RFU rules against London Welsh

**TRF_Cymro** · 02-06-12, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by Tallshort

sly dig there but to be expected....

For the record I have nothing against London Welsh and yes Tigers are lucky in that they have always had a ground at Welford rd that could be developed but I am worried about this promotion firstly because London Welsh do not have the assets or the stucture to have a sustained Premiership life and this campaign they are waging could destroy what they have built up over the years like it did to Richmond, secondly English rugby union need clubs in the north if Welsh go up thats 5 clubs in the south east 4 of which dont even have a ground, the stucture of the HC is such that rugby development is put before simply picking the best 24 teams in Europe and its something I agree with. Rugby Union is still developing as a pro game and sometimes tough choices need to be made but London Welshes promotion could spell doom to that club and rugby in the North east I know mine is not a popular view but its the most sustainable one for English rugby.

1. You basically want to ring fence the Avia Premiership.
2. It's not London Welsh's fault they earned promotion, it is however Newcastle's fault for finishing bottom.
3. Geographic location should have no bearing on what should happen. The simple answer of you can't relegate Newcastle because it will kill rugby in the North-East is simply illogical. Union has not really been strong in the North, history states this.
4. London Welsh could sustain themselves, fact they have been doing so for years is a testimony to the hardwork that is going on behind the scenes.
5. Assets being a stadium I presume? Old argument that. They have sorted an alternate and the fact that other stadiums are now putting their hat into the ring e.g. Selhurst Park and Griffin Park shows that there people who believe that Welsh deserve the promotion and are willing to help.

**Forum Ad** · 02-06-12 09:13 PM

**TRF_SelimNiai** · 02-06-12, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by Tallshort

secondly English rugby union need clubs in the north if Welsh go up thats 5 clubs in the south east 4 of which dont even have a ground, the stucture of the HC is such that rugby development is put before simply picking the best 24 teams in Europe and its something I agree with. Rugby Union is still developing as a pro game and sometimes tough choices need to be made but London Welshes promotion could spell doom to that club and rugby in the North east I know mine is not a popular view but its the most sustainable one for English rugby.

So are you suggesting the "authorities" pick and choose promoted sides based on "what rugby needs". That's total bollocks, what gives them the right to preserve one club and potentially kill another. I just can't put into words how wrong and stupid that suggestion is

The South West has so many top sides is because Rugby has always been strong down here, its a good thing to have Bath, Bristol, Gloucester, Exeter, Cornish Pirates and Plymouth in the top 2 tiers.

You tell us why Newcastle should be saved and London Welsh should be ignored.

**Feicarsinn** · 02-06-12, 09:32 PM

I'd just like to point to how the far more popular sport of football goes about it's business in this regard. At the moment, there's no Premier league team in Sheffield (they were both in league two last season). Does this mean that football is dead in Sheffield and that kids will stop playing? Seems unlikely. Did football stop in Leeds when they were relegate? Of course not.

The point is, relegating Newcastle wont kill off rugby in the north. It's a weak area, but there's no point trying to hide that fact by artificially keeping them at the top. Just as Leeds Carnegie continue to contribute a player or two to the England 20's despite going down, so will Newcastle. As far as I'm concerned, that argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.

**Tallshort** · 02-06-12, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro

1. You basically want to ring fence the Avia Premiership. I dont remember saying that
2. It's not London Welsh's fault they earned promotion, it is however Newcastle's fault for finishing bottom.
3. Geographic location should have no bearing on what should happen. The simple answer of you can't relegate Newcastle because it will kill rugby in the North-East is simply illogical. Union has not really been strong in the North, history states this. So English rugby gives up on the north? Should we exclude Italy from the HC too as we know its not really strong there
4. London Welsh could sustain themselves, fact they have been doing so for years is a testimony to the hardwork that is going on behind the scenes. They can sustain themselves in the championship but could they sustain a Premiership side in a ground 55 miles away from there fan base
5. Assets being a stadium I presume? Old argument that. They have sorted an alternate and the fact that other stadiums are now putting their hat into the ring e.g. Selhurst Park and Griffin Park shows that there people who believe that Welsh deserve the promotion and are willing to help.

NO after what happened to wasps its far from an old argument.

[QUOTE=SelimNiai;507402]So are you suggesting the "authorities" pick and choose promoted sides based on "what rugby needs". That's total bollocks, what gives them the right to preserve one club and potentially kill another. I just can't put into words how wrong and stupid that suggestion is

Thats what happens in the HC.....

**TRF_SelimNiai** · 02-06-12, 09:42 PM

[QUOTE=Tallshort;507411]

Originally Posted by SelimNiai

So are you suggesting the "authorities" pick and choose promoted sides based on "what rugby needs". That's total bollocks, what gives them the right to preserve one club and potentially kill another. I just can't put into words how wrong and stupid that suggestion is

Thats what happens in the HC.....

We're not talking about the HCUP are we? This is about London Welsh and the travesty of their not getting what they deserve

**Tallshort** · 02-06-12, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Feicarsinn

I'd just like to point to how the far more popular sport of football goes about it's business in this regard. At the moment, there's no Premier league team in Sheffield (they were both in league two last season). Does this mean that football is dead in Sheffield and that kids will stop playing? Seems unlikely. Did football stop in Leeds when they were relegate? Of course not.

The point is, relegating Newcastle wont kill off rugby in the north. It's a weak area, but there's no point trying to hide that fact by artificially keeping them at the top. Just as Leeds Carnegie continue to contribute a player or two to the England 20's despite going down, so will Newcastle. As far as I'm concerned, that argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.

You cannot compare the 2 Football is and always will be the most popular sport in England, rugby union is still very much developing and does need a helping hand in some parts the North east in particular

**TRF_Cymro** · 02-06-12, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Tallshort

NO after what happened to wasps its far from an old argument.

You might not have said ring fencing but that's what you were talking about without calling it that.

You make no sense, give up on the North East, Newcastle have not earned the right to stay in the Premiership. This is their fault, no one else. London Welsh should not lose out for the expense of keeping 'rugby' in the North East. You need to brush up on your sport history, North of England has traditionally been strong for League since it's split from Union. Your argument that Newcastle deserve to stay in the Premiership purely because they are in the North is ludicrous. Please please please get real.

You make me

because you won't know if London Welsh can sustain themselves unless they are given that chance.

**Tallshort** · 02-06-12, 09:50 PM

[QUOTE=SelimNiai;507412]

Originally Posted by Tallshort

We're not talking about the HCUP are we? This is about London Welsh and the travesty of their not getting what they deserve

Take the emotion out of it for one minute, we are talking about whats best for rugby. The Hcup allow all 6 nations in the NH to field teams because it helps the development of rugby. Would it be a travesty if Welsh dont go up...for Welsh yes for the game in England as a whole no and lets be honest would the press be so vocal about this if it was Wasps looking at relegation and say Nottingham looking at promotion. No they wouldnt

**TRF_Cymro** · 02-06-12, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by Tallshort

Take the emotion out of it for one minute, we are talking about whats best for rugby. The Hcup allow all 6 nations in the NH to field teams because it helps the development of rugby. Would it be a travesty if Welsh dont go up...for Welsh yes for the game in England as a whole no and lets be honest would the press be so vocal about this if it was Wasps looking at relegation and say Nottingham looking at promotion. No they wouldnt

The press made a fuss about the nonsense with Pirates last year.

**Tallshort** · 02-06-12, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro

You might not have said ring fencing but that's what you were talking about without calling it that.

You make no sense, give up on the North East, Newcastle have not earned the right to stay in the Premiership. This is their fault, no one else. London Welsh should not lose out for the expense of keeping 'rugby' in the North East. You need to brush up on your sport history, North of England has traditionally been strong for League since it's split from Union. Your argument that Newcastle deserve to stay in the Premiership purely because they are in the North is ludicrous. Please please please get real.

You make me

because you won't know if London Welsh can sustain themselves unless they are given that chance.

And you obviously have the good of English rugby close to your heart.......

**Tallshort** · 02-06-12, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro

The press made a fuss about the nonsense with Pirates last year.

No they didnt not to this extent.

**TRF_SelimNiai** · 02-06-12, 09:56 PM

[QUOTE=Tallshort;507416]

Originally Posted by SelimNiai

Take the emotion out of it for one minute, we are talking about whats best for rugby. The Hcup allow all 6 nations in the NH to field teams because it helps the development of rugby. Would it be a travesty if Welsh dont go up...for Welsh yes for the game in England as a whole no and lets be honest would the press be so vocal about this if it was Wasps looking at relegation and say Nottingham looking at promotion. No they wouldnt

If it ever got that close again that Wasps might go down the RFU would probably abolish relegation altogether.

I'm done trying to make you see sense on this. It's like teaching a budgie Cantonese.

**Feicarsinn** · 02-06-12, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by Tallshort

You cannot compare the 2 Football is and always will be the most popular sport in England, rugby union is still very much developing and does need a helping hand in some parts the North east in particular

There's been a Premier rugby team in Newcastle since 1998. That's 14 seasons. In my opinion that's long enough for a club to be able to stand on it's own two feet. If they go down now, I don't see why they should deserve any special help from the RFU due to geography.

Your argument is that rugby needs to be developed in certain areas. Taking that argument to it's natural extreme, the club system in England should be abolished in favour of regional teams. So the like of Leicester and Northampton would be combined, as would Bath and Bristol, and the London teams. Then you'd have a championship of about 8 or 10 regional teams with players centrally contracted to the RFU and the destruction of the club game would follow. If you really want to develop rugby in the North, that's the way to do it.

Personally I'd just let the game develop naturally. Newcastle don't deserve to stay up.

**Tallshort** · 02-06-12, 09:58 PM

[QUOTE=SelimNiai;507422]

Originally Posted by Tallshort

If it ever got that close again that Wasps might go down the RFU would probably abolish relegation altogether.

I'm done trying to make you see sense on this. It's like teaching a budgie Cantonese.

Sorry just thought we agreed on something.....

**TRF_Cymro** · 02-06-12, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by Tallshort

No they didnt not to this extent.

Hahahaha, you are arguing for the sake of arguing. There was press, get over it. London Welsh have a case that is why the press has jumped on it.

**Saintjay** · 02-06-12, 10:18 PM

[QUOTE=SelimNiai;507422]

Originally Posted by Tallshort

If it ever got that close again that Wasps might go down the RFU would probably abolish relegation altogether.

I'm done trying to make you see sense on this. It's like teaching a budgie Cantonese.

They were happy to let Saints go down.

What is the exact criteria the RFU are saying that London Welsh do not meet? It seems to me the RFU would not risk losing a high court challenge. The legal eagles would have looked at it and do not think London Irish are in the right.

**TRF_Cymro** · 02-06-12, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Saintjay

They were happy to let Saints go down.

What is the exact criteria the RFU are saying that London Welsh do not meet? It seems to me the RFU would not risk losing a high court challenge. The legal eagles would have looked at it and do not think London Irish are in the right.

Tenure on the Kassam Stadium, which apparently they have shown to the RFU they have. The timing of when the RFU told London Welsh they were not eligible and the fact they wanted Bristol to beat the Pirates so that it would stop Welsh kicking up a fuss shows that the RFU are worried by a London Welsh challenge. Take into account that Bleddyn Phillips also is a partner in a major solicitor firm who would have a fairly good idea if they had a case, I seriously doubt London Welsh would be making so much noise if they genuinely did not believe they have a chance to overturn the RFU's decision.

**Saintjay** · 02-06-12, 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro

Tenure on the Kassam Stadium, which apparently they have shown to the RFU they have. The timing of when the RFU told London Welsh they were not eligible and the fact they wanted Bristol to beat the Pirates so that it would stop Welsh kicking up a fuss shows that the RFU are worried by a London Welsh challenge. Take into account that Bleddyn Phillips also is a partner in a major solicitor firm who would have a fairly good idea if they had a case, I seriously doubt London Welsh would be making so much noise if they genuinely did not believe they have a chance to overturn the RFU's decision.

Ooops. My mistake I have one eye on watching Alien and should concentrate more.

I guess you could say the same about the RFU, would they knock them back without a case. Then again it's the RFU who at times think they can do want they want. I am sure it was mentioned before by a member that a team can only move within a certain radius. I am not sure how true that is or if it is part of the RFU case.

My view is that if you meet the criteria then it is simple you go up and a team comes down. I just interested in the reasons both side have supporting each arguement.

**TRF_Cymro** · 02-06-12, 10:41 PM

And this is why we debate them

, be boring if not!

Not watching Alien ready for Prometheus?

**Saintjay** · 02-06-12, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro

And this is why we debate them

, be boring if not!

Not watching Alien ready for Prometheus?

Very true.

Yep and because it is on channel 4. I am led to believe that Prometheus is set a few movies before Alien or at least two movies according to Ridley Scott.

**TC08** · 03-06-12, 07:35 AM

The criminal thing about this is that we're still, 10 days after the RFU annouuncement that they had rejected LW's application to be considered for eligibility to the Premiership for failure to meet the primacy of tenure requirements and "various" other failures, waiting to see the full grounds for rejection.

Despite a lot of press comment and coverage.

The RFU said that LW had 14 days to appeal........but apparently aren't telling the club what they have to appeal against!

And the appeal is to be heard by a panel of indeterminate criteria, put together by the RFU disciplinary officer. Well, we can guarantee that will be impartial in its judgement, can't we.

And neither the RFU, nor PRL nor the PGB publish the criteria for public scrutiny.

Why not? what are they afraid of, other than ridicule at the blatant attempt to protect the existing clubs that don't meet the criteria.

So you have to hunt around various odd sites to find even a glimpse of them. Last year's ones were apparently revealed on a site that was primarily trying to win over local opposition to their Copthall Stadium plans, and this year's ones, which have changed significantly, are also apparently on a Leicester supporter's site - I say apparently as there is no acceptance or confirmation from any official body that the 60+ and 40+ page docs are pukka. But reading them is odd, they are incredibly complex, seem to allow for a lot of discretion as to penalties (many "might" and "may" and only a few "will" in there) and require much cross referencing to work out exactly what is required eg re primacy of tenure, you can only get to the "30 mile" rule by working through the initial definitions:

Standby Ground ( for meeting the PoT) refers to Territory

Territory says 30 mile radius from Principal Home Ground

Principal Home Ground means the ground nominated and audited as being the one you'll be based at.

There's also an interesting discussion on another aspect of the Criteria, which provide for a two legged playoff IF BOTH the winner of the Championship AND the team finishing bottom of the Premiership fail to meet the PoT Criteria in the podcast on the www.rugbyhalfhour.com site from 18 mins in (for 15 mins). This year's MSC can also be found there if you're an insomniac.

**Peat** · 03-06-12, 07:51 AM

How do you know that the club aren't being told, and how do you know that it's the RFU and not the PGB, who are responsible for these rules?

edit: Playing at Selhurst would change nothing for LW, they still fall foul of the same regulations.

The Crystal Palace National Sports Centre however would probably be a different kettle of fish...

edit edit: Besides, I've started campaigning to get a London side with some actual fans in if Parish wants to get some extra dubloons in on the side...

**TC08** · 05-06-12, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by Peat

How do you know that the club aren't being told, and how do you know that it's the RFU and not the PGB, who are responsible for these rules?

edit: Playing at Selhurst would change nothing for LW, they still fall foul of the same regulations.

The Crystal Palace National Sports Centre however would probably be a different kettle of fish...

edit edit: Besides, I've started campaigning to get a London side with some actual fans in if Parish wants to get some extra dubloons in on the side...

There was a report in the Times on 30 May, the day after the final second leg, which said that "today LW will learn the detailed findings of the independent audit that ruled against them in a meeting with RFU officials".
However the LondonWelshRFC twitter feed said that these had not been received in writing by last Friday.

BTW, LW have played at the Crystal Palace athletics Stadium before - I think it was for a one-off match in the 80s, before London Broncos played there

**Teh Mite** · 05-06-12, 10:05 AM

Just because the Telegraph say something doesn't make it true.

**TC08** · 06-06-12, 03:52 PM

Who mentioned the Telegraph?

**Teh Mite** · 06-06-12, 04:34 PM

*times. Same principal applies.

**Nielsch** · 06-06-12, 04:35 PM

LW turned down the Selhurt Park offer and are still opting for Kassam Stadium in Oxford.

http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rug...ry/165318.html

**Peat** · 06-06-12, 04:40 PM

Good in one sense, bad in another. I genuinely hope they go bankrupt if they move out of London when there is a move available within normal bounds.

**TRF_Cymro** · 06-06-12, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by Peat

Good in one sense, bad in another. I genuinely hope they go bankrupt if they move out of London when there is a move available within normal bounds.

Sorry but who in their right mind would wish bankruptcy on a club. Such an idiotic statement.

If you read anything about the Selhurst Park move you would know that London Welsh were told they would not get the Primacy of Tenure if they moved to Selhurst.

**Peat** · 06-06-12, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro

Sorry but who in their right mind would wish bankruptcy on a club. Such an idiotic statement.

If you read anything about the Selhurst Park move you would know that London Welsh were told they would not get the Primacy of Tenure if they moved to Selhurst.

Because they've been told they'll get it in Oxford?

RFU rules against London Welsh

Thread Tools

Display