Rugbypass take on Guardian article

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Are there any specific requirements about home grounds in the Championship?

There was quite a lot of land around the EPIC that could potentially be utilised, some was for sale at the opening, and the Academy house was not short of land. But I have a feeling that might have been owned by Derek himself, and not be part of the training centre. I'd be interested to find out who owns it now...

[wasps]

The article was a bit nothing-y for those of us who frequent wasps message boards, but probably did raise valid points for those who don't and who may red articles on rugbypass.




Despite that, the real question is, would you take 5-10 years of Wasps followed by a possible complete failure, or would you rather there was no wasps at all?


That's ultimately the situation we were in previously.
Was an extra 8 years of a Wasps team existing worth it?


If it wasn't, then it isn't now either
If it was ok then, then there's an argument that it's worth the risk now...... After all, it's none of us taking the risk

[NellyWellyWaspy]

However, it is worth pointing out that apart from his own axe grinding most of the points he has raised came from here.

Or anywhere/anyone else that has read the Guardian article. The suggestion Wasps can play Champ games at Henley for example raises a load of questions that pretty much anyone could think up if they we interested.

Epic could barely cope with a visiting team transportation. It has barely enough (actually NOT enough) parking for the home team players. No, there is no way the training ground could or should ever be used for competitive games. There is zero parking nearby and this tiny town is a traffic nightmare at the best of times.

Here's the thing though - does playing a game of rugby on an outdoor pitch watched by some people (1,2, 25, 250....) require a planning 'change of use' application?

Whilst the erection of a stand and with that, an examination of parking and access arrangements, I suspect just playing a game of rugby with no changes to the infrastructure will not need a change of use.

It was one of the many avenues of objection the Henley Sports Centre Alliance put forward, that Wasps might choose to play fixtures there, and I think Wasps assured them it would not happen. However, no, it would not require a change of use application. But, there would have to be new infrastructure. The changing rooms, toilets etc. are totally inadequate; you need three (or more) sets of them at least (home, away and officials, plus trainers, water boys, etc.). The car park is tiny and totally inadequate. Would you need first aid facilities? Probably. With the current horrendous backlog of planning applications in Stratford District, you would not have a hope of getting it heard and debated in under 1-2 years.

[Skippy]

Sounds like yet another case of the shirking-from-home curse that?s blighting the public sector.

[baldpaul101]

I suspect just playing a game of rugby with no changes to the infrastructure will not need a change of use.

You may well be correct. But as Nelly outlines, there's lots of other things you would need to take into account, its not as simple as "just playing a game of rugby"

Now I am sure that temporary toilets & changing rooms etc could be hired & other issues ironed out but I really hope that playing at the EPIC is being viewed as a last resort, only to be used when all other options have been discounted & only when to not play, would impact Wasps inclusion in the Championship!

[DGP Wasp]

Playing rugby at a rugby training ground may not constitute a change of use, but surely they will need a licence to sell alcohol, and presumably some sort of licence would be needed before they could admit paying punters in the kind of numbers that would be expected. And the addition of a club shop and food outlets could in themselves be defined as a change of use. I think the council will not be short of means to put a stop to it if they felt so inclined.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Playing rugby at a rugby training ground may not constitute a change of use, but surely they will need a licence to sell alcohol, and presumably some sort of licence would be needed before they could admit paying punters in the kind of numbers that would be expected. And the addition of a club shop and food outlets could in themselves be defined as a change of use. I think the council will not be short of means to put a stop to it if they felt so inclined.

Just so, and I think they would, that is if the planning officers ever return to work off 'sick leave'.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Playing rugby at a rugby training ground may not constitute a change of use, but surely they will need a licence to sell alcohol, and presumably some sort of licence would be needed before they could admit paying punters in the kind of numbers that would be expected. And the addition of a club shop and food outlets could in themselves be defined as a change of use. I think the council will not be short of means to put a stop to it if they felt so inclined.

The plan was always to host events there with food and drink so it may well be that a license for food/drink/music already exists. 

[Egret]

There are requirements for home/away/referee changing rooms and medical facilities however afaik temporary buildings do not need planning permission. Similarly with any 'temporary' food/refreshment outlets, the licencing requirement could be achieved by outsourcing the running of the bar to a local rugby club or other licensee.

From what other people said, not ideal to hold games there but feasible given my understanding of planning law.

[RogerE]

When at Wycombe they had to get planning permission for the beer tent every season.

[Neils]

They have two changing rooms. Plus other facilities which could be utilised by officials and coaches.
They could play games there without supporters just to get up and running.
Use a bit of innovation and have a few"temporary" TV towers and stream the games to potential  STHs and charge a fee to outsiders and opposition fans. Make it good quality with commentary.  Make it very plain that it is a temporary situation to fulfil requirements. 
Or use Solihull as the Telegraph leaked.

[welsh wasp]

Don't forget that Sixways is still available. New Wasps playing hard to get with its current unreliable owners?

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Don't forget that Sixways is still available. New Wasps playing hard to get with its current unreliable owners?

I am far from convinced that Atlas ARE the new owners. I doubt that they have paid in full yet.

[baldpaul101]

While I am sure it is possible to play matches at the EPIC, even though it will VERY far from ideal, that doesnt mean that the RFU will agree to let Wasps do it.
As far as I am aware a Phoenix club has to full fill various RFU criteria, one of which was to play at a suitable ground, either the ex-clubs existing ground or one not to far away which the RFU would need to approve.
I am sure New Wasps will be aware of that & will not try & play at any ground which doesnt have RFU approval.

All that said, it would be a pretty p1ss poor start to the New Wasps if they had to play there IMO. Although fully understand there may be no option.
In my mind this suggestion is a bargaining chip for a better deal somewhere else. I hope so anyway!

[Heathen]

I am starting to get rather concerned about all the negative vibes attached to professional rugby in England.

The 'new' Wasps leaders are desperately trying to attract investors in, what must be for them, a potentially grim scenario for the future of professional rugby.

The odds on Wasps returning must be diminishing, as each week goes by.