By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
They’re tweeting that their “matchday operations” are being restricted for the home game against Barrow on Sunday for reasons that they don’t want to divulge at the moment. The bottom line is that the crowd capacity is limited to 920 and there will be no cash admissions on the day. Wonder what that’s all about?
-2
Hornets on Sunday on 21:05 - Aug 2 with 3666 views
I was at a meeting the other week where momeyman Sebastian Gerrard was talking about his plans to buy the AJ Bell Stadium and install Swinton there as well as Salford so both rugby league clubs would be groundsharing. His family were big Swinton backers 50 years ago. If this happened then Heywood Road Sale would be available for Andy Mazey after Swinton left. Talk about musical chairs!
It's been posted previously that Rochdale Hornets cannot change their name nor relocate. What this actually, I guess we'd have to see the agreement, because the sale agreement for the stadium purchase allows for Hornets to give 12 months notice of giving up their tenancy. Has anyone considered that Andy Mazey may be a genuine Rugby League fan who just wants to turn a club around and get it playing at a higher and therefore financially sustainable level? We've got to put persoanlity aside in this and look at the bigger picture.
I’m quite prepared to accept that. But I also suspect that sentiment might not bind him to the town of Rochdale. If he thinks that the future of the club might be best served by moving to another catchment area to make it financially viable then I’m sure he’d give it every consideration.
0
Hornets on Sunday on 21:30 - Aug 2 with 3583 views
I’m quite prepared to accept that. But I also suspect that sentiment might not bind him to the town of Rochdale. If he thinks that the future of the club might be best served by moving to another catchment area to make it financially viable then I’m sure he’d give it every consideration.
Then I dare say Rochdale Hornets would have to close as a company and reform elsewhere, but would the RFL accept that?
I’m quite prepared to accept that. But I also suspect that sentiment might not bind him to the town of Rochdale. If he thinks that the future of the club might be best served by moving to another catchment area to make it financially viable then I’m sure he’d give it every consideration.
It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mazey wants to run a viable rugby league outfit - not at all, but the question we have to keep coming back to, as we did in a different context, is: why Rochdale Hornets?
It just smacks of opportunism, because Hornets were (are) in trouble but still have some potential on the playing side
And if that's all it is - using the town's rugby league outfit as a personal project, so we're left with no town team, he can fook right off
It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mazey wants to run a viable rugby league outfit - not at all, but the question we have to keep coming back to, as we did in a different context, is: why Rochdale Hornets?
It just smacks of opportunism, because Hornets were (are) in trouble but still have some potential on the playing side
And if that's all it is - using the town's rugby league outfit as a personal project, so we're left with no town team, he can fook right off
[Post edited 2 Aug 2022 21:37]
It seems that outcome would suit many Dale fans.
History tells us the very existence of both clubs is borne of mutual co-operation, however painful it has been.
Then I dare say Rochdale Hornets would have to close as a company and reform elsewhere, but would the RFL accept that?
The RFL have previous here. They effectively allowed Hemel Stags to become Ottawa and then approved Toronto’s relocation to Cornwall. After that anything is possible! I worked at Mansfield for a spell in the 1980’s and they moved to Nottingham. And Blackpool relocated to Wigan, then Chorley and finally Altrincham where they called themselves Trafford Borough. Andy Mazey’s former club Swinton are a classic example. I think that they’ve had at least six grounds since leaving the town of Swinton itself 30 years ago, only one of which was actually in the borough.
1
Hornets on Sunday on 21:51 - Aug 2 with 3541 views
The RFL have previous here. They effectively allowed Hemel Stags to become Ottawa and then approved Toronto’s relocation to Cornwall. After that anything is possible! I worked at Mansfield for a spell in the 1980’s and they moved to Nottingham. And Blackpool relocated to Wigan, then Chorley and finally Altrincham where they called themselves Trafford Borough. Andy Mazey’s former club Swinton are a classic example. I think that they’ve had at least six grounds since leaving the town of Swinton itself 30 years ago, only one of which was actually in the borough.
The RFL have previous here. They effectively allowed Hemel Stags to become Ottawa and then approved Toronto’s relocation to Cornwall. After that anything is possible! I worked at Mansfield for a spell in the 1980’s and they moved to Nottingham. And Blackpool relocated to Wigan, then Chorley and finally Altrincham where they called themselves Trafford Borough. Andy Mazey’s former club Swinton are a classic example. I think that they’ve had at least six grounds since leaving the town of Swinton itself 30 years ago, only one of which was actually in the borough.
Understood, but none of them towns had a 150 year affinity with hosting a professional RL club.
It's been posted previously that Rochdale Hornets cannot change their name nor relocate. What this actually, I guess we'd have to see the agreement, because the sale agreement for the stadium purchase allows for Hornets to give 12 months notice of giving up their tenancy. Has anyone considered that Andy Mazey may be a genuine Rugby League fan who just wants to turn a club around and get it playing at a higher and therefore financially sustainable level? We've got to put persoanlity aside in this and look at the bigger picture.
Fair point, that agreement and "legally binding clause" need to be seen to be believed. The current Hornets regime have form, claiming an "agreement" to host the England V Fiji game at the COA. They went to the High Court to defend that agreement. There was no written agreement presented. High Court case withdrawn from.
My Grandson was watching "The boy who cried "WOLF" today. Seen too many boys crying "WOLF" at RAFC in the past 12 months or so. The devil is in the detail, which most of these boys are pisspoor at.
1
Hornets on Sunday on 10:40 - Aug 3 with 3128 views
It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that Mazey wants to run a viable rugby league outfit - not at all, but the question we have to keep coming back to, as we did in a different context, is: why Rochdale Hornets?
It just smacks of opportunism, because Hornets were (are) in trouble but still have some potential on the playing side
And if that's all it is - using the town's rugby league outfit as a personal project, so we're left with no town team, he can fook right off
[Post edited 2 Aug 2022 21:37]
Why Rochdale Hornets?
Perhaps he was invited in, rather than circling as an opportunist might?
They have virtually no assets to speak of, so maybe it is a labour of love?
Doesn't say he was invited but seems to my like their Chief Exec initiated discussions.
The Hornet mentioned on their forum that it is indeed the case Mazey was invited. Very ITK is The Hornet although his absence lately seems to have coincided with someone’s holiday and it’s booking.
Yet another coincidence…
[Post edited 3 Aug 2022 11:34]
0
Hornets on Sunday on 13:44 - Aug 3 with 2847 views
One question that it'd be interesting to see answered (by those with the knowledge to do so) is: would the demise of Hornets at the COA lead to greater running costs for Dale?
If the answer to that is Yes, then on purely practical grounds we should all be supporting Hornets continued presence alongside Dale as the face of professional sport in the town
Any "us and them" attitude should be firmly confined to history - and i can understand why it exists. Surely, as Dale continues to fight for its existence, we should be supporting both outfits in the same regard? Wishing ill of one for the sake of old enmities or slights casts a cloud on our efforts to keep Dale's head above water
[Post edited 25 Feb 2022 12:26]
I would imagine that the income received from Hornets is not much more if at all the extra outgoings that Dale incur for the holding of Rugby at Spotland. Income from bar sales etc might bring in some but possibly don't cover along with with rent etc the cost of the Rugby. If there was no Hornets there, Dale might be able to rent out areas presently rented by Hornets. Also there would be more availability to use the stadium at times when we currently can't. This is a post about do we need the Hornets money, and not about wishing they weren't here.
To add, I am not in the know, but the rental figures were put into the public domain by our BOD.
Edit, god knows why I was reading the post from Feb, but I guess it could well become relavent if Hornets do leave.
Looks like the couple of days break from social media bleating is over. Mazey is now checking twitter users against the Hornets database to see if they’re genuine or not. I’m not fully au fait with GDPR but even if it’s not illegal it’s very naughty and unprofessional. Could find himself in a bit of trouble over that if it is indeed illegal
Not sure where you have suddenly popped up from? Don’t believe your name is on the clubs CRM database or season ticket holders? Seems fishy the account created last week and all over all things @RochdaleHornets
So, income of £61k to the RH Sporting Foundation, which no doubt will have first rate accounting procedures to be able to demonstrate to the National Lottery Heritage Fund how that money is being spent on enhancing the club and the town's links with Fiji, as specified in the article
Receipt of that grant a little earlier might've meant Hornets being more inclined to fund the extra expenditure to put on an international fixture. As it is, they'll be hosting a fixture against the Fijians in October
Hope the historical ties with Fiji go from strength to strength with this grant. Best keep their internet activity professional too, the town will be watching and possibly a wider audience
So, income of £61k to the RH Sporting Foundation, which no doubt will have first rate accounting procedures to be able to demonstrate to the National Lottery Heritage Fund how that money is being spent on enhancing the club and the town's links with Fiji, as specified in the article
Receipt of that grant a little earlier might've meant Hornets being more inclined to fund the extra expenditure to put on an international fixture. As it is, they'll be hosting a fixture against the Fijians in October
Hope the historical ties with Fiji go from strength to strength with this grant. Best keep their internet activity professional too, the town will be watching and possibly a wider audience
[Post edited 4 Aug 2022 12:20]
The Rochdale Hornets Sporting Foundation is a registered charity
Yep, the distinction between the RHSF and rugby club are clear, but one wouldn't exist without the other, and presumably the latter playing in Rochdale. The positive publicity attracted by the SF will no doubt reflect on the rugby club, which could've been enhanced had the club made a greater effort to host the international fixture. This would have in turn highlighted the work being undertaken by the SF as a result of the grant
Yep, the distinction between the RHSF and rugby club are clear, but one wouldn't exist without the other, and presumably the latter playing in Rochdale. The positive publicity attracted by the SF will no doubt reflect on the rugby club, which could've been enhanced had the club made a greater effort to host the international fixture. This would have in turn highlighted the work being undertaken by the SF as a result of the grant
Good point. The SF would've had to put in a fair bit of work in preparing it's bid for the grant, and the specified activities are well thought through. Unless there's no communication between RH and the RHSF, one would expect a winning bid might've at least have been anticipated by RH
Good point. The SF would've had to put in a fair bit of work in preparing it's bid for the grant, and the specified activities are well thought through. Unless there's no communication between RH and the RHSF, one would expect a winning bid might've at least have been anticipated by RH
It was rejected in April according to this so looks like more work was done on the bid.
I can't help but wonder: is it entirely a coincidence that the initial lottery grant bid by RHSF was rejected in April, and the legal action against Dale was brought by Hornets on 19 April? (The Head of Terms were provided to Hornets by Dale in March.)
If, for instance, the rejected bid had included provision for funding (or part-funding) of the international fixture v Fiji as part of the heritage programme, one can see why it might've been rejected, sparking the subsequent chucking of toys out of the pram
Entirely speculative, of course. But there was a lot going on in April...
I can't help but wonder: is it entirely a coincidence that the initial lottery grant bid by RHSF was rejected in April, and the legal action against Dale was brought by Hornets on 19 April? (The Head of Terms were provided to Hornets by Dale in March.)
If, for instance, the rejected bid had included provision for funding (or part-funding) of the international fixture v Fiji as part of the heritage programme, one can see why it might've been rejected, sparking the subsequent chucking of toys out of the pram
Entirely speculative, of course. But there was a lot going on in April...
Did they actually bring action, or send a pre-action letter?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
