Saints v Tigers - 09th January 2021 - cancelled due to COVID

[Tiglon]

I mean being very tin hat and negative, but if a team low on confidence loses say it's 3 best players due to covid wouldn't 2 points be better than potentially another lose at home? (Last season not going to lie I would've taken 2 points at times).

I mean most likely the case is Saints have a smaller squad and it's more likely to have a bigger impact but it highlights all the potential issues if relegation really does happen this season.

I guess that's why the panel sits to decide on the allocation of points. Always has been a 4/2 split so far but I guess they will look at whether Saints could have fielded a match day 23 or not so time will tell

If Saints have been advised not to play, I can't imagine the Premiership will rule that Saints should have ignored safety advice and played anyway. That's surely the easiest way to persuade the government to instruct professional rugby to cease.

[Bunchy]

From reading Boyd's statement, it sounds like it is now a case of cancelling a match if one club gets a few positive results, rather than if they are unable to field a team. Will likely lead to an even higher proportion of cancelled matches.

Having said that...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/55559922

Exeter have positive tests, but are confident they can still play.

Saints have positive tests, have a 23 available, but are advised to cancel anyway.

Doesn't really seem consistent! Could Saints have chosen to play but instead followed the cautious advice? Have Exeter been given the same advice but chosen to ignore it? Or have Saints simply had a much higher number of positive cases?

Its not just the amount of positive tests, its the identified close contacts that have to isolate for 5 or 10 days also - Saints will have a lot more players affected through both measures than just those testing positive..........

[Tiglon]

From reading Boyd's statement, it sounds like it is now a case of cancelling a match if one club gets a few positive results, rather than if they are unable to field a team. Will likely lead to an even higher proportion of cancelled matches.

Having said that...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/55559922

Exeter have positive tests, but are confident they can still play.

Saints have positive tests, have a 23 available, but are advised to cancel anyway.

Doesn't really seem consistent! Could Saints have chosen to play but instead followed the cautious advice? Have Exeter been given the same advice but chosen to ignore it? Or have Saints simply had a much higher number of positive cases?

Its not just the amount of positive tests, its the identified close contacts that have to isolate for 5 or 10 days also - Saints will have a lot more players affected through both measures than just those testing positive..........

If you read the reports, Boyd says that they could have fielded a team, even without all those who had to self isolate.

[chewbacca]

Whats the betting they change the points allocation so we don't get 4

[Tiglon]

Whats the betting they change the points allocation so we don't get 4

Why would they do that?

I'm not sure I even care how many points we get given, does it really matter?

[GB72]

Is it clear anywhere who advised Saints not to play when they could have produced a 23 and on what grounds the advice was given. Interested to see if there is a precedent here as to whether teams should play a match or not in certain circumstances.

[JP14]

Going to be sometime until we will have a completed unaffected weekend at this rate, seems to be that more games are being cancelled because of contact tracing than actual positive tests, so maybe clubs should start to look at altering training methods to limit social contact until the results of the next round of tests so that they don’t have to isolate so many people in the event of 5/6 players testing positive.

However I admit this is probably a case of easier said than done.

[Tigerbeat]

Is it clear anywhere who advised Saints not to play when they could have produced a 23 and on what grounds the advice was given. Interested to see if there is a precedent here as to whether teams should play a match or not in certain circumstances.

It may have been decided following a review of the contact tracing and significant numbers, not necessarily players, having to isolate.

[OakhamTiger32]

Whats the betting they change the points allocation so we don't get 4

Why would they do that?

I'm not sure I even care how many points we get given, does it really matter?

Not sure it would be fair to chop and change midway through the season

[Tiglon]

Whats the betting they change the points allocation so we don't get 4

Why would they do that?

I'm not sure I even care how many points we get given, does it really matter?

Not sure it would be fair to chop and change midway through the season

The rules are 4 and 2. The panel are there to certify that covid was the reason and confirm which team was responsible.

Tigers could get 5 points if it is deemed that Saints could have played but chose not to (unlikely if they were following advice).

Tigers could get 2 points (I think) if it is found that they were not able to fulfil the fixture either (I'm sure we would have heard already if this might be the case).

[wellstiger]

I for one would now like the authorities to ring fence the premiership. Its getting farcical. Its as others have stated a lottery.
If teams are able to play under Covid , then at least we will see a game, it-keeps the players fresh and able to access and build for the future. Then the table is only a guide and should be treated as such.
If they are serious about player welfare then they should act now.

Wish every one well and keep safe.

[Tiglon]

I for one would now like the authorities to ring fence the premiership. Its getting farcical. Its as others have stated a lottery.
If teams are able to play under Covid , then at least we will see a game, it-keeps the players fresh and able to access and build for the future. Then the table is only a guide and should be treated as such.
If they are serious about player welfare then they should act now.

Wish every one well and keep safe.

I would argue that there shouldn't be a champion either, if a lot more matches are cancelled over the next few months.

[chewbacca]

I for one would now like the authorities to ring fence the premiership. Its getting farcical. Its as others have stated a lottery.
If teams are able to play under Covid , then at least we will see a game, it-keeps the players fresh and able to access and build for the future. Then the table is only a guide and should be treated as such.
If they are serious about player welfare then they should act now.

Wish every one well and keep safe.

I would argue that there shouldn't be a champion either, if a lot more matches are cancelled over the next few months.

I concur. The league is so distorted at the moment and not likely to change in that respect any time soon. It would seem sensible that this season be declared void.

[mol2]

I suppose the play offs will give a semblance of a champion.

[ourla]

I suppose the play offs will give a semblance of a champion.

I concur. And hopefully by then the top 4 will be able to play teams unaffected by Covid.