Rage Online

Looked dire yesterday and that's before the rugger buggers dig it up today. Not great considering IL chucked £50k at the problem a few months back.

There must be some money in the lower division of Wugby as the whole of the Leeds Carnegie entourage stayed at the relatively posh and not inexpensive Eynsham Hall overnight beforehand (http://www.eynshamhall.com/ and their players and staff were cluttering up the gym which I use yesterday, which was irritating. The really bad news is that Leeds lost so there is more chance of LW getting promoted.

To be fair, it has been raining a fair bit lately. Our pitch is doing better than many at the moment.

Anyway, 'London' 'Welsh' might be off to Witney.

If they think they will get bigger crowds in Witney rather than Oxford they must be mad. Further for their core support to travel too.

Update: Traffic issues key to approval.
Planning documents here.

Hopefully they can overcome the traffic and parking issues; use land to the south as overspill parking, and be gone. All the best to them!

Our pitch is poor but have a look at today's South Wales Argus
to see Newport's "pitch" - it's a disaster and the club is at it's lowest ebb.

They don't know what to do after SIX postponements.

Tuesday next week looks a massive doubt

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/ ... owest_ebb/

Very interesting report about London Welsh. So it seems that the problem they have at the Kassam is that we have primacy of tenure. I say good luck to them, in a nice way, not the way Kassam seems to. It's would certainly be preferable to have a good sporting facility in Witney, rather than another sainbury's supermarket, which appears to be the option should the move not go through.

One interesting consequence is that there'd be an additional stadium in Oxfordshire with decent capacity and facilities. One of the problems with our current situation is that we can't use the leverage of having an alliterative home available, to get Kassam to reduce his asking price. Not that a move to Witney for us would be anything other than terrible. But I just wander if it might alter the dynamics somewhat? Probably more important is that Kassam would get less rent from only having one tenant again, which apparently has an affect on the price of the stadium, and who would want to be secondary tenants now, having witnessed the experience of LW?

One final thought: if LW have the money to build an develop a new stadium, why don't they have the money to go for a joint bid with us for the Kassam?

tomoufc wrote:Very interesting report about London Welsh. So it seems that the problem they have at the Kassam is that we have primacy of tenure. I say good luck to them, in a nice way, not the way Kassam seems to. It's would certainly be preferable to have a good sporting facility in Witney, rather than another sainbury's supermarket, which appears to be the option should the move not go through.

One interesting consequence is that there'd be an additional stadium in Oxfordshire with decent capacity and facilities. One of the problems with our current situation is that we can't use the leverage of having an alliterative home available, to get Kassam to reduce his asking price. Not that a move to Witney for us would be anything other than terrible. But I just wander if it might alter the dynamics somewhat? Probably more important is that Kassam would get less rent from only having one tenant again, which apparently has an affect on the price of the stadium, and who would want to be secondary tenants now, having witnessed the experience of LW?

One final thought: if LW have the money to build an develop a new stadium, why don't they have the money to go for a joint bid with us for the Kassam?

Haven't you answered your own question - Primacy of tenure?

slappy wrote:

tomoufc wrote:Very interesting report about London Welsh. So it seems that the problem they have at the Kassam is that we have primacy of tenure. I say good luck to them, in a nice way, not the way Kassam seems to. It's would certainly be preferable to have a good sporting facility in Witney, rather than another sainbury's supermarket, which appears to be the option should the move not go through.

One interesting consequence is that there'd be an additional stadium in Oxfordshire with decent capacity and facilities. One of the problems with our current situation is that we can't use the leverage of having an alliterative home available, to get Kassam to reduce his asking price. Not that a move to Witney for us would be anything other than terrible. But I just wander if it might alter the dynamics somewhat? Probably more important is that Kassam would get less rent from only having one tenant again, which apparently has an affect on the price of the stadium, and who would want to be secondary tenants now, having witnessed the experience of LW?

One final thought: if LW have the money to build an develop a new stadium, why don't they have the money to go for a joint bid with us for the Kassam?

Haven't you answered your own question - Primacy of tenure?

No, in fact if LW and OUFC jointly bought the stadium, then all existing contracts could be torn-up, including primacy of tenure, meaning that LW could stay at the Kassam, enjoy the benefits of joint ownership and have equal rights to tenure (or however you would phrase it).

But the pitch would still be sh!t!

tomoufc wrote:No, in fact if LW and OUFC jointly bought the stadium, then all existing contracts could be torn-up, including primacy of tenure, meaning that LW could stay at the Kassam, enjoy the benefits of joint ownership and have equal rights to tenure (or however you would phrase it).

You can't have equal primacy of tenure - that's the whole point of having the rule. It basically boils down to "if there were a clash of fixtures, who would have first dibs on the stadium?". At the moment, the answer to the question is OUFC.

However, I doubt the primacy of tenure is the real issue here. Premiership Rugby rules allow a club not to have primacy provided that they have an acceptable alternative ground which may be used, and that is the criteria London Welsh met when they won promotion to the Premiership. I suspect that they are more concerned about the financial implications of having to pay for use of the KasStad with crowds of less than 2,000. The StadCo accounts should be out any day now, so it will be interesting to see what they have been/are being charged.

tomoufc wrote:

slappy wrote:

tomoufc wrote:Very interesting report about London Welsh. So it seems that the problem they have at the Kassam is that we have primacy of tenure. I say good luck to them, in a nice way, not the way Kassam seems to. It's would certainly be preferable to have a good sporting facility in Witney, rather than another sainbury's supermarket, which appears to be the option should the move not go through.

One interesting consequence is that there'd be an additional stadium in Oxfordshire with decent capacity and facilities. One of the problems with our current situation is that we can't use the leverage of having an alliterative home available, to get Kassam to reduce his asking price. Not that a move to Witney for us would be anything other than terrible. But I just wander if it might alter the dynamics somewhat? Probably more important is that Kassam would get less rent from only having one tenant again, which apparently has an affect on the price of the stadium, and who would want to be secondary tenants now, having witnessed the experience of LW?

One final thought: if LW have the money to build an develop a new stadium, why don't they have the money to go for a joint bid with us for the Kassam?

Haven't you answered your own question - Primacy of tenure?

No, in fact if LW and OUFC jointly bought the stadium, then all existing contracts could be torn-up, including primacy of tenure, meaning that LW could stay at the Kassam, enjoy the benefits of joint ownership and have equal rights to tenure (or however you would phrase it).

It is not either OUFC or LW or Kassam that requires or offers primacy of tenure, it is a requirement of both the football and rugby authorities.

The only difference of LW moving to Witney would be the return to single tenant status of the ground, which significantly affects sale value.

Well that's comprehensively cleared that up for me, thanks.

Returning to the subject of the pitch it the club have arranged an inspection at 9:30 tomorrow.

Approved: Yes to plans for London Welsh’s Witney stadium