Pontypool defeated by Welsh Rugby Union in court.

http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/news/22784.php

he Welsh Rugby Union has welcomed today's High Court decision to reject the challenge brought by Pontypool RFC against the WRU's decisions in respect of the reforms to the Principality Premiership Division for the season 2012/13.

The Honourable Sir Raymond Jack, sitting as a judge of the High Court, said within his 38 page judgement: "I conclude that Pontypool has failed to establish any breach of contract or any breach of duty on behalf of the WRU and there are no grounds for the intervention of the courts."
Permission to appeal has also been refused.

The WRU's planned reforms of the Principality Premiership and the establishment of a new 14 club National Championship Division will now be implemented.

The announcement of the Welsh rugby league structures and fixtures, which has been delayed pending the outcome of the legal proceedings brought by Pontypool, will now go ahead as soon as possible.

The Group Chief Executive of the WRU, Roger Lewis, said: "We can now all place this issue behind us and move forward in the best interests of Welsh rugby.

"We were disappointed that Pontypool decided to take this legal action against the Union. We cannot achieve change without facing up to difficult decisions. It is important we all now move on in harmony for the sake of the game.

"The WRU encourages the coaches, administrators and supporters of Pontypool to seize the opportunity we have created with the new National Championship Division to make the progress they seek as a club.

"Pontypool RFC has a proud place in Welsh rugby and we are confident that the supporters and the team will embrace the challenges of the new season with their usual energy and enthusiasm."






http://www.pontypoolrugby.org.uk/build/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=313:pooler-press-release-12-july-2012&catid=39:rokstories-samples

The WRU will parade this decision as an inevitable victory. It was not.

It is clearly a disappointing decision for Pontypool RFC and its supporters but in a number of areas of the case the club’s arguments were upheld by the judge and credence given to the club’s views.

The WRU needs to ask itself some serious questions about how this restructure was implemented and it needs to be much more open and transparent than it has been here. The judge indicated as much in suggesting that the WRU might learn from the case in relation to its practices, procedures and rules. He also expressed concern that certain clubs may not satisfy the A License criteria and may have submitted false statements of truth although he was not in a position to make a finding on this.

Pontypool RFC successfully established a number of important issues. This includes that there is a contract between the WRU and each member club in relation to the application of the criteria for admission into the Premiership. It also established that clubs which satisfy the first two conditions of the criteria for admission (the issue of an A License and signing of a Participation Agreement) will then be selected for participation in the Premiership in order of merit based on previous seasons’ performances.

The court also found that there is an implied term in the contract between the WRU and the member clubs of fairness in the treatment between clubs. The practice of using and relying on statements of truth was also shown to be suspect. Hopefully, the WRU will have regard to these matters in its future dealings with its member clubs.

Pontypool RFC now has the unenviable task of trying to prepare for the new season lumbered with a huge financial burden. In addition to the huge legal costs, relegation means the club’s central funding will be cut by almost 95 per cent.

The directors would like to publically thank everyone who contributed to the club’s legal fund in such short notice. To raise in excess of £80,000 during the first week of asking is phenomenal, and shows the passion for and the high regard with which so many people hold this great club. In an age of austerity and with the sport as a whole struggling financially, this was a monumental effort.

Regional and club rugby in Wales is fighting a losing battle for people’s attendance and sponsorship, so closing the door on such a well-supported, financially sound, historic club that met the criteria for participation in the Premiership when it appears others did not and within the original time-scales set out by the WRU is baffling.

We hope the changes to the Premiership will vastly improve the playing standards as per the WRU’s wishes. We all want a high-quality and financially viable semi-professional game in Wales.

In the meantime, Pontypool RFC is currently considering its position in the light of the judgment including the possibility of an appeal.

It also remains possible that in view of the judge’s interpretation of the criteria that Pontypool RFC could still find itself in the Premiership if the WRU’s ongoing investigations show that certain other clubs did not and could not satisfy the criteria.

Do we know why Pontypool were relegated when others didn't meet the criteria? Is it that they lied and convinced the WRU? Or was it that they were in 'better' location geographically? Was this geographically location part of the criteria (like it is in Super League)? Or was it on the whim of the WRU?

Just re-read the bottom and it says the WRU are investigating others to ensure they meet the standards and then Pooler may get promoted. I guess that means they did meet the criteria and the ones that stayed up were believed to meet the criteria.

Let's hope the WRU doesn't give these clubs an exemption.

Hammer - I think it was IF any other teams fail to meet the criteria then Pontypool can go back up, sort of thing. The welsh prem was being reduced to try and improve the quality and Pontypool were not good enough at the time the changes were being drawn up. Harsh but simple.

HammerofThunor wrote:Just re-read the bottom and it says the WRU are investigating others to ensure they meet the standards and then Pooler may get promoted. I guess that means they did meet the criteria and the ones that stayed up were believed to meet the criteria.

Let's hope the WRU doesn't give these clubs an exemption.

N'ah if you bend the rules for one team then your allowing fancy lawyers to pull your trolleys down and force themselves apon you

How many teams are in the new premiership as Pooler were 12th in the last season and were on the same number of points as Newport.

It was being cup to 10, but after the Scarlets and Ospreys protested for Carmarthen Quins & Bridgend (I believe) to be included it was adjusted to 12 sides.


WRU confirms Welsh Premiership team number reduction
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/13069895

Bridgend seek Premiership reduction review
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/14818482

Pontypool RFC 'not good enough' to be in new rugby premiership, High Court told
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18801961

Pontypool Rugby Club challenge WRU demotion in High Court
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-18583915

As a Pontypool fan I'm obviously disappointed, but I'm not particularly interested in the legal argument. On the pitch, which is where it counts, we haven't been good enough.

When I'm not at the Dragons or Bath I'll still be at the park just as I have done for 35 years.

Hammer, I think what the WRU did was look at a team's performance over a number of years so that they wouldn't end up getting rid of a team that had an off year this year (Bedwas in this case). You could argue that this flies in the face of a league structure, similar to Bristol not getting promoted in the English league, but I think this is different as they are going for a ring fenced premiership so need to get those teams that generally do better.

This year Pontypool were 12th, last year they were one from bottom (Ebbw Vale relegated that year), the year before they were one from bottom (Bridgend relegated), and the previous 2 years they weren't in the league because they had been relegated at the end of the 05-06 season. Bedwas RFC on the other hand, who finished below them this season, had finished higher than them each season since 2005 (can't remember how far back they looked when calculating 'performance'), so they were more consistent and I guess the thinking is that they could/should offer more to the league as they've generally been better.

It's a tough one I have to admit, but if you've got a strategy to improve the league by concentrating the talent then some teams have to go. I think a performance measure is the best way to do it, rather than the state of a team's toilets or the standard of their pies.

offload wrote:As a Pontypool fan I'm obviously disappointed, but I'm not particularly interested in the legal argument. On the pitch, which is where it counts, we haven't been good enough.

When I'm not at the Dragons or Bath I'll still be at the park just as I have done for 35 years.