PDA

View Full Version : IMPORTANT: Worcester promotion petition



Pablo
21-05-04, 12:05
Do you think the Worcester promotion situation is a farce? Do you think that rugby's administrators are handling this poorly? Do you think Rotherham are behaving to our sport's detriment by threatening legal action? Do you think that for next season it would make sense for Worcester, a team who have WON EVERY GAME in National One, to replace Rotherham, a team that has LOST every game in the Zurich Premiership? If your answers to these questions are all "Yes", then please visit, read and sign the following petition:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/makende/petition.html

This is important - without promotion, teams have nothing to play for. If Worcester are held down in National One, a dangerous precedent is set which, in my opinion, will forever damage rugby's credibility as an emerging professional sport . Let's make our voices heard.

Cheers,
Paul

Davet
21-05-04, 13:05
As I understand it the challenge is about Worcester not being able to comply with the ground rgulations, in that they may not be able to proceed with the ground development and will not be able to seat the required number of specatators.

I agree it is unfair, but it is up to Worcester to make sure that not only are they good enough on the field, but also off the field. The regulations are not new, and Worcester should have had this sorted months ago if they were serious about getting promoted.

Oddly its very similar to the problems previously faced by Rotherham...which resulted in Leeds staying up.

It seems that sides who profess their ambition for promotion and who put the money and effort in should ensure that they have ALL their ducks in a row - to do otherwise is simply casual and very poor management; and Duckworth is the one who should carry the can.

Pablo
21-05-04, 14:05
I would have to disagree. I don't think Worcester could have managed this any differently. They were granted planning permission and an expanded licensed capacity, then made a minor technical alteration to their plans so they could use a superior seat supplier, which of course requires the plans to be rechecked legally. The problems began due to England Rugby's draconian inflexibility - the response to a deadline missed on a technicality (when Worcs all but had the planning permission anyway and were merely lacking the actual bit of paper) was an almost immediate threat of not being promoted, which is not going to dispel anyone's ring-fencing conspiracy theories - and Rotherham's disgusting sour grapes. I have always felt a great deal of sympathy for Rotherham, because they fought uphill for such a long time. I cheered when they came through the farcical two game play-off against Bedford for their first promotion, I wrote to the RFU in anger when they were denied promotion a couple of seasons ago, and I felt justice had been served when they returned to the ZP at the start of this season. It's a real shame they've not been able to cut it at ZP level this year, but they are helping nobody by trying to interfere with Worcester's promotion hopes - in fact they are simply making themselves part of the guilty crowd who were responsible for keeping them down two years ago.

I agree management off the field needs to be up to speed in these instances, but sometimes it's out of their hands - we all know how long it can take to obtain planning permission, and if there's the slightest change to the plans, as was the case here, then the whole tediously slow process starts again. All Worcester are missing is a bit of paper, and England Rugby shouldn't be so damn quick to get the cosh out and start throwing around threats of denying promotion so readily.

Press release from Worcester RFC here (http://www.wrfc.co.uk/news.htm).

Pablo
21-05-04, 16:05
Oh dear. This is turning into a proper little catfight... official statment from Rotherham here (http://www.rotherhamtitans.com/vsite/vcontent/content/transnews/0,10869,4949-140420-19728-26234-127119-8547-4933-layout67-157636-news-item,00.html?ImgDisp=0).

All getting a bit fraught, isn't it?...

Deeps
25-05-04, 22:05
The following statement is being issued to the media this afternoon.

ERL STATEMENT

WORCESTER PROMOTION DECISION

The Board of ERL met this afternoon to consider the issue of Worcester's promotion and in particular, the legal advice it had received regarding a potential legal challenge.

Having considered the legal advice the Board decided that Worcester should be promoted to the Zurich Premiership for the 2004/05 season.



25th May 2004

I like to think that common sense has prevailed. Perhaps Rotherham will be back up next season.

chopper15
26-10-07, 11:10
Ref. Pablo 21-05-04;
Do you think the Worcester promotion situation is a farce? Do you think that rugby's administrators are handling this poorly? Do you think Rotherham are behaving to our sport's detriment by threatening legal action? Do you think that for next season it would make sense for Worcester, a team who have WON EVERY GAME in National One, to replace Rotherham, a team that has LOST every game in the Zurich Premiership?



Bit late I know, but I watch 2007 1st Div. 'Pirates and should they pip Saints at the season's end I wouldn't have any objection, in fact welcome, a play off ( with the premiereship 'losers') on a neutral ground to justify any claim to promotion.

Should the Saints top the div. let them too prove they're still worthy of premiereship rugby.

PeterH
26-10-07, 11:10
With some of the rumours re: Premiership 1 & 2 ring-fenced...
May not be an issue... but the National 2 guys may began to ask questions :)

chopper15
26-10-07, 12:10
With some of the rumours re: Premiership 1 & 2 ring-fenced...
May not be an issue... but the National 2 guys may began to ask questions :)



I'm fortunate, I watch 'Pirates' on Sundays and 2nd Div. 'Reds' on Sats. so the same play-off system would apply.

It musn't be forgotten that there's a lot more invested as you go up the ladder and the 'one fell swoop' Pro/Dem. system is, in my opinion a crass,insensitive way of doing it!

But then, since when was the RFU sensitive, as a body that is!?

OB..
26-10-07, 17:10
AS a Bedford supporter, I well remember the old RFU play-off system. In 1999 we came 13th in a 14 team Division. West Hartlepool were 14th and automatically relegated. We won a play-off against Rotherham by the narrowest possible margin.

In 2000 it was a 12 team division since London Scottish and Richmond had "amalgamated" with London Irish. We came 12th and again faced Rotherham. This time we lost by a narrow margin. Rotherham went straight back down again.

The problem is not a simple pros v amateurs divide. For some reason the newcomers to the top table get a smaller share of the financial pie, so just when they need to boost their playing resources, they don't have the money.

Ideally National 1 should have a mix of pro and semi-pro players so that the gap decreases. At present people talk of a "top 13", implying one team yo-yos, but I don't see why that should be the long term situation.