Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Post Reply
Old Hob
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4111
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:15 pm

Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by Old Hob »

The points awarded after the cancelled game are, it seems, not enough and Gloucester want Worcester to compensate them for the financial loss too. Fair? And what kind of precedent does it set?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/61396825
Omnia dicta fortiora si dicta Latina
Pmvl
Top Cat
Top Cat
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:15 pm

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by Pmvl »

I read that earlier today myself, it appears they claim it cost them £250K in lost ticket revenue after refunding all tickets & hospitality sold.
TigerFeetSteve
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7417
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by TigerFeetSteve »

I think it's fair, you shouldn't be conceding games at this level without a significant covid outbreak... HOWEVER it could lead to Worcester re-challenging the points award decision that said it wasn't a covid related thing. If they were to do that, then Gloucester could both lose the extra point and the money, which could get nasty
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
bendy
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by bendy »

Let's be honest, it was pretty cynical from Worcester wasn't it? Especially as they put out a team in the PRC a couple of days later.

That said, you'd hope Prem clubs could work together to find an amicable solution to these things, rather than to start persuing each other through the courts. Hardly a good look for the sport is it?
TigerFeetSteve
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7417
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by TigerFeetSteve »

After reading some of the judgement which can be found on the link below there's no wonder Glaws are trying to get their money back.... here's one quote (which is disputed) from the report.
At about 3.30pm (after the Match had been cancelled), they spoke again. What was said is not agreed. Mr St Quinton’s evidence was that Mr Whittingham told him he had been “outvoted” by Mr Goldring and Mr Diamond, who did not wish the Match to be played because Worcester had an important Premiership Cup match against Bath the following Wednesday.
If true then Wuss should have the book thrown at them!!!


Link to the full decision can be found here

https://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/s ... d-decision
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
Crofty
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1216
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: The bagging area (unexpectedly)

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by Crofty »

TigerFeetSteve wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 10:50 am After reading some of the judgement which can be found on the link below there's no wonder Glaws are trying to get their money back.... here's one quote (which is disputed) from the report.
At about 3.30pm (after the Match had been cancelled), they spoke again. What was said is not agreed. Mr St Quinton’s evidence was that Mr Whittingham told him he had been “outvoted” by Mr Goldring and Mr Diamond, who did not wish the Match to be played because Worcester had an important Premiership Cup match against Bath the following Wednesday.
If true then Wuss should have the book thrown at them!!!


Link to the full decision can be found here

https://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/s ... d-decision
And if it isn't Gloucester (or at least Mr St Quinton) should have the book thrown at them for trying to defame Worcester...
No, not that one!

Remember, whatever you do to the smallest of the backs you do to his prop, and you can't avoid the rucks and mauls forever...

I know you don't like it when I boo him but how else will he know he's wrong?

non possumus capere
TigerFeetSteve
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7417
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by TigerFeetSteve »

Crofty wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 7:48 pm
TigerFeetSteve wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 10:50 am After reading some of the judgement which can be found on the link below there's no wonder Glaws are trying to get their money back.... here's one quote (which is disputed) from the report.
At about 3.30pm (after the Match had been cancelled), they spoke again. What was said is not agreed. Mr St Quinton’s evidence was that Mr Whittingham told him he had been “outvoted” by Mr Goldring and Mr Diamond, who did not wish the Match to be played because Worcester had an important Premiership Cup match against Bath the following Wednesday.
If true then Wuss should have the book thrown at them!!!


Link to the full decision can be found here

https://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/s ... d-decision
And if it isn't Gloucester (or at least Mr St Quinton) should have the book thrown at them for trying to defame Worcester...
Very true!
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
Hot_Charlie
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4041
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
Location: Lincoln

Re: Glaws after compensation from Wuss

Post by Hot_Charlie »

Pmvl wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 10:09 am I read that earlier today myself, it appears they claim it cost them £250K in lost ticket revenue after refunding all tickets & hospitality sold.
Easily that. Averaging solidly over 10000 attendance per match. Complete sympathy with their position.

I think Worcester's insurers need to be paying out on this one, if Worcester can't pay themselves.

Before covid, when was the last time a Premiership match was cancelled because a team "couldn't field" a side?
Post Reply