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

[TigerFeetSteve]

Given it looks probable that Bayonne is off the next weekend, and possibly Brive the week after,we should be contacting any other clubs that have have a cancellation against them regarding a friendly, we need to ensure we stay match sharp.

[Tiglon]

Given it looks probable that Bayonne is off the next weekend, and possibly Brive the week after,we should be contacting any other clubs that have have a cancellation against them regarding a friendly, we need to ensure we stay match sharp.

Good idea.

Could the Premiership also look at the possibility of rescheduling games that are cancelled? If the Bayonne match is off (has that been confirmed?) and Newcastle don't have any fixtures for the next 2 weeks, why can't we reschedule our cancelled match against them?

I know the rules don't allow postponements, but that was due to fixture congestion which is less of an issue with so many fixtures being cancelled - surely now is the time to be flexible. Would it be beyond the realms of possibility if the Exeter game is cancelled this weekend to have Tigers v Bristol instead and shuffle the fixture list around?

Is that all just wishful thinking? Probably.

[Jimmy Skitz]

Given it looks probable that Bayonne is off the next weekend, and possibly Brive the week after,we should be contacting any other clubs that have have a cancellation against them regarding a friendly, we need to ensure we stay match sharp.

Good idea.

Could the Premiership also look at the possibility of rescheduling games that are cancelled? If the Bayonne match is off (has that been confirmed?) and Newcastle don't have any fixtures for the next 2 weeks, why can't we reschedule our cancelled match against them?

I know the rules don't allow postponements, but that was due to fixture congestion which is less of an issue with so many fixtures being cancelled - surely now is the time to be flexible. Would it be beyond the realms of possibility if the Exeter game is cancelled this weekend to have Tigers v Bristol instead and shuffle the fixture list around?

Is that all just wishful thinking? Probably.

why would Newcastle agree, they got given a win, you'd like to think they will but until ringfencing is official for this season at least why would they risk it?

[Old Hob]

And we would risk a guaranteed 2 points against nil as well as 4 or 5

[MCC1964]

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.

Going off topic a bit, but I agree too. They should cancel the playoffs this year as I suspect the COVID points allocation could have an impact on who finishes in the top four (well ok the top 3) and so there will always be doubts over merit. And as people have said, what does it really mean this year?

I think they should temporarily ringfence. This year for sure and next year (if not the following year too) to allow clubs to recover financially, but bring Sarries back (sorry to be controversial) and have a 13 team competition. I don’t believe in ringfencing in the long run and neither I suspect will Cornish Pirates or Ealing, but they’ll probably not be ready in the next couple of years anyway. At the end of the period then the two bottom sides playoff and the loser plays the winner of the Championship.

[ourla]

If you cancel the play offs every game from here on is effectively a friendly.

Also there would be a knock on effect on the European competitions.

And if the Pro 14 and Top 14 continue...

Nah, let's keep going and see it out.

[Tigerbeat]

If you cancel the play offs every game from here on is effectively a friendly.

Also there would be a knock on effect on the European competitions.

And if the Pro 14 and Top 14 continue...

Nah, let's keep going and see it out.

+1

[johnthegriff]

It has been proven in the past that it is unfair to base promotion on a Championship winner playing the bottom Premiership team as the system greatly benefits the team that has been playing at the higher level (however unsuccessfully) throughout the season. I hate the idea of ringfencing but in current circumstances I can see why, it would be most unfortunate if a team were to be relegated due to behaving responsibly to positive Covid testing. and if there is no relegation how can you have a promotion? There is Championship competition but it is possible that results of some matches will be corrupted by Covid and this may affect which teams finish top of their conference to play a final, a game that might itself be cancelled due to Covid, of course it could be re-scheduled but Saracens if involved may then be losing players to various tours (if they are actually taking place). The whole things a mess, whatever solution is decided upon by the authorities it must be clear that it is a temporary measure for one season only.
This season must continue as best we can to its conclusion but the consequences of finishing bottom should not result in relegation unless it can be shown that team involved is, there on actual results from matches played.

[Tiglon]

why would Newcastle agree, they got given a win, you'd like to think they will but until ringfencing is official for this season at least why would they risk it?

And we would risk a guaranteed 2 points against nil as well as 4 or 5

And what would be the point of a rugby club that doesn't want to play rugby?

[ads]

Saracens might fancy a game?

[Jimmy Skitz]

why would Newcastle agree, they got given a win, you'd like to think they will but until ringfencing is official for this season at least why would they risk it?

And we would risk a guaranteed 2 points against nil as well as 4 or 5

And what would be the point of a rugby club that doesn't want to play rugby?

come off it you know full well they are businessess too and being relegated would be catastrophic, they won't put that at risk by willingly taking points off the board, a friendly might be arranged but no chance of the league fixture being rearranged

[GB72]

I am still querying who is advising the club not to play the match. Is it the medical staff of the club, the RFU, the Premiership. I am just interested as to who is responsible for this advice as the club state that they had 23 players available and could have put a team out.

I am all for caution but there needs to be transparency to ensure a fair and level playing field. Whilst I would hope it would never happen, lets look at the example of a team at the bottom of the table with a match coming up against Exeter. They are playing badly already and due to covid can only put out a much weaker side for this match and are looking at a hammering. Would you rather rest players, take 2 points and no damage to the points difference or or potentially get no points, tired players and a big deficit on the points difference. What if, in the same circumstances, a team needs 2 points in the last match of the season. Do you play and risk it or cancel due to covid and guarantee survival.

Now that there are points awarded for covid cancelled matches, there needs to be an independent assessment of whether a team could, or should, play and ,if they refuse to play with a 23 man squad available, do they get any points.

[fentiger]

I am still querying who is advising the club not to play the match. Is it the medical staff of the club, the RFU, the Premiership. I am just interested as to who is responsible for this advice as the club state that they had 23 players available and could have put a team out.

I am all for caution but there needs to be transparency to ensure a fair and level playing field. Whilst I would hope it would never happen, lets look at the example of a team at the bottom of the table with a match coming up against Exeter. They are playing badly already and due to covid can only put out a much weaker side for this match and are looking at a hammering. Would you rather rest players, take 2 points and no damage to the points difference or or potentially get no points, tired players and a big deficit on the points difference. What if, in the same circumstances, a team needs 2 points in the last match of the season. Do you play and risk it or cancel due to covid and guarantee survival.

Now that there are points awarded for covid cancelled matches, there needs to be an independent assessment of whether a team could, or should, play and ,if they refuse to play with a 23 man squad available, do they get any points.

I understand they have had to close their training ground. So sounds like pretty much what happened to Tigers!

[chipnchase]

Saracens might fancy a game?

Sure Ealing wouldn't mind a rumble as well.

Lets be fair who has the money to compete next season.. Saracens and Ealing. Expand the league to 14 and give the clubs in the championship 4 seasons to build a model ready to apply for expansion. It works in a number of leagues.

London Welsh went bust having yo yo'd between the leagues, Leeds are now down in National one, Bedford are part time and acted as Sarries B team for a good while, Richmond / Orrell and London Scottish all went pop at the start of professionalism, Rotheram are in National One and West Hartlepool are in the regional league. The track record of teams that achieved Premiership status by splashing big on players as never had a happy ending.

Who been successful? Exeter and Bristol... why? Because the infrastructure was in place to sustain a competitive Premiership side.

The romance of the amateur era doesn't existing any more!

[GB72]

I am still querying who is advising the club not to play the match. Is it the medical staff of the club, the RFU, the Premiership. I am just interested as to who is responsible for this advice as the club state that they had 23 players available and could have put a team out.

I am all for caution but there needs to be transparency to ensure a fair and level playing field. Whilst I would hope it would never happen, lets look at the example of a team at the bottom of the table with a match coming up against Exeter. They are playing badly already and due to covid can only put out a much weaker side for this match and are looking at a hammering. Would you rather rest players, take 2 points and no damage to the points difference or or potentially get no points, tired players and a big deficit on the points difference. What if, in the same circumstances, a team needs 2 points in the last match of the season. Do you play and risk it or cancel due to covid and guarantee survival.

Now that there are points awarded for covid cancelled matches, there needs to be an independent assessment of whether a team could, or should, play and ,if they refuse to play with a 23 man squad available, do they get any points.

I understand they have had to close their training ground. So sounds like pretty much what happened to Tigers!

Didn't we have to do that before the Bath match until only a couple of days before hand. I was under the impression (and could be wrong) but thought that we could not put a team out for Newcastle due to the infections and track and trace. It is only because a statement was made stating that a 23 man squad was available that am interested as to who advised them not to play and on what grounds. Surely not having access to the regular training facilities is not grounds in itself. There are pitches and gyms standing idle the length and breadth of the country that could be brought into use for a couple of days.