Wembley should be unaffected, they've layed tarmac at pitch level in the past so a league game isn't going to affect it. Besides they over spent so much they need every single event going to make it viable.

I don't know about Wigan but in the case of the KC it will be Hull City who are put in a worse position than FC. It is a council owned stadium and we have a 99 year lease of the ground (or we did when it was built, will be about 92 now). This means either it's up to City to find somewhere else to play or they have to give us some very hefty compensation. And they don't have the money to do either.



Besides, it won't be an issue at all when they go down next month.

World Cup 2013 opener should be fine

The DW Stadium was built on the premise that it was a dual purpose stadium, Wigan have a 50+ year lease there.



If the Premier League want us & Hull FC out, they should build new stadia for the football teams if anything, as the rugby teams can actually sell out their grounds once or twice a year.

I was sort of surprised that the piece wasnt dated 1st April... The premier league pitches were a wreck before mid Feb, and Mark (Lawro) Lawrenson was to be heard blaming the RL for the state of the pitch at Wigan before a set of 6 had been played on it! Might have something to do with the proper winter we've had at last (when grass actually stops growing!)

Why Lawrenson is employed as an 'expert' by the BBC is a mystery, when he hasn't got a clue on anything! As you say, rugby league doesn't ruin pitches over a season - the main reason is weather. Belle Vue had Super League and two football teams playing there for 2 or 3 years and the pitch was perfect thanks to the elements being able to get in and a groundsman/staff working hard on it - in my non-gardening opinion anyway!

This is just a load of hyped up nonsense.



How exactly do the FA plan to override any leases or covenants that are in place? If anything, if the FA rule that hooliganball ONLY may be played on any pitch in use by a Premier League side, then it will be the hooliganball side that has to relocate.



Either that, or the FA will need to heavily compensate the rugby teams forced to relocate. So it won't happen.



Anyway, I'm done with arguing the toss over who ruins pitches. If you look at the average state of a football pitch and where the wear and tear is, then it's obvious who causes the damage.



But given that hooliganball by its very nature appeals to the lowest common denominator, it's not surprising that they can't see the obvious, is it?

wake up and smell the coffee.

money talks. and on the grand scheme RL are small fry.

however it is absolute nonsense that the rugby wrecks pitches but what do the facts matter?

If I remember correctly thr RFL are a stakeholder in the Wembley stadium.

Rugby League was used as part of the reasoning for the funding application and funding was granted on that basis. Wembley does not belong to the FA!

It's a ridiculous story even with regards to DW and KC, but there's nothing in there to suggest Wembley would be affected, it being about a vote of Premier League clubs about Premier League pitches.



They need every game they can get at Wembley. They have Gridiron and Monster Trucks there, for goodness sake, so Rugby League is hardly in danger, although they might do well to ban Feka from playing there.

What a load of tosh that article is! The worst pitch in SL is Leeds Rhinos, they need to kick the Tykes out!

If playing rugby leads to ruined football pitches them how come [url=http://www.liberty-stadium.com/home_news_view.php?news_id=469this guy[/url won an award?



And i'd go as far to say that playing kick and clap would be far worse for a pitch than league because of all the contested scrums and piling on they get up to.



I went to Spotland and Boundary Park last season and i'd go as far to say they were the best pitches i'd seen all year, they were like bowling greens.