Report this comment
  • "Totally agree with you.Let us hope that this judge has some common sense. I still cannot believe that the WRU has tried to defend the totally indefensible.Without doubt they decided the outcome they wanted and set the criterion to match and when the result was not what they wanted changed their position again."
  • This field is mandatory
  • This field is mandatory
  • Please note we will not accept reports with HTML tags or URLs in them.


  • Enter the above word in the box below

WRU denies ‘ignoring’ safety in Pontypool RFC court battle

WRU denies ‘ignoring’ safety in Pontypool RFC court battle

First published in Gwent news

THE Welsh Rugby Union denied "abdicating responsibility" for safety at grounds in its plans to relegate one of its most famous clubs.

Pontypool RFC is fighting at the High Court to overturn the WRU's decision to axe it from the top league in a major restructuring of the game.

Lawyers for the club accused the Union of "ignoring" safety issues in its choice of clubs to go forward and play in a newly constituted 12-team Premiership.

But the WRU yesterday denied the accusation, saying it is down to the clubs and local councils to make sure rugby grounds are safe for spectators.

"This is not the WRU's responsibility," said Adam Lewis QC. "This is the responsibility of the local authorities under the legislation. The role which the WRU is being said to have here just simply does not exist."

Earlier this week, the court heard that part of the selection process for the new division was based on whether clubs had A Licences for their grounds.

That meant having covered hard-standing for 1,000 spectators, but should be based on safety as well as capacity considerations, said the club's barrister, Ian Rogers.

However, the WRU's reference to the so-called Green Guide on safe capacity was "selective at best", he said.

Had the WRU properly applied the criteria in assessing clubs' grounds, three clubs could not have obtained the A Licences they needed to get into the Premiership, he argued.

Judgment in the case is expected to be reserved until a later date by the judge.

Local Businesses

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree