Page 9 of 16
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:06 am
by cpwigan
Wigan RLFC cause minimal damage to the playing surface. The pitch is damaged more by playing football on it during the winter. Any remedial groundswork to tidy up minor damage could be done on Saturday morning.
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:07 am
by chnwh
I agree, but due to the weather that we've had the pitch will cut up more than usual and as i've said I can understand why they don't want it played there.
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:14 am
by chester
This "away" match should be made completely free, a la Hudds chairman did.
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:27 am
by gw
How about as a proest during the Latics Sunderland game on saturday we kick rugby balls into the ground, you could easily do it at the corners of the ground.
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:38 am
by the-Bowtun-Warrior
send the soccer lot to play on the back of the soccer dome! All the fans would fit around a sunday league pitch. . . . All 5of them!
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:39 am
by the-Bowtun-Warrior
gw wrote:How about as a proest during the Latics Sunderland game on saturday we kick rugby balls into the ground, you could easily do it at the corners of the ground.
Thats a top idea!
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:51 am
by Shaun1967
Is it just me, or is much of the anger here being misdirected.
Yes Whelan is being a pain in the ar** not accommodating us, but we have known all along where his allegiances lie.
The simple fact is that the Premier League fixtures were announced in mid June. We have had three months to discuss this eventuality with Whelan / the RFl, yet we wait until the week before the fixture to organise something.
The blame for this lies solely at the door of IL for not highlighting the situation earlier. Granted the outcome may have been the same, but at least it would not be posted on national TV that we have nowhere to play a big game less than a week later.
We have become the laughing stock of rugby league.
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:59 am
by Spanakopitta
i am so annoyed about this
what size crowd would this fixture have got if played at jjb??????
surely the size of venue should be selected not just on availability but also capacity?
playing at jjb everyone who wanted to attend would have been easily accomodated but now with either the HJ or Stobart is this going to be the case?
I'm stressing that after attending the vast majority of matches home and away this season that i'm going to miss the most important match so far.
just checked, bolton are away this weekend - surely the reebok is a better choice of venue? large enough capacity, just off motorway for the away (!?) fans - and don't give me the pap about it being too expensive!
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:11 am
by weststand-rich
This is rubbish.
At the JJB we could have reasonably expected a crowd of 18,000+ for that match. The Halliwell Jones accomodates 14,200 and the Stobart (not Hobart!!) fits 13,500. By the time Bradford get their 2K or whatever it is allocation there only room for season ticket holders and a few thousand more fans.
We end up out of pocket and some of fans out in the cold. Crap. Absolute crap.
Re: according to the website w...
Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:15 am
by Alex the Warrior
Surprised at how quickly I got through to the ticket office at 9a.m., only to be told that they have no information about tickets!!!!
EDIT. Just seen the reason for this. They can shove it. Ridiculous.