Jump to content

Championship clubs still in deadlock


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

I was being a touch... I remember that but I don't think anything has happened since that spade was stuck in the ground. The last statement I saw from Sheffield (a few weeks ago) was that work hadn't started and they were in discussions regarding the urgency of progress. There's also a rumour that one of the developers has pulled out of the project. 

I hear that the whole project has ground to a halt with one of the two major developers having withdrawn, which is a shame for Sheffield (genuinely). If they are to survive in the city then they need a decent permanent home. As always, unfortunately, they are dependent upon someone else building it for them.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


35 minutes ago, RP London said:

the last time i was there (feb), or across the road to be precise, there seemed to be a bit going on but that isnt to say they were doing much work. 

I have not heard that rumour though about someone pulling out. The weather at the beginning of the year and then Covid is not going to have helped a whole lot to be fair but equally it has been known to get stuck on personality issues since the very start.

 

26 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

I hear that the whole project has ground to a halt with one of the two major developers having withdrawn, which is a shame for Sheffield (genuinely). If they are to survive in the city then they need a decent permanent home. As always, unfortunately, they are dependent upon someone else building it for them.

Latest pictures on the Legacy Park FB page of Athletes returning to training would suggest no change - the temporary stand can still be seen to be in place, which I believe is on the side to be developed (west)! (I'd attach but there are people in the photographs). 

Edited by Les Tonks Sidestep
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

I hear that the whole project has ground to a halt with one of the two major developers having withdrawn, which is a shame for Sheffield (genuinely). If they are to survive in the city then they need a decent permanent home. As always, unfortunately, they are dependent upon someone else building it for them.

If only the Council had accepted Sheffield's bid instead of a bloke who talked big and delivered little, Johnny.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

 

Latest pictures on the Legacy Park FB page of Athletes returning to training would suggest no change - the temporary stand can still be seen to be in place, which I believe is on the side to be developed (west)! (I'd attach but there are people in the photographs). 

So you think Sheffield will play at the OLP then ?

If there's a restart, obviously.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chronicler of Chiswick said:

No way is the capacity of the Queensway stadium 8.5k, I'd reckon it's around 2000.

There's no way I 'd want to be in that stadium with 8500 there! I doubt it would get a safety certificate for anywhere close to that number

It's a bit like saying Odsal once held 102,000. It still could..... so long as you didn't have any concern for people's health and safety.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Griff said:

So you think Sheffield will play at the OLP then ?

If there's a restart, obviously.

I've no idea. Currently the pitch is unavailable to anyone (because of Covid, not building work) but that could of course change at anytime. Their plan at the start of the season was to return to the OLP at the beginning of May, so quite possibly depending on how true what Johnny's heard is.

Edited by Les Tonks Sidestep
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Griff said:

If only the Council had accepted Sheffield's bid instead of a bloke who talked big and delivered little, Johnny.

I don't know the ins and outs Griff but it does look like an unsatisfactory outcome so far.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, paulwalker71 said:

There's no way I 'd want to be in that stadium with 8500 there! I doubt it would get a safety certificate for anywhere close to that number

It's a bit like saying Odsal once held 102,000. It still could..... so long as you didn't have any concern for people's health and safety.

8256 according to Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensway_Stadium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

I don't know the ins and outs Griff but it does look like an unsatisfactory outcome so far.

The less said, the better.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so bottom line, is championship & league 1 resuming? running out of time to make a decision. surely they must make a decision soon? sitting on the fence is not the answer. teams who want to play should do so, those who don't sit this year out. but make a decision!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kev p said:

so bottom line, is championship & league 1 resuming? running out of time to make a decision. surely they must make a decision soon? sitting on the fence is not the answer. teams who want to play should do so, those who don't sit this year out. but make a decision!

I imagine that the latest delay in making a decision is connected to the emerging rumours in the press of some crowds being allowed at sports fixtures from September/October onward. The RFL probably don't want to tell clubs they cannot play in whatever form of competition could be organised, only to later see the principal obstacle to a resumption (inability to have paying crowds) being removed by the government. Whilst it may look like procrastination on the part of the RFL I suspect that the expectation of the return of crowds being announced soon may be the, perfectly reasonable, reason for the delayed decision.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/07/2020 at 13:29, NickD said:

Whats the attraction?  Im lost.  Are we not passionate on here or not?  Id watch Dewsbury if they were playing in the toy town lego cup.  I love rugby and I love my team. Its as simple as that.

I keep saying this myself.... Though I obviously mean London mot Dewsbury

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kev p said:

teams need to make the decision to play or not. if left to RFL we might die waiting for an answer. 

The ultimate decision lies with the RFL board, they will want to do it with agreement from the clubs affected. They decided to delay the decisions on retention (or not) of P&R for this year and on resumption or cancelling of the Championship and League 1 following further consultation with all 25 clubs. During which a majority expressed a desire to only resume once crowds are allowed to attend and from which a shortened autumn tournament of some form (if fans can attend) was supported. As most clubs didn't want to restart now behind closed doors the RFL board (IMHO) seem to have delayed the decision in the hope that upcoming government announcements (now rumoured in the press) about further easing of restrictions will make complying with the wishes of the majority possible.

Had they made a call to cancel already and then saw the return of crowds announced they would have made a rod for their own back. Those clubs keen to resume at any stage would be angry at being denied a shot at getting promotion when the leagues could have resumed, while those wanting to wait for crowds would be angry at no longer being able to make any money by holding competitive fixtures. A time limit has been given for a decision (July 23rd) by which time hopefully we will know that crowds can attend after a specific date and so some competition (whatever form that takes) can be undertaken by those 25 clubs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kev p said:

teams need to make the decision to play or not. if left to RFL we might die waiting for an answer. 

Many a true word .............

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/07/2020 at 00:06, wiganermike said:

Had they made a call to cancel already and then saw the return of crowds announced they would have made a rod for their own back. Those clubs keen to resume at any stage would be angry at being denied a shot at getting promotion when the leagues could have resumed, while those wanting to wait for crowds would be angry at no longer being able to make any money by holding competitive fixtures. A time limit has been given for a decision (July 23rd) by which time hopefully we will know that crowds can attend after a specific date and so some competition (whatever form that takes) can be undertaken by those 25 clubs.

We have to remember that we are not alone, the EFL and RFU are in the same boat, along with some other sports. All will be pressing the government for some sort of indication on the main drivers for a return - mainly crowds and testing.

One thing I find odd about testing is the fact that employers are being urged to take staff off furlough where possible. So why should they have to pay for testing if it means that professional sports men and women could go back to work and save the taxpayer money? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve Slater said:

We have to remember that we are not alone, the EFL and RFU are in the same boat, along with some other sports. All will be pressing the government for some sort of indication on the main drivers for a return - mainly crowds and testing.

One thing I find odd about testing is the fact that employers are being urged to take staff off furlough where possible. So why should they have to pay for testing if it means that professional sports men and women could go back to work and save the taxpayer money? 

Well, I would imagine it's because rugby players come into very close contact with employees of another organisation as part of their employment duties.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve Slater said:

We have to remember that we are not alone, the EFL and RFU are in the same boat, along with some other sports. All will be pressing the government for some sort of indication on the main drivers for a return - mainly crowds and testing.

One thing I find odd about testing is the fact that employers are being urged to take staff off furlough where possible. So why should they have to pay for testing if it means that professional sports men and women could go back to work and save the taxpayer money? 

Featherstone Rovers Chairman Mark Campbell

Championship and League One clubs have made some positive steps by contacting their local NHS testing centres, who may be able to provide the weekly tests for essential staff. This would remove a huge obstacle and would allow essential staff to return safely back into their environments. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Griff said:

Well, I would imagine it's because rugby players come into very close contact with employees of another organisation as part of their employment duties.

Yes. Although the govt is urging people to come back to work, it's all still supposed to be with some sort of social distancing in place (2m, 1m+, masks in common area etc) None of that is possible in rugby, thus players are still off, unless testing can be carried out.

Given the expected timeline of this, I think Championship and L1 potentially have a problem for next year as social distancing guidelines are unlikely to have been removed before the start of 2021. So either Championship/L1 have to hope that the cost of testing has fallen massively by then (possible), they ask players to take risk of full contact (lawsuit waiting to happen), or they don't play. (financial disaster for clubs). The crunch is coming quite soon.     

  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Featherstone Rovers Chairman Mark Campbell

It is disappointing then to read the statement from the RFL regarding the testing costs for each club would be in the region of £5,000 per week. I am confused and concerned as to where they have estimated these figures from, as we have researched our own costs which aren’t close to this figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, POR said:

Featherstone Rovers Chairman Mark Campbell

It is disappointing then to read the statement from the RFL regarding the testing costs for each club would be in the region of £5,000 per week. I am confused and concerned as to where they have estimated these figures from, as we have researched our own costs which aren’t close to this figure.

Thats the quote that the Super League clubs have got too. 

I assume Campbell has looked at using the NHS testing facilities, which would clearly reduce costs but does seem a bit on the nose for supposedly professional sport to be using it as a preferred method. Its also important to state that this isn't something that can or should be done "on the cheap" either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, POR said:

Featherstone Rovers Chairman Mark Campbell

It is disappointing then to read the statement from the RFL regarding the testing costs for each club would be in the region of £5,000 per week. I am confused and concerned as to where they have estimated these figures from, as we have researched our own costs which aren’t close to this figure.

He should share that with everyone then, save everyone some cash!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, POR said:

Featherstone Rovers Chairman Mark Campbell

It is disappointing then to read the statement from the RFL regarding the testing costs for each club would be in the region of £5,000 per week. I am confused and concerned as to where they have estimated these figures from, as we have researched our own costs which aren’t close to this figure.

Get in there Marky boy, RFL bullsheeite as usual to appease the Pub teams and avoid relegation from SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, POR said:

Featherstone Rovers Chairman Mark Campbell

It is disappointing then to read the statement from the RFL regarding the testing costs for each club would be in the region of £5,000 per week. I am confused and concerned as to where they have estimated these figures from, as we have researched our own costs which aren’t close to this figure.

Talking to a friend last week who knows one of your ex coaches quite well was informed by him that Fev had come to an agreement with a 'testing' establishment quite close to the Town that would do the 'tests' on the Fev player's for substantially a lot loss than the quoted figures, in fact the cost was said to be negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Thats the quote that the Super League clubs have got too. 

I assume Campbell has looked at using the NHS testing facilities, which would clearly reduce costs but does seem a bit on the nose for supposedly professional sport to be using it as a preferred method. Its also important to state that this isn't something that can or should be done "on the cheap" either. 

See above Tommy, if any club can negotiate its own terms, don't knock it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...