redeemed on completion of this refinancing. Discussions with this lender are at an advanced stage.
Which does indeed sound positive, and in line with what Derek and the rest of the board have said.
-
Is this definitely an update since Wasps’ statement, or is this simply a delayed update to Bond Investors via HL relaying the same news Wasps put out in their Statement?
-
Yes, sounds like the old statement to me.
-
Can’t see a ten teamer working myself. Most teams wouldn’t be able to survive on 9 home games a season even with a lower cap.
Would love to hear some stats behind costs to put on a game vs revenues.
It’s only 3 fewer league games than we currently have and 2 fewer than a traditional 12 team league.
It would mean a 25% reduction in operating costs due to a 25% reduction in home matches and I reckon we’d be able to recoup the ‘lost’ 20k or so attendees from the 3 games by appealing to more casual fans coming to see matches with full strength teams.
Prem Cup games become more competitive as well and would still get played at home with arguably bigger attendances.
Reckon the economics might not be as bad as you think, but no data to back it up. Just gut feel.
-
I'm genuinely intrigued.
Do you see the 2 10 team leagues as being on a par with each other?
Surely if one has the best 10 teams and the other has the next best 10 teams, then isn't it still premiership and championship but with a more concentrated structure?
And therefore if one league is deemed the better of the 2, it'll get the better sponsorship, TV deals etc.
I really do think that a 10 team league improves in some important areas.
A strong domestic cup competition can likely be marketed too
Another question though...
How do you see the next generation of players being developed?
There's no A league, less games per season so less chance for younger squad players to be eased in, and a (hopefully) competitive cup competition stops it being used for development.
-
If we have a ten team league there will be no more access to England players- this deal of reduced matches for better access to players simply is not on the table.
The genie is out and that is that. If you nip out a couple of teams they will just put on more training camps and get togethers or even more fixtures.
-
I'm genuinely intrigued. Do you see the 2 10 team leagues as being on a par with each other?
Surely if one has the best 10 teams and the other has the next best 10 teams, then isn't it still premiership and championship but with a more concentrated structure?
And therefore if one league is deemed the better of the 2, it'll get the better sponsorship, TV deals etc.
I really do think that a 10 team league improves in some important areas.
A strong domestic cup competition can likely be marketed too
So it’s basically a restructure of the Prem + Champ with 2 up, 2 down promotion and relegation and with a view to always having the best players available to encourage casual fans to attend knowing they’ll see the star players.
9 weekends of Prem Cup action (during intls), perhaps with a limit of 3 ‘regular’ squad members and the rest U23/less than 25 first team games in the leagues.
Another question though...
How do you see the next generation of players being developed?
There's no A league, less games per season so less chance for younger squad players to be eased in, and a (hopefully) competitive cup competition stops it being used for development.
via a competitive Prem Cup type competition or league played during internationals. So the Clubs can host events, but manage a minimal crowd or go big/cheap on tickets. Up to them.
The other impact of a reduced cap and fewer games is likely less higher cost players and more young talent played organically. Keep academies going and an U18 competition etc…
-
This is definitely the sort of thing I was imagining. With the TV coverage / wage cap etc roughly similar between the 2 leagues.
I've always thought that the restriction on 1st team players in the prem cup should be based on premiership minutes played in the last calendar year or something to allow players coming back from injury game time along with wider squad members.
-
FWIW, I'd go with:
16 team Premiership split into 2 leagues of 8 with promotion and relegation 2 up, 2 down via playoffs (playoffs not universally popular I know, but commercially necessary in reality). To get an idea of how this might look, based on last year's final tables, Premiership 2 would still include Wasps, Bristol, Newcastle, Worcester and Bath, plus Ealing, Doncaster and Cornish Pirates from the current Championship to make things a bit more interesting, so still plenty of eye-catching fixtures there.
European competitions to revert to pools of 4, giving all another guaranteed 3 home games.
New English national knockout cup involving all 4 tiers of the National Leagues (currently 81 teams, rising to 82 next season if all goes to plan), preliminary round between Nat 2 teams to take it to 64 ahead of straight knockout from round 1 involving Prem, Champ and Nat 1, with early rounds played during international breaks and Prem teams fielding development sides similar to current Prem Cup, but later rounds (Q Final onwards?) to be scheduled to allow top teams to field a full strength team and hopefully generate more interest (and £££) from sponsors/TV/spectators giving a financial boost to clubs lower down the ladder as well.
That's a guaranteed 10 home games a season, plus likely some knockout rugby here and there.
If it helped raise interest across all clubs then I wouldn't be averse to having centrally contracted England players spread more equitably around all the 16 Prem teams via some sort of US style draft (not sure exactly how these things work as I'm not really a follower of US sports, but I know some on here will have a good grasp of it). I know this is sacrilege to some, but it would take some of the financial burden off of the clubs, should mean that all clubs have at least 1 or 2 England players to draw in the crowds and would put a stop to certain clubs hoovering up all the emerging talent from other clubs whose owners don't have such deep pockets.
Something radical is needed as it is increasingly clear that the current model just ain't working.
-
FWIW, I'd go with:
16 team Premiership split into 2 leagues of 8 with promotion and relegation 2 up, 2 down via playoffs (playoffs not universally popular I know, but commercially necessary in reality). To get an idea of how this might look, based on last year's final tables, Premiership 2 would still include Wasps, Bristol, Newcastle, Worcester and Bath, plus Ealing, Doncaster and Cornish Pirates from the current Championship to make things a bit more interesting, so still plenty of eye-catching fixtures there.
European competitions to revert to pools of 4, giving all another guaranteed 3 home games.
New English national knockout cup involving all 4 tiers of the National Leagues (currently 81 teams, rising to 82 next season if all goes to plan), preliminary round between Nat 2 teams to take it to 64 ahead of straight knockout from round 1 involving Prem, Champ and Nat 1, with early rounds played during international breaks and Prem teams fielding development sides similar to current Prem Cup, but later rounds (Q Final onwards?) to be scheduled to allow top teams to field a full strength team and hopefully generate more interest (and £££) from sponsors/TV/spectators giving a financial boost to clubs lower down the ladder as well.
That's a guaranteed 10 home games a season, plus likely some knockout rugby here and there.
If you were to have playoffs, I would make it one team go up/ down between the two divisions.
Keep the final day at twickenham,but make it a double header , including the div2 final. Would guarantee a full house plus bonus of seeing 2 other teams you probably won’t have seen live in your own season of games.
Plus still look at relegation /promotion from National league.
-
If you were to have playoffs, I would make it one team go up/ down between the two divisions.
Keep the final day at twickenham,but make it a double header , including the div2 final. Would guarantee a full house plus bonus of seeing 2 other teams you probably won’t have seen live in your own season of games.
Plus still look at relegation /promotion from National league.
If everyone attending was a grown-up and a fan of rugby rather than their team that would be great. But the London DH showed what is more likely to happen, the fans of the 1st match teams have limited interest in the 2nd, get battered and throw stuff around ruining the enjoyment of those there to see the 2nd match.
It wasn't a one off, it was every year and ruined the DH for me a STH when it was designated our home fixture (which it almost always was since Quins refused to have it as one of theirs).
-
If you were to have playoffs, I would make it one team go up/ down between the two divisions.
Keep the final day at twickenham,but make it a double header , including the div2 final. Would guarantee a full house plus bonus of seeing 2 other teams you probably won’t have seen live in your own season of games.
Plus still look at relegation /promotion from National league.
If everyone attending was a grown-up and a fan of rugby rather than their team that would be great. But the London DH showed what is more likely to happen, the fans of the 1st match teams have limited interest in the 2nd, get battered and through stuff around ruining the enjoyment of those there to see the 2nd match.
It wasn't a one off, it was every year and ruined the DH for me a STH when it was designated our home fixture (which it almost always was since Quins refused to have it as one of theirs).
Yes I know what you mean about the LDH ,but a lot of tickets were sold very cheaply,given away to fill stadium which didn’t help.lots of different fans go to prem final to actually watch it.
Alternative would be to maybe hire a different stadium for div 2 final outside London , maybe midlands to help/promote rugby
-
Seems like a few of us are on the same page:
- Create 2 smaller but more viable/competitive league that combined have a greater number of teams than the current 13 Team PRL and offer room for growth as more teams from the (current) Championship are in a position to be competitive/go fully professional
- Reduce the financial burden on Clubs by hosting fewer (but more marketable) home games to try and increase crowds to capacity
- Find a way to further reduce the Salary Cap be it via a reduced cap or centralised EPS contracts (and not having internationals absent will likely help reduce squad sizes)
- Disperse the ‘star’ players (EPS or non-EPS) amongst a greater number of teams
- Ensure players are available for selection (assuming fit) for every league game
- Use a revised Prem Cup as the junior competition with meaningful games
-
Laudable sentiments but I can’t see how it would work. The second division would be totally one sided. You give teams free time with less games and they won’t rest players - they’ll want a way of earning cash. Less games just won’t do that. Also, you’d probably bankrupt the bigger teams in the second tier. Players being dispersed can’t work as they are all going to want the best deals with the best clubs.
I think the only solution is to make it a 14 team league by adding Ealing. Find a way to get the best players on show (less pointless internationals/get togethers/ training camps etc). Ditch the prem cup. Go with the league and Europe. Reintroduce promotion & relegation.
-
Laudable sentiments but I can’t see how it would work. The second division would be totally one sided. You give teams free time with less games and they won’t rest players - they’ll want a way of earning cash. Less games just won’t do that. Also, you’d probably bankrupt the bigger teams in the second tier. Players being dispersed can’t work as they are all going to want the best deals with the best clubs.
I think the only solution is to make it a 14 team league by adding Ealing. Find a way to get the best players on show (less pointless internationals/get togethers/ training camps etc). Ditch the prem cup. Go with the league and Europe. Reintroduce promotion & relegation.
Second division would need to be "levelled up" (sorry!) by more even distribution of centrally contracted England internationals, so in this utopian scenario, shouldn't be too one sided, and would be a better vehicle to allow teams to step up from the Championship (I wouldn't want a closed shop).
Fewer games and clubs won't have to rest players, so not sure I get your point there. As it is, most clubs only rest players when compelled to do so by England, so 26 league games a season doesn't strike me as a way to fix that. Wage paying clubs will want their pound of flesh. Few have the luxury of sufficient squad depth to allow for planned rotation.
England players being dispersed can work if they are all centrally contracted and the RFU (who have the finances if they can only manage them better) foots the bill with clubs just having to top up.
14 team league means 26 matches in the season and inevitably more weeks when internationals will be unavailable.
Fewer "pointless" internationals just ain't going to happen. I wouldn't want to see more internationals, but to wish for fewer is unrealistic.
-
Laudable sentiments but I can’t see how it would work. The second division would be totally one sided. You give teams free time with less games and they won’t rest players - they’ll want a way of earning cash. Less games just won’t do that. Also, you’d probably bankrupt the bigger teams in the second tier. Players being dispersed can’t work as they are all going to want the best deals with the best clubs.
I think the only solution is to make it a 14 team league by adding Ealing. Find a way to get the best players on show (less pointless internationals/get togethers/ training camps etc). Ditch the prem cup. Go with the league and Europe. Reintroduce promotion & relegation.
During ‘fallow’ league weeks (during AIs and the 6N) all clubs across both leagues would have Domestic Cup matches, so not rested per se.
It feels like 14 Teams = More matches which = more underlying operating costs to the Club = Larger Squads required = Fewer star players on show = less of an attraction to the ‘casual’ rugby fan who could be persuaded to come along. The reality is that an extra game is highly unlikely to generate significantly enough revenue (yet) to give an upside to the extra opex to put on the game.
It’s kind of whats been done (Get more games in, buy bigger players for better pulling power, have bigger squads/higher salary caps) and not worked, so think something different is required.
Appreciate that it’s unlikely to be enough to change your view Shugs especially as there isn’t any meaningful data behind it, but surprised to read your suggestion to the solution to some of PRLs issues is to throw another team in, give Clubs another home game and reduce England Squad time together.
-
Sobering thought in all of this, is Gloucester have said they will lose £350k of income due to Worcs game cancellation. This means they need 15 meaningful home games each season just to cover players salaries if spending to cap. This of course doesn’t cover any other operating costs, which hopefully would be covered by prl/tv money.
-
Rugby leagues proposals
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549)
-
Rugby leagues proposals
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549)
Will be interesting how that pans out in reality. Don’t follow it to know which clubs in super league are deemed better than others to be too big for relegation/ B division.
-
"Too big to be relegated" just sounds wrong to me. If you're not winning enough games it shouldn't matter how many titles you've won or how much money you've got, you should go down.
If sport stops being about sporting achievement & becomes just business, its the death of sport, IMO
-
Completely agree Baldpaul.
-
"Too big to be relegated" just sounds wrong to me. If you're not winning enough games it shouldn't matter how many titles you've won or how much money you've got, you should go down.
If sport stops being about sporting achievement & becomes just business, its the death of sport, IMO
People said that about Quins and Northampton, but both failed to haul themselves off the bottom and down they went. Both have since come back and won Premiership titles. Wasps survived by the skin of their teeth in 2012, despite 4 English and 2 European titles in the previous 10 years. But for a reprieve from relegation due to COVID, both Leicester and Bath could have suffered the same fate more recently. No one is "too big to be relegated". Not even Sarries.
-
Plus 1. 'Animal Farm' .... 'Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others.'
-
The 'Plus 1' is in agreement with Baldpaul.
-
Rugby leagues proposals
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549)
Will be interesting how that pans out in reality. Don’t follow it to know which clubs in super league are deemed better than others to be too big for relegation/ B division.
Sounds like the football Euro super league or whatever. A club of the haves versus the have nots.
-
I wonder how the Governments handling of the economy will affect finding investors, on the one hand borrowing has become more difficult on the other the weak pound makes a foreign investors go a lot further.
-
I wonder how the Governments handling of the economy will affect finding investors, on the one hand borrowing has become more difficult on the other the weak pound makes a foreign investors go a lot further.
Govt gilts made our bond look positively risk free at one point yesterday - until the Bank of England bought them all!
-
I wonder how the Governments handling of the economy will affect finding investors, on the one hand borrowing has become more difficult on the other the weak pound makes a foreign investors go a lot further.
Yes agree ….. so my hope would be for a US sports billionaire to get involved 🤞
-
I wonder how the Governments handling of the economy will affect finding investors, on the one hand borrowing has become more difficult on the other the weak pound makes a foreign investors go a lot further.
Yes agree ….. so my hope would be for a US sports billionaire to get involved 🤞
As long as they do don't do it like the Glazer's have with Manchester United, by putting all the debt on the Club.
-
Not from Wasps, but from someone in a position to have some knowledge (sorry for being vague, it is deliberately so).
What he's hearing is that Wuss (as we already know) are in big trouble, but there's no real concern about Wasps at the moment. Feeling is Wasps will get through this without issue. Also suggested that as Wasps voluntarily started the administration process, that may effect the potential of being relegated too (as in, it won't effect them). Hopefully it doesn't get that far anyway.
-
Not from Wasps, but from someone in a position to have some knowledge (sorry for being vague, it is deliberately so).
What he's hearing is that Wuss (as we already know) are in big trouble, but there's no real concern about Wasps at the moment. Feeling is Wasps will get through this without issue. Also suggested that as Wasps voluntarily started the administration process, that may effect the potential of being relegated too (as in, it won't effect them). Hopefully it doesn't get that far anyway.
It's a shame you have to be vague about the identity of your source, but fully understand your reasons for being so.
Hopefully this is accurate and we can all soon relax a little. Out with my mates last Saturday, several casual chief's supporters and one hardcore Quins supporter among them, they were all curious to know who I'd support if Wasps did perish, I honestly don't know if I could just shift allegiance like that, it really would leave a hole, of sorts, in my life
-
Not from Wasps, but from someone in a position to have some knowledge (sorry for being vague, it is deliberately so).
What he's hearing is that Wuss (as we already know) are in big trouble, but there's no real concern about Wasps at the moment. Feeling is Wasps will get through this without issue. Also suggested that as Wasps voluntarily started the administration process, that may effect the potential of being relegated too (as in, it won't effect them). Hopefully it doesn't get that far anyway.
Thanks for sharing that Raggs.
-
I guess a good way of describing their knowledge would be a much higher class of rumour than most of us would get :D
-
Not from Wasps, but from someone in a position to have some knowledge (sorry for being vague, it is deliberately so).
What he's hearing is that Wuss (as we already know) are in big trouble, but there's no real concern about Wasps at the moment. Feeling is Wasps will get through this without issue. Also suggested that as Wasps voluntarily started the administration process, that may effect the potential of being relegated too (as in, it won't effect them). Hopefully it doesn't get that far anyway.
It's a shame you have to be vague about the identity of your source, but fully understand your reasons for being so.
Hopefully this is accurate and we can all soon relax a little. Out with my mates last Saturday, several casual chief's supporters and one hardcore Quins supporter among them, they were all curious to know who I'd support if Wasps did perish, I honestly don't know if I could just shift allegiance like that, it really would leave a hole, of sorts, in my life
Yep - real dilemma. After wanting Wasps to win every game since their move to Coventry I'm not sure I would want to find a Premiership club to support. I'd probably become a Cov STH again.
-
Yes, thanks for sharing Raggs - interesting and somewhat reassuring. If the worst did happen I’d just be a rugby neutral. Not sure you can really switch clubs.
-
Agreed Shugs.
-
Not from Wasps, but from someone in a position to have some knowledge (sorry for being vague, it is deliberately so).
What he's hearing is that Wuss (as we already know) are in big trouble, but there's no real concern about Wasps at the moment. Feeling is Wasps will get through this without issue. Also suggested that as Wasps voluntarily started the administration process, that may effect the potential of being relegated too (as in, it won't effect them). Hopefully it doesn't get that far anyway.
It's a shame you have to be vague about the identity of your source, but fully understand your reasons for being so.
Hopefully this is accurate and we can all soon relax a little. Out with my mates last Saturday, several casual chief's supporters and one hardcore Quins supporter among them, they were all curious to know who I'd support if Wasps did perish, I honestly don't know if I could just shift allegiance like that, it really would leave a hole, of sorts, in my life
Yep - real dilemma. After wanting Wasps to win every game since their move to Coventry I'm not sure I would want to find a Premiership club to support. I'd probably become a Cov STH again.
At least supporting Cov wouldn't be too massive a drop in standard of rugby on offer, my local club is Plymouth Albion, I used to go to watch them frequently when they were in the championship, but since they've slid down the divisions, the product is not worth the ticket price (I think they took 50p off the price of a ticket when they were relegated from the championship......)
-
I'd certainly become a neutral anti-Saracens fan.
While I'm happy to hear someone else believes that we'll be ok, I believe we're down to 5 days now
That feels like cutting it fine
-
I'd certainly become a neutral anti-Saracens fan.
While I'm happy to hear someone else believes that we'll be ok, I believe we're down to 5 days now
That feels like cutting it fine
I am a neutral anti-Saracens fan whenever they play, already. I only want Tigers to win vs Sarries.....
If I had to change - then I'd enjoy following my local team in Tribute Western Counties North with Stroud and Cheltenham. I might get to more actual games. And I'm on the Trust team that owns their ground.
I'm probably nearest Bath....but that's in self harm territory.....so that's off...
-
Wow that is a difficult one, not sure I can find another club to support. Sarries is a big no but I must admit I am impressed with how McCall get the best out of is players. 100% not Tigers most probably the team I dislike the most, can't stand Tiger's supporters.
I do like the way Quins play and don't mind seeing them win but not sure that I can continue that for too long.
-
I'd certainly become a neutral anti-Saracens fan.
While I'm happy to hear someone else believes that we'll be ok, I believe we're down to 5 days now
That feels like cutting it fine
I am a neutral anti-Saracens fan whenever they play, already. I only want Tigers to win vs Sarries.....
If I had to change - then I'd enjoy following my local team in Tribute Western Counties North with Stroud and Cheltenham. I might get to more actual games. And I'm on the Trust team that owns their ground.
I'm probably nearest Bath....but that's in self harm territory.....so that's off...
:) Bath fans must be contemplating switching on the assumption they won’t fold!
-
Interesting discussion evolving on here. Living close to HW, Oirish and Queens are almost equidistant, followed by the Cheats.
I would not fancy getting to either of those and Cheats is a definite no-no.
I would probably go back to watching my local junior side playing in Souther Counties.
Wasps will be OK.
£2M for the taxman is chicken feed for several of the people involved at the top. Hopefully the current financial chaos will not screw up the refinancing.
-
I've had a liking for Glos ever since the days of Iron Mike Teague and they've been my second team ever since.
-
:) Bath fans must be contemplating switching on the assumption they won’t fold!
Be interesting to see....but I've only seen one Bath shirt around my way and that's the STH in my road.....TBH - it's not a bad night out if not raining and you're not driving - but I couldn't support Bath......
-
Lawrence on BT Sport tonight, nothing new and carefully worded.
https://twitter.com/btsportrugby/status/1575913875291226118?t=PIuZoXhQdC6tklCoSDAPMA&s=19
-
I found that quite negative on a few counts. He seemed to be stressing the fact that we shouldn’t be relegated because covid is an extenuating circumstance rather than saying we won’t go into it in the first place. He’s often not very clear though. The other aspect is that some interest is in the non rugby businesses - odd.
-
All our postmen are Glaws or Barf, but nice for all that. I always liked Wuss and loath Sarries/Execeter(80 per cent orful supporters)/Bristle. Left with Ealing, Cornish Pasties, Nots and Scarlets. But nothing comes close to Wasps.
-
Lawrence on BT Sport tonight, nothing new and carefully worded.
https://twitter.com/btsportrugby/status/1575913875291226118?t=PIuZoXhQdC6tklCoSDAPMA&s=19
It was interesting to hear. He almost hinted there could be different owners for the entities that currently fall under the Wasps Holdings umbrella. It would already seem that Christopher Holland 'owns' the training facility. The Rugby business being stand alone and having a lease from a 'new' stadium owner?????
Food for thought?
-
I was also concerned about the comments, it sounds like it is far from definite that we will not go into administration, getting nervous.
-
Is the whole complex being parcelled up and sold off in bits - with Conditions?
-
I'd certainly become a neutral anti-Saracens fan.
While I'm happy to hear someone else believes that we'll be ok, I believe we're down to 5 days now
That feels like cutting it fine
I'd also go back to just being a rugby fan. I stopped watching Sarries before the salary cap scandal and from what I occasionally see and here they still aren't pleasant to watch even though they play good rugby.
And well done Tom Fowley for clamping down on all that back slapping and celebrating opponents' mistakes in the first few minutes of today's game. That sort of behaviour put me off soccer.
-
I wonder if you can get anti-saracens season tickets... ;)
-
Interesting discussion evolving on here. Living close to HW, Oirish and Queens are almost equidistant, followed by the Cheats.
I would not fancy getting to either of those and Cheats is a definite no-no.
I would probably go back to watching my local junior side playing in Souther Counties.
Wasps will be OK.
£2M for the taxman is chicken feed for several of the people involved at the top. Hopefully the current financial chaos will not screw up the refinancing.
Then why hasn't it been repaid?
Lol should get a job as the Chancellor's spin doctor. That was an impressive way to say "we're still going but we're very nearly completely fucked."
There's no way Prem Rugby/the RFU will buy the Covid excuse this long after all restrictions are lifted etc, and our finances being so poor for so long before and after.