1
'It's a disgrace' - player's outrage at Yorkshire Carnegie over signing of Joe Ford
By Ian Cameron
Yorkshire Carnegie this week agreed a deal to bring fly-half Joe Ford back to the club for a fourth time from Gallagher Premiership side Leicester Tigers - but it hasn't gone down well in all quarters.
The 29-year-old older brother of England's George Ford has spent the past two seasons at the Tigers making 23 appearances and scoring 116 points.
However, the signing of the player by the financially troubled Championship club has triggered a backlash on Twitter - from one of the club's own players.
Backrow Daniel Temm wrote on the social media platform that the signing of a player of Ford's profile was 'unbelievable' considering what some current players are going through at the club.
"I find it truly unbelievable that Yorkshire Rugby are able to sign a guy like
Joe Ford with premiership credentials. They have players who they signed and moved their families across the country and the world who have received 15 pence to the pound on agreed contracts!
"We now have players who played 30 games for the club last year who are now receiving personal medical bills from companies as the club is not willing to cover Xrays and MRIs that were undergone by players on recommendations and necessity from the clubs medical staff."
"This is happening the board who have lead the club into this financial crisis are left to operate how they please with no consequences. The thing for me as a player is that this issue isn’t just a financial issue. It is something that the England Rugby/RFU needs to look into."
The New Zealander was backed on Twitter by former player Andy Saul, who said if medical bills weren't being paid then legal proceeding against the club should be taken. "Did they stop paying medical insurance? If so that is a serious issue that could probably go to court, I’m pretty sure it’s illegal!"
Another former player previously branded the club a disgrace.
"I played for 2 years at Yorkshire Carnegie and it’s a disgrace to see how they have treated not only my 2 brothers but all the guys there. I’ve seen first hand how much hardship it is causing and if people really knew just half of how bad it’s been managed they’d be disgusted!"
The financially stricken club has been set a target of getting all creditors to agree to the terms of the CVA by August 9. If not, the could potentially be handed a 28-point deduction before a ball has even been kicked in the new Championship season.
An RFU statement explained: “If the club stays up despite the points deduction, or would have been relegated anyway even without the points deduction, then there is a further deduction in the following season. The case remains subject to review.”
Last week Richmond issued a statement slamming the decision not to relegate Yorkshire for financial mismanagement.
"Richmond are disappointed with the decision of the RFU Board that Yorkshire Carnegie can remain a Championship Club and will be seeking a review of that decision.
"The reality is that Yorkshire Carnegie stand to suffer no sanction whatsoever as any potential points deduction is to all intents and purposes illusory."
Trending on RugbyPass
2
Israel Folau to make rugby return despite mid-week Lions disappointmen
3
Gregor Townsend: It’s the first time since 2000 that we’ve been to NZ
4
England hooker Luke Cowan-Dickie's club future appears done
5
Latest Comments
Yes that’s what WR needs to look at. Football had the same problem with european powerhouses getting all the latin talent then you’re gaurenteed to get the odd late bloomer (21/22 etc, all the best footballers can play for the country much younger to get locked) star changing his allegiance.
They used youth rep selection for locking national elifibilty at one point etc. Then later only counted residency after the age of 18 (make clubs/nations like in this case wait even longer).
That’s what I’m talking about, not changing allegiance in rugby (were it can only be captured by the senior side), where it is still the senior side. Oh yeah, good point about CJ, so in most cases we probably want kids to be able to switch allegiance, were say someone like Lemoto could rep Tonga (if he wasn’t so good) but still play for Australia’s seniors, while in someone like Kite’s (the last aussie kid to go to France) case he’ll be French qualified via 5 years residency at the age of 21, so France to lock him up before Aussie even get a chance to select him. But if we use footballs regulations, who I’m suggesting WR need to get their a into g replicating, he would only start his 5 years once he turns 18 or whatever, meaning 23 yo is as soon as anyone can switch, and when if they’re good enough teams like NZ and Aus can select them (France don’t give a f, they select anybody just to lock them).
Go to commentsThe only benefit of the draft idea is league competitiveness. There would be absolutely no commercial value in a draft with rugby’s current interest levels.
I wonder what came first in america? I’m assuming it’s commercial aspect just built overtime and was a side effect essentially.
But the idea is not without merit as a goal. The first step towards being able to implement a draft being be creating it’s source of draftees. Where would you have the players come from? NFL uses college, and players of an age around 22 are generally able to step straight into the NFL. Baseball uses School and kids (obviously nowhere near pro level being 3/4 years younger) are sent to minor league clubs for a few years, the equivalent of the Super Rugby academies. I don’t think the latter is possible legally, and probably the most unethical and pointless, so do we create a University scene that builds on and up from the School scene? There is a lot of merit in that and it would tie in much better with our future partners in Japan and America.
Can we used the club scene and dispose of the Super Rugby academies? The benefit of this is that players have no association to their Super side, ie theyre not being drafted elshwere after spending time as a Blues or Chiefs player etc, it removes the negative of investing in a player just to benefit another club. The disadvantage of course is that now the players have nowhere near the quality of coaching and each countries U20s results will suffer (supposedly).
Or are we just doing something really dirty and making a rule that the only players under the age of 22 (that can sign a pro contract..) that a Super side can contract are those that come from the draft? Any player wanting to upgrade from an academy to full contract has to opt into the draft?
Go to comments