Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'There are many people out there who think they know better' - Simon Orange pens open letter to Sale fans

(Photo by Alex Livesey/Getty Images)

Sale owner Simon Orange has written an open letter to supporters explaining the decision taken by the Gallagher Premiership not to bring forward fixtures to fill the void created in the January calendar by the cancellation of two rounds of Champions Cup pool fixtures.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Manchester club, who last Friday officially confirmed Alex Sanderson as their new director of rugby following Steve Diamond’s departure, were due to play Edinburgh and Toulon.

With those games cancelled due to political interference from the French government, it left a two-week gap in the schedule.

Video Spacer

Sale forward Josh Beaumont guests on RugbyPass All Access

Video Spacer

Sale forward Josh Beaumont guests on RugbyPass All Access

That sparked initial calls from coaches such as Exeter’s Rob Baxter and Bristol’s Pat Lam to being forward Premiership fixtures in order to keep clubs active. However, that request was knocked back, league officials deciding a fortnight-long circuit breaker was the best for the game in England.  

Explaining the mechanics involved in reaching that Premiership decision, Sale owner Orange told his club’s supporters: “Bringing matches forward was going to be difficult, though not impossible, because of clubs’ own logistics and the broadcast contract and schedule. 

“For it to happen all the clubs would have to agree unanimously and it certainly would not have suited some. It was decided that we should not bring the fixtures forward for the following reasons:

  • We did not need to create any free weeks later in the Premiership season because the round three and four European matches were not going to be rescheduled for a later date;

  • We did not see any benefit in changing/compromising the Premiership competition;

  • It made no sense bringing fixtures forward to a time when the rate of transmission is at its peak;

  • The NHS is close to capacity and it was thought prudent not to add potential greater stress to the system at this time;

  • It made no sense to move fixtures forward to a time when crowds are still not permitted due to lockdown/tier systems;

  • Players and staff had a hectic schedule to complete the 19/20 season plus a very short pre-season, so a two-week break would be good for everyone’s welfare.

These decisions were taken after much discussion. Many other options were debated and, as you will imagine when you have so many interested parties, there were differing opinions. 

“I’m sure there are many people out there who think they know better and have better solutions but there are also very capable club owners and CEOs and PRL executives involved in the decision-making. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“As one of those individuals, I believe we have come to the right conclusion and am fully supportive of the outcome. I would also like to thank the owners and CEOs of the other clubs as well as the PRL for their hard work and commitment to these matters.”

Orange also explained the reasoning behind the four/two points split in use in the Premiership for matches that are cancelled. 

“Many alternative ideas were mooted including awarding no points and other point combinations, but it was decided overall this 2/4 system was the fairest to both of the affected clubs and this is what was agreed by the PRL Rugby committee and the owners of all 13 clubs that the PRL represents.”

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 6 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.

145 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Sacha Feinberg-Mngomezulu suffers new injury setback Springboks flyhalf's latest injury worry
Search