Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: Vespula Vulgaris on October 20, 2022, 07:32:01 AM
-
So despite having built a new stand it turns out that the EA's ground still does not meet the capacity requirements for the Premiership despite their special dispensation.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/oct/19/saracens-lacking-safety-certificate-to-admit-10000-or-more-fans-to-stadium
Seems the rules don't apply to some people.
-
All this Special Consideration for one cheating club does make you wonder if it's ''who you know'' or ''what you know''. Sorry to say it makes me wonder anyway.
-
Conversation in the corridors of power: “They can’t house 10,000”. “I know that’s why we didn’t let them get promoted”. “No, not Ealing, Sarries”. “Sarries you say, well that’s different, just let them be promoted and hopefully no one will notice the blatant bias in our decision making”.
-
Conversation in the corridors of power: “They can’t house 10,000”. “I know that’s why we didn’t let them get promoted”. “No, not Ealing, Sarries”. “Sarries you say, well that’s different, just let them be promoted and hopefully no one will notice the blatant bias in our decision making”.
;D +1
-
;D
Honestly, we're edging closer to sounding like the monster-raving looney party on here at times. Another deliberately provocative article. Had Ealing or Doncaster won the league, they would have been afforded the same dispensation. So there's hardly any favouritism happening here.
Development of the new stand is complete and as it's 10,001+ the route to certification is that the Club notifies the Local Authority (who can certify stadia of 10,000 and below) who in turn notifies the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and they then certify it.
The interesting snippet is that Phil de Glanville explains the minimum capacity isn't about crowds, but about the greater degree of scrutiny stadiums come under when they're 10,001 capacity and above. The farcical part of this though beyond the unnecessary expense it puts Clubs through is certification is then taken out of the hands of the Club/Local Authority.
-
What I find interesting is their attendance numbers. All below our last match figure - and consistently lower. Finally they get a new stand built that adds only 500 seats to take them over the specified minimum. Mind you pre-covid a friend of mine was paying over a grand for a season ticket.
-
Had Ealing or Doncaster won the league, they would have been afforded the same dispensation. So there's hardly any favouritism happening here.
I thought Ealing did win last year.
-
Had Ealing or Doncaster won the league, they would have been afforded the same dispensation. So there's hardly any favouritism happening here.
I thought Ealing did win last year.
My bad - I meant the year that Sarries came back up (and got the dispensation)
-
Regardless of this, the PRL is talking tough and taking a stringent line with clubs. It either applies the hardline rules or doesn’t and the Cheats have been up for over a year now.
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
-
They don’t meet the promotion criteria, they should be relegated and removed of their p share.
Premier rugby have made it very clear there is no wiggle room in any rules whatsoever. To quote Baxter and Massie “that would be unfair”.
-
IMO Baxter is morphing into a Jeremy Hunt.
-
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
Oh come on, it's a daft view to suggest that a Club who is increasing their Stadium beyond the already 10,001+ minimum and needs to temporarily cap attendance to do so should be relegated and stripped on their P-Shares.
Especially when the certification is out of the hands of the Club and in the hands of Central Government.
The problem is getting a collective agreement on anything amongst the PRL and Team Owners.
-
For 'morphing 'read' morphed'.
-
Hang on a minute.
If the surviving ten are going to keep afloat by bringing in more fans for fewer games, how does that work if there is insufficient capacity right now?
-
Hang on a minute.
If the surviving ten are going to keep afloat by bringing in more fans for fewer games, how does that work if there is insufficient capacity right now?
+1
its a response I’ve seen in Industry that dates back to Ancient Rome.
Petronius Arbiter, a Roman official at the time of Nero, wrote, 'We tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion inefficiency, and demoralization.
-
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
Oh come on, it's a daft view to suggest that a Club who is increasing their Stadium beyond the already 10,001+ minimum and needs to temporarily cap attendance to do so should be relegated and stripped on their P-Shares.
Especially when the certification is out of the hands of the Club and in the hands of Central Government.
The problem is getting a collective agreement on anything amongst the PRL and Team Owners.
Maybe, but the PRL are talking tough. It’s nowhere near as daft as refusing a rescue bid for a 155 year old club on the basis of refusing their P share. That’s out of the club’s control too and in the hands of an administrative body.
Daft if taken as a one off, but given the bigger picture and Saracen’s recent history, yet another flagrant example of turning a blind eye when it suits. It also compromises the PRL’s integrity and makes them look about as credible as Liz Truss.
-
Maybe Ealing should have put a couple of bits of scaffold up, claimed work was underway and asked for dispensation?
-
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
Oh come on, it's a daft view to suggest that a Club who is increasing their Stadium beyond the already 10,001+ minimum and needs to temporarily cap attendance to do so should be relegated and stripped on their P-Shares.
Especially when the certification is out of the hands of the Club and in the hands of Central Government.
The problem is getting a collective agreement on anything amongst the PRL and Team Owners.
Maybe, but the PRL are talking tough. It’s nowhere near as daft as refusing a rescue bid for a 155 year old club on the basis of refusing their P share. That’s out of the club’s control too and in the hands of an administrative body.
Daft if taken as a one off, but given the bigger picture and Saracen’s recent history, yet another flagrant example of turning a blind eye when it suits. It also compromises the PRL’s integrity and makes them look about as credible as Liz Truss.
On your last point Andy, absolutely.
Whilst tough to accept, fans of Worcester and Wasps would accept that rules are rules, and we just have to take what's coming to us on the proviso that these rules are applied fairly and in the spirit of the rules.
I don't believe the rules are fairly applied. A work around will always be found for a club of value (Tigers, Saracens, Exeter) to ensure that, on the face of it, a punishment has been served, but in real terms has no weight to it.
Now, I'm being cynical and wearing my tin foil hat (so feel free to tell me I'm wide of the mark), but Tigers only survived relegation at the end of the 2019/20 season due to Saracens' punishment for their cheating. You could argue that the fallout of Tiger's relegation would've been far greater than what actually happened with Saracens. Prem Rugby would've been happy because, secretly, they will have been happy to have saved Tigers and, publicly, they will have been seen to have "done something" about Saracens' cheating (even though the punishment served, in real terms, was next to nothing).
Yet, along comes Wasps and Worcester, who need serious help, have had PRL turn their backs on them. To answer back to Baxter, yes you could say admin could be used as a way to gain an advantage, but can he please tell us Wasps and Worcester fans what advantage our clubs have gained exactly? There's absolutely nothing left of either club. It's not like all those Wasps players and staff have now got contracts with a new Wasps company ready to bounce back straight into the Premiership next week.
-
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
Oh come on, it's a daft view to suggest that a Club who is increasing their Stadium beyond the already 10,001+ minimum and needs to temporarily cap attendance to do so should be relegated and stripped on their P-Shares.
Especially when the certification is out of the hands of the Club and in the hands of Central Government.
The problem is getting a collective agreement on anything amongst the PRL and Team Owners.
Maybe, but the PRL are talking tough. It’s nowhere near as daft as refusing a rescue bid for a 155 year old club on the basis of refusing their P share. That’s out of the club’s control too and in the hands of an administrative body.
Daft if taken as a one off, but given the bigger picture and Saracen’s recent history, yet another flagrant example of turning a blind eye when it suits. It also compromises the PRL’s integrity and makes them look about as credible as Liz Truss.
One of those problems will be solved by this time next week.
-
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
Oh come on, it's a daft view to suggest that a Club who is increasing their Stadium beyond the already 10,001+ minimum and needs to temporarily cap attendance to do so should be relegated and stripped on their P-Shares.
Especially when the certification is out of the hands of the Club and in the hands of Central Government.
The problem is getting a collective agreement on anything amongst the PRL and Team Owners.
Maybe, but the PRL are talking tough. It’s nowhere near as daft as refusing a rescue bid for a 155 year old club on the basis of refusing their P share. That’s out of the club’s control too and in the hands of an administrative body.
Daft if taken as a one off, but given the bigger picture and Saracen’s recent history, yet another flagrant example of turning a blind eye when it suits. It also compromises the PRL’s integrity and makes them look about as credible as Liz Truss.
One of those problems will be solved by this time next week.
Errr, already solved.
-
At the rate we’re going it might be solved AGAIN by the end of next week!! :)
-
I know this is high jacking the thread but did she ever actually get to move in and unpack her bags?
-
Did she get to cover ''that'' wallpaper with magnolia paint?
-
I know this is high jacking the thread but did she ever actually get to move in and unpack her bags?
Poor thing. At least she gets redundancy, which is the same as her annual salary, and, because she worked so hard, she can have that redundancy in the form a pension, every year from now on in until she pegs it.
Yes, £105k per year, for how many days work?
-
I know this is high jacking the thread but did she ever actually get to move in and unpack her bags?
She never moved in - was spooked by sky rocketing interest rates. :)
-
It’s more evidence of a couple of clubs running the game.
Oh come on, it's a daft view to suggest that a Club who is increasing their Stadium beyond the already 10,001+ minimum and needs to temporarily cap attendance to do so should be relegated and stripped on their P-Shares.
Especially when the certification is out of the hands of the Club and in the hands of Central Government.
The problem is getting a collective agreement on anything amongst the PRL and Team Owners.
Maybe, but the PRL are talking tough. It’s nowhere near as daft as refusing a rescue bid for a 155 year old club on the basis of refusing their P share. That’s out of the club’s control too and in the hands of an administrative body.
Daft if taken as a one off, but given the bigger picture and Saracen’s recent history, yet another flagrant example of turning a blind eye when it suits. It also compromises the PRL’s integrity and makes them look about as credible as Liz Truss.
One of those problems will be solved by this time next week.
Errr, already solved.
She's still nominally PM and we don't know who will replace her.
-
There were 52 days from the first pre season game to Monday, so our season should outlast her Premiership...
-
Shortest term served by any PM in our history. Laughing all the way to the bank.
-
Was she something to do with the EAs?
-
Still a good deal longer than Vincent Koch's Wasps career!
-
Was she something to do with the EAs?
Feels akin to their “guest speaker” scam. Here’s £10k to come to this event but you don’t have to come.