Jump to content

Broncos forfeit Toulouse game


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Cool, as could London. In a fairly run comp. But apparently they are judged by different criteria, because, er, well just because 

Could it be because london let toulouse buy a private plane,pay Covid test for all of them and decide few days before to stay home. Very fair.... but still have to pay for everything reserved. Sad 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply
21 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Given this week's events, it's not a good look having Catalans, drawn at home, playing in the UK.

This is a condition of the BBC contract with the RFL for CC broadcasts. Steve McNamara said that they were fully aware of this when they entered the competition.

Covid restrictions prevent the BBC from arranging broadcasts from France, apparently.

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

9 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

Do keep up RP. The fixture list for the Championship, as published weeks ago, does not cover each club playing each other one home and away. Every club loses four "fixtures" from what would have been a balanced programme under normal circumstances. That is why the league positions will be determined on the basis of the win percentage rather than points. Hence, two clubs didn't have an away fixture in Toulouse to begin with and two other clubs won't have a home fixture with them either.

that's true every team miss out on two home games and don't have to travel to two away games leaving 22 games 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/04/2021 at 08:59, coolie said:

Reading that

If nobody travels to France to play Toulouse 

They cannot qualify for the play offs

As they would have played only 50% of games.

Not true -  look again at the last paragraph.

 

"Toulouse are now deemed to have played two matches...and London Broncos one."

 

So what the RFL have done is awarded Toulouse a win that counts towards the percentage of completed fixtures that need to be played. London, owing to their forfeit, won't have this game count in their completed fixtures so not only do they earn no points, they've also reduced their percentage of games played, so if they just miss the 70% threshold, the RFL can just turn around and say "Well, It's your own fault for not fulfilling the Toulouse match."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/04/2021 at 17:43, Rupert Prince said:

So why cannot the other clubs play as well? The issue of full time part time is a total red herring. 

I believe the Toulouse home games against English part time sides have merely been postponed until later in the year when Covid protocols may change. 

  https://www.rugby-league.com/article/57735/statement--toulouse-olympique

The sport isn't fair and it is not a level playing field - a bit like recent promotions,the promotion of London Broncos into Super League in the 1990's.

Catalans Dragons fulfilling their obligations, last year,and their home cup game,in St Helen's v Wakefield Trinity last night.

No surprise to see a rich owner of a rugby league club not wanting to go the extra mile for the fallacy of the rugby league family.

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/04/2021 at 11:37, Blind side johnny said:

The "decision" wasn't about whether clubs would play Toulouse away or not. Despite the attempts of some on here to be utterly simplistic it was a complex proposal from the RFL about the whole structure of the Championship and C1 in 2021 that provided the possibility of a season of fixtures actually being run, together with a host of contingencies regarding the avoidance of excessive disruption to these schedules in the case of another Covid surge.

These proposals were drawn up and considered when the country was still in the throes of a major Covid wave with hundreds of people dying daily. The alternative to accepting these proposals, together with their idiosyncrasies could, in reality, have meant abandoning the 2021 season in total. This could well have resulted in some clubs closing, possibly for good. It would appear that some posters on here would regard this as a price worth paying.

At the time I certainly wasn't aware of London kicking up a major fuss about the arrangements. Nor do I recall them saying that they would refuse to travel to Toulouse under these circumstances or obligations. What has changed in the meantime?

Thanks for shedding some light on this murky situation.

It was obvious to me that managing this pandemic and trying to preserve as many fixtures (and as much revenue) as possible was at the heart of any arrangements made and agreed to.

I don't want you to think that I was being simplistic, (or that I'm simplistic by nature) so I want to restate that my point was not in essence, a criticism of the RFL or the Championship clubs but rather about the unsympathetic nature of some of the posters on this forum.

Even in these extraordinary circumstances many posters seem hell bent on punishment and vilification rather than suspending judgement until all the facts are in. Additionally, some (here) seem perfectly happy to advocate unfairness as a principle as long as they can see some short term benefit by disadvantaging others. 

The underlying motive, in these cases is almost always envy and if it goes unchecked, it has the potential to tear us apart.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

If so, why not London?

I hope this answers the question - London Broncos are full-time

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/part-time-teams-wont-be-required-to-travel-to-toulouse-until-quarantine-restrictions-are-lifted/

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, fighting irish said:

 

 

 

Even in these extraordinary circumstances many posters seem hell bent on punishment and vilification rather than suspending judgement until all the facts are in. Additionally, some (here) seem perfectly happy to advocate unfairness as a principle as long as they can see some short term benefit by disadvantaging others. 

 

^^ This

 

Broncos, like almost every club at this level, are reliant upon a benefactor paying the bills. Why the RFL have randomly decided only the irritatingly far-from-Leeds Mr Hughes should have to do X, Y and Z out of some sort of magical beneficence and not expect the same of his peers is a mystery to me. But makes perfect sense to everyone else apparently. 

 

The logical dividing line for travel and other comp structure decisions in a pandemic is by league level, not by wage structure. Anything else we expect full time teams to do? If we’d had this sort of discretion in the late 1980’s maybe we could have stopped Wigan killing the competition back then..!! 😂😂😂
 

 

Apparently this site says I "won the day" here on 23rd Jan, 19th Jan, 9th Jan also 13th December, whatever any of that means. Anyway, 4 times in a few weeks? The forum must be going to the dogs - you people need to seriously up your game. Where's Dutoni when you need him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Broncos really have been poor in their approach to this. I note the old prejudices resurfacing. However its really lucky Covid knows the difference between full and part time players and that the 5 days of isolation (non elite comp) wouldn’t affect any team prep. 

Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/04/2021 at 12:07, DimmestStar said:

There is currently a 3rd wave in France and a 6pm curfew.

Ridiculous that London or anyone else is expected to travel to France.

Coved was not n issue in this matter.and Toulouse had arranged special precautions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Southern Reiver said:

Broncos really have been poor in their approach to this. I note the old prejudices resurfacing. However its really lucky Covid knows the difference between full and part time players and that the 5 days of isolation (non elite comp) wouldn’t affect any team prep. 

That's where the misunderstanding comes in It's not covid it's the governent who are allowing what they call elite clubs by that they mean full time to travel abroad then when they  come back   they  have to isolate for 10 days however  because they are in a bubble it can be reduced to 5 days if they pass a covid test so as not to jepordise future games  but they can only go to training and games they are still not allowed to leave their homes and do normal thing for the stipulated 10 days 

now part time players who have outside interests from the sport do not get this exemption they have to isolate for 10 days so that's time off work sat at home without pay while full time players can sit at home in  a 5 day isolation and still get a full pay packet

so the RFL listened to the government guidelines and postponed 2 part time reams from travelling and allowed a full time team to participate 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/04/2021 at 12:01, Gooleboy said:

If the part time teams go to Toulouse later in the season, why can't London?

Because they are FT and therefore have no reason not to play now and let their comrads play later in the season.

Or the season can just be cancelled again and the SL clubs can pick next seasons whipping boys again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/04/2021 at 20:10, POR said:

now part time players who have outside interests from the sport do not get this exemption they have to isolate for 10 days so that's time off work sat at home without pay while full time players can sit at home in  a 5 day isolation and still get a full pay packet

Not sure that is entirely correct. The RFL did define the Championship and League 1 as Elite sport (though did delay their start in terms of training as a precaution). But it  would imply that both professional and semi-professional players would be covered by the definition of being elite.

You can argue that semi-pro don’t meet the definition as ‘derived living’ but Govt guidance does not make a distinction (or any comment about sports people with outside interests). As an elite sport there would be no distinction sporting wise in the guidance between pro and semi-pro so the policy of 5 day quarantine with PCR test on 5th day applies equally.

The Govt guidance does not cover the economic impact on those with regular jobs and that is a real issue for semi-pro sports people. That is where in setting the position the RFL has created the issue that Broncos are claiming

 

Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/04/2021 at 20:10, POR said:

That's where the misunderstanding comes in It's not covid it's the governent who are allowing what they call elite clubs by that they mean full time to travel abroad then when they  come back   they  have to isolate for 10 days however  because they are in a bubble it can be reduced to 5 days if they pass a covid test so as not to jepordise future games  but they can only go to training and games they are still not allowed to leave their homes and do normal thing for the stipulated 10 days 

now part time players who have outside interests from the sport do not get this exemption they have to isolate for 10 days so that's time off work sat at home without pay while full time players can sit at home in  a 5 day isolation and still get a full pay packet

so the RFL listened to the government guidelines and postponed 2 part time reams from travelling and allowed a full time team to participate 

 

I thought the RFL had requested to have the championship and league removed from the elite sport list. So I don’t think any of the clubs come under the elite sport banner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Southern Reiver said:

Not sure that is entirely correct. The RFL did define the Championship and League 1 as Elite sport (though did delay their start in terms of training as a precaution). But it  would imply that both professional and semi-professional players would be covered by the definition of being elite.

You can argue that semi-pro don’t meet the definition as ‘derived living’ but Govt guidance does not make a distinction (or any comment about sports people with outside interests). As an elite sport there would be no distinction sporting wise in the guidance between pro and semi-pro so the policy of 5 day quarantine with PCR test on 5th day applies equally.

The Govt guidance does not cover the economic impact on those with regular jobs and that is a real issue for semi-pro sports people. That is where in setting the position the RFL has created the issue that Broncos are claiming

 

 

35 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I thought the RFL had requested to have the championship and league removed from the elite sport list. So I don’t think any of the clubs come under the elite sport banner. 

I have read that the RFL asked to change the status of the Championship but looking at the Gov's website there is no longer a list of exempt 'elite' sporting competitions (probably due to changes in quarantine and bubble rules) but a definition of an 'elite sportsperson' as one who derives a living from sport. PT players are unlikely to come under that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.