Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Wasps and Coventry City in advanced talks over groundshare extension

The Ricoh Arena

Since Wasps relocated to Coventry in 2014, they have been sharing the Ricoh Arena with the local football club, Coventry City.

ADVERTISEMENT

The 32,000-seater stadium has played host to Coventry since it was built in 2005, but there has been long-standing animosity between the club’s owners, SISU Capital, and Arena Coventry Ltd, the company who operated the stadium before Wasps bought out the shareholders at ACL.

There has been legal action taken and it even saw Coventry briefly play their home games at Northampton Town’s Sixfields Stadium, before Coventry returned to the Ricoh in 2014 shortly prior to Wasps acquiring the stadium during their relocation to the city.

Wasps have seen a dramatic rise in their revenues since moving to the Ricoh, with the club also benefiting from the casino and exhibition hall, as well as from using the stadium as a music venue. The club also benefits from a rental agreement that Coventry have to play at the stadium.

If no deal can be reached to extend Coventry’s license to play at the Ricoh, it could see the League One club expelled from the Football League, but it seems as if talks have moved on and Coventry are confident of securing their future at the stadium.

A statement from Coventry read: “We have worked closely with Shaun Harvey and the EFL over a long period of time on this matter, and are grateful to the EFL Board for giving us the extra time needed to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion, which would see Coventry City continue to play its fixtures in Coventry.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We can confirm that Coventry City Football Club has started initial discussions with Wasps Holdings Limited regarding an extension to our current license agreement to play at the Ricoh Arena.

“We can also confirm that a Heads of Terms agreement has been signed to ground-share at an alternative venue. However, the timescales involved with this option means that a deal with Wasps will need to be concluded very quickly, otherwise our option with the alternative venue will be lost.

“We want to conclude this matter as soon as possible, with the continued aim of Coventry City playing at the Ricoh Arena, and will work extremely hard in the next few days to that end.”

Speaking to CoventryLive, Wasps issued the following statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We can confirm we have started initial discussions with Coventry City FC regarding an extension to their current license agreement to play at the Ricoh Arena.

“There are still a number of issues to resolve and any agreement is subject to contract and the approval of Wasps Holdings Limited Board.  We are not able to comment any further due to a mutually-signed confidentiality agreement.”

Following the announcement that London Irish would be taking up a ground-share with Brentford at the new Brentford Community Stadium in 2020, Wasps are one of just four clubs under the Premier Rugby Limited umbrella who groundshare, with the others being Sale Sharks and Newcastle Falcons, both of whom share their grounds with rugby league clubs.

With Wasps under investigation from the Financial Conduct Authority for statements relating to the retail bond scheme the club launched in 2015, an inability to generate enough revenue to pay back the scheme and mounting losses and debt, it could spell trouble for the Gallagher Premiership club if they also lose the revenue they are able to call on from Coventry’s use of the stadium.

WATCH: RugbyPass Legends: Drew Mitchell

Video Spacer
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 2 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
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search