Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Cancel games and award non-French sides 28-0 wins - Andy Goode

Ulster v Northampton Saints – Heineken Champions Cup – Group A – Kingspan Stadium

Europe may be going full steam ahead but we need a decision on the postponed games now and I can see the French teams losing out.

ADVERTISEMENT

There just isn’t a spare weekend in the calendar for the five Champions Cup games postponed in Round 2 to be replayed and nobody should be entertaining the possibility of staging them during the Six Nations.

Can you imagine Wasps facing Toulouse’s second team or Scarlets without their Welsh stars taking on Bordeaux without Matthieu Jalibert and co? It’d make a mockery of Europe’s premier club competition.

Video Spacer

A Rugby Player’s Christmas and England’s Lewis Ludlam | RugbyPass Offload | Episode 15

Video Spacer

A Rugby Player’s Christmas and England’s Lewis Ludlam | RugbyPass Offload | Episode 15

Instead, I think they should be cancelled with the matches awarded to the non-French sides on a 28-0, five match points basis. It is regrettable as the games weren’t able to be played because of the French government rather than the clubs but their opponents shouldn’t be punished.

Whenever a match has been called off in the past and a 28-0 scoreline attributed to one team, EPCR have insisted that it isn’t about apportioning blame and that it is a “tournament management measure” with the objective of ensuring that all fixtures are accounted for. This is no different.

Indeed, Bristol were handed the points when their game with the Scarlets was cancelled in Round 1 but that was largely a travel related issue with the Welsh region forced to quarantine following their abandoned trip to South Africa.

ADVERTISEMENT

There are likely to be more games called off in the next couple of rounds, so the option of just replaying any postponed matches on the weekend of April 8/9/10 and not having a two-legged Round of 16 wouldn’t work for me.

That would mean some teams might end up with two postponed games to fit in and other teams would be in limbo not knowing whether they’ve qualified until April.

Getting rid of the Round of 16 entirely and replaying any games on those two weekends in April before going straight through to the quarter-final stage in May is an option but I can’t see that being the preferred one for EPCR as they would lose out on the excitement of the extended knockout stage.

It’s great news that exemptions for the “pursuit of an economic activity” have been put in place following discussions with the French government but now we need strong leadership and to know where we stand as far as the rest of the tournament is concerned ahead of Round 3.

ADVERTISEMENT

Awarding five match points to the non-French clubs in the postponed Round 2 games may not seem fair but the French sides weren’t able to fulfil the fixtures and the rules are in place for when that is the case.

Champions Cup decision
(Photo by PA)

The discussions with the French government have reportedly also resulted in an exemption that would allow any unvaccinated players to still take part in the competition, although new rules being considered by the UK government could make that a non-starter.

Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries apparently wants to end the exemption allowing unjabbed elite sportsmen to break the self-isolation period to attend training or compete at events when returning to the UK from abroad.

Obviously we want to see all of the top stars able to play in Europe’s top club competition and that means looking at these rules as well as not playing games during the Six Nations but this week has taught us that you have to be careful when handing out exemptions in sport that don’t apply to the general public.

Novak Djokovic didn’t fare too well in Australia and I think it’s perfectly fair to say if you haven’t been vaccinated, you can’t play in the Champions Cup.

The games in France may be going ahead this month but we aren’t going to see full stadiums, with rules there restricting attendances to 5,000 outside and 2,000 inside, and that is a major concern moving forwards.

We all know how much rugby suffered, both financially and as an overall product, without fans at games and everybody should be doing everything in their power to ensure we don’t return to the days of playing behind closed doors.

The French government are set to review their restrictions ahead of the Six Nations and there are hopes that the rules in Scotland, where there is currently a cap of 500 on attendances at outdoor events, will have changed by then as well.

However, the word coming out of Wales isn’t as positive and you only have to look at Dan Biggar’s comments or Louis Rees-Zammit’s recent tweet and some of the other players who have supported it to know what the players think.

There will be significant logistical challenges but if there are restrictions still in place in Wales or Scotland, in particular, those unions should absolutely look at staging their home fixtures at the likes of St James’ Park, the Coventry Building Society Arena, Twickenham, Wembley or anywhere else.

There are a lot of decisions to be taken and not much time left to take them in so it’s going to be an interesting couple of weeks ahead but let’s start with the Champions Cup and hope for some more clarity in the coming days so everyone knows where they stand.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Ex-Wallaby explains why All Blacks aren’t at ‘panic stations’ under Razor Ex-Wallaby explains why All Blacks aren’t at ‘panic stations’
Search