Championship rugby

[westwinds31]

And only 1 up from National 1, which won’t go down well as I think there were a few teams looking to be in the mix to make the move.

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

Am I cynical to think this suits PRL & that some will be hoping The Falcons can't carry on?

[Tiglon]

Am I cynical to think this suits PRL & that some will be hoping The Falcons can't carry on?

That would be very cynical, doesn't mean it can't be true though

I would say PRL want the biggest league possible, because money. But no relegation. The RFU on the other hand might be very keen on a smaller league, with more space for internationals, because.... money.

[sam16111986]

Am I cynical to think this suits PRL & that some will be hoping The Falcons can't carry on?

I doubt either the PRL or the RFU would want the Falcons to disappear. Geographically beneficial to have someone based up there. I suspect if they could pick then they'd have wanted Doncaster to get promoted to give a base for the league in Yorkshire.

[ads]

Yeah I was hoping Donny would go up, would be great if Leeds could ever get back to that level again.

This is all selfish and personal as I live in Leeds so would mean I could easily go and watch Tigers...

[GB72]

Does seem somewhat odd that there is no time after the application is rejected to put in place a ground share option. OK, about as odd as putting in place an application that does not meet the criteria without having another option to fall back on.

Not great from either side on this one.

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

Shame part of the requirements to play in the Premiership isn't a Real Grass Pitch....

[GETHIN EXILE]

We will never know if either of these clubs were in discussions to ground share but were unwilling to commit to signing anything until they knew that they had gained promotion. I would not sign a groundshare agreement unless I was guaranteed that I would be promoted. To commit to the cost of ground sharing as well as the level of salaries required to play in the premiership without the guarantee of promotion would be financial suicide.

[MurphysLaw]

[quote="GETHIN EXILE" post_id=810980 time=1646228396 user_id=9929]
We will never know if either of these clubs were in discussions to ground share but were unwilling to commit to signing anything until they knew that they had gained promotion. I would not sign a groundshare agreement unless I was guaranteed that I would be promoted. To commit to the cost of ground sharing as well as the level of salaries required to play in the premiership without the guarantee of promotion would be financial suicide.
[/quote]

I can't see why the clubs could not have Heads of Terms Agreements for a ground-share in place for their applications, without committing any costs. A planning application for a ground extension( if feasible) would cost in terms of architectural drawings etc and an application fee, but not necessarily a huge amount.
As unfair and short-sighted as the RFU ruling seems, isn't it equally ridiculous from the Clubs submitting an application to join, when they know it does not meet the criteria for acceptance?
Doncaster Rovers use the fabulous Eco Stadium (previously the Keepmoat), which I think holds around 15,000. I don't know if the Knights have tried to get a ground-share, but it would seem to be ideal.

[BiteMe]

Statement from Doncaster Knights -

Doncaster RFC are disappointed, dismayed and disheartened by the decision of the Rugby Football Union Board to disallow the club’s application to play in the Premiership league should the Doncaster Knights win the current season’s Championship league contest. The Club will be appealing the decision.

Within the audit process, the only failure by the Club is to, currently, not be able to demonstrate a capacity crowd of 10,001 at the Club’s ground, Castle Park. All other aspects of the audit, it seems are in order and Castle Park has, on a number of occasions, demonstrated its proficiency in hosting significant events via both Women’s and Under 20’s international matches.

At this stage, it can only be stated that the DRFC Board have every confidence that the required capacity could be delivered for season 2022/23 with a stand-by ground now being available should unexpected delays occur.

There has been significant debate about the Premiership being open to promotion and relegation, which can only be good for the aspirational nature of clubs, players and fans alike. The current Championship contest is approaching its climax with at least three teams statistically able to take the winner’s title. By the beginning of April the victor will be known.

Excitement in the camps and amongst rugby supporters in general is high but that has now been dashed at a stroke via yesterday’s untimely RFU statement, producing a resurgence of subsequent outpourings of angry feelings towards the governing body at a time when harmony should prevail.

Sensibility and fairness dictate that a delay to a decision being made could have been better for all concerned. Now, the teams play the final matches of the season in an atmosphere of despondence, albeit an administrative box has been ticke

[jgriffin]

Second time Donny's been stuffed AFAIK. Wasn't there a potential groundshare last time? No team in their right mind would commit to a groundshare unless assured of title, and this looks like it was going down to the wire.

[chipnchase]

Shame part of the requirements to play in the Premiership isn't a Real Grass Pitch....

or enough fans to fill the 10,000 seats.. Worcester, Falcons, Wasps

[sam16111986]

We will never know if either of these clubs were in discussions to ground share but were unwilling to commit to signing anything until they knew that they had gained promotion. I would not sign a groundshare agreement unless I was guaranteed that I would be promoted. To commit to the cost of ground sharing as well as the level of salaries required to play in the premiership without the guarantee of promotion would be financial suicide.

I can't see why the clubs could not have Heads of Terms Agreements for a ground-share in place for their applications, without committing any costs. A planning application for a ground extension( if feasible) would cost in terms of architectural drawings etc and an application fee, but not necessarily a huge amount.
As unfair and short-sighted as the RFU ruling seems, isn't it equally ridiculous from the Clubs submitting an application to join, when they know it does not meet the criteria for acceptance?
Doncaster Rovers use the fabulous Eco Stadium (previously the Keepmoat), which I think holds around 15,000. I don't know if the Knights have tried to get a ground-share, but it would seem to be ideal.

I believe the issue with the football ground is that it's being used for the Rugby League World Cup this Autumn as well so there's only so many games you could play on it in a short space of time before the surface would be ruined.

[trendylfj]

Not sure if this should have its own thread - mods please decide. Saw this and am quite alarmed by some of the statements/plans/proposals.

https://inews.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/p ... TO=newsnow

1. 45 central contracts with the rfu deciding where they will play

2. 28 club matches in 2 conferences

3. Academies to be taken from the clubs and run by the universities.

4. No mention of how many "international matches/tours" will take place just reducing the club matches

Don't like it at all

[TigerFeetSteve]

Not sure if this should have its own thread - mods please decide. Saw this and am quite alarmed by some of the statements/plans/proposals.

https://inews.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/p ... TO=newsnow

1. 45 central contracts with the rfu deciding where they will play

2. 28 club matches in 2 conferences

3. Academies to be taken from the clubs and run by the universities.

4. No mention of how many "international matches/tours" will take place just reducing the club matches

Don't like it at all

1. Disgraceful, if a club nurtures talent then RFU says we're contracting you now move from Leicester to Saints so we can get you playing the style we want JOKE!!! Disgraceful suggestion

2. I actually like two conferences of 8 teams. Key would be getting the splits right. Though I'd have 2 playoffs. Top 2 in each conference semi and final. Bottom team in each conference and top 2 championship clubs have a promotion play off. Two bottom teams play, winner is safe loser plays the winner of the top two Championship sides to try and stay in the conference.

3. Really, are we in a position where we want to split away the best coaches from clubs, maybe get better links with Uni's and other clubs eg our relationship with Loughborough and Nottingham.

4. Course they're not gonna reduce the money spinning international games. If they did go to a conference system I'd like to see it that the prem cup only plays teams in the other conference too to better spread the games