More news on Ryton (2 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

I suggest we don't really know much of what has actually gone on at this stage, so we don't know what the club has spoken to the council about.

One thing we do know a little of is the goings on at The Butts and this suggests the council hasn't been acting terribly professionally. It seems the council sought information about what the football club had been talking to Coventry Rugby Club about, commercially sensitive information the council had no right to. It also seems the council tried to get a ban on professional football being played at The Butts, something that seems dangerously like an attempt to restrict trade.

But A) The club hasn't applied to have any covenant changed or applied for planning permission. B) Commercially Sensitive information? Isn't the covenant a matter of public record available to anyone at request to the LRO? C) If the club ever did look to change the covenant (no indication as yet that they're even considering it) is the final decision CCC's? Wouldn't that be central government as presumably any change of use and therefore covenant is a planning matter?

 

---

[Sky Blue Kid]

But you haven't shown anything?

This enough?.... Mr Millerchip, a former Coventry Rugby Club player, donated thousands of pounds to the club when the outfit was struggling financially. He currently owns Coventry Rugby Properties LLP, which owns the 125-year lease from Coventry City Council for the Butts Park Arena site. That lease contains restrictions which mean the site can only currently be used by a rugby club.

 

[skybluetony176]

How are Cov United playing there?

Not a professional outfit.

 

[Buster]

Nail on head. SISU had two choices - prove their good intentions, and work to build from the inside (on terms that knew about when they took over). Or try to be clever by attempting to bring the whole thing down from the outside.

You can spin the figures , guess the back room chat and troll through the sequence of events but that post sums up the situation to perfection and should be carved on SISU's gravestone . You either go with their dubious antics or stand up to them . Looking forward to Charlton

 

[Nick]

Not a professional outfit.

Where's that mentioned in the stuff he keeps posting saying rugby only?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Where's that mentioned in the stuff he keeps posting saying rugby only?

Have you read my post #457 yet?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

I think the stumbling block could well have been Chris Millerchip having something to do with blocking Pro Football at the Butts, but I'm only reading between the lines.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Where's that mentioned in the stuff he keeps posting saying rugby only?

Coventry United are not a Pro outfit Nick.

 

[Nick]

Coventry United are not a Pro outfit Nick.

They aren't a rugby club either are they?

 

[Nick]

Have you read my post #457 yet?

Yes, the one that says it can only be used by a rugby club. Can't be true can it if cov United are going to play there?

 

[Grendel]

I think the stumbling block could well have been Chris Millerchip having something to do with blocking Pro Football at the Butts, but I'm only reading between the lines.

No you are just wrong. The sub lease owned by the rugby club cannot prevent football played there. It was nothing to do with football at professional or non professional either.

 

[Frankley]

Who the f**k are you? Judge Rinder, read the article it might tell you
Just putting it out there mate. same applies to you.. Don't shoot the messenger.

I think Judge Rinder's a man :jawdrop:

The isn't any restriction that specifically mentions football mentioned in the CT article, that's why I asked you where it had been published.

If you don't know, just say. :cat:

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

No you are just wrong. The sub lease owned by the rugby club cannot prevent football played there. It was nothing to do with football at professional or non professional either.

I've played in many Cup Finals at the Butts, but not at Semi or Pro level. so yes football has been played there but that was over 40 years ago. So I don't know what has gone on since.

 

[Frankley]

Isn't that what you're doing?

No...

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

I think Judge Rinder's a man :jawdrop:

The isn't any restriction that specifically mentions football mentioned in the CT article, that's why I asked you where it had been published.

If you don't know, just say. :cat:

Read my post #457 Then if you don't understand just say I'll try my utmost to explain each word so you can.

 

[Nick]

Read my post #457 Then if you don't understand just say

That says only rugby can be played there, it doesn't prove anything does it?

 

[Frankley]

But A) The club hasn't applied to have any covenant changed or applied for planning permission. B) Commercially Sensitive information? Isn't the covenant a matter of public record available to anyone at request to the LRO? C) If the club ever did look to change the covenant (no indication as yet that they're even considering it) is the final decision CCC's? Wouldn't that be central government as presumably any change of use and therefore covenant is a planning matter?

That discussions were going on between CRFC and CCFC at all was something that was commercially sensitive.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

That says only rugby can be played there, it doesn't prove anything does it?

You think about things, but can you prove it?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

That says only rugby can be played there, it doesn't prove anything does it?

Pedantic bugger tonight eh Nick

 

[Frankley]

Read my post #457 Then if you don't understand just say I'll try my utmost to explain each word so you can.

...and I've already shown how the supposed restriction in the lease is being flouted. If you don't understand the difference between women's football and rugby, or American football and rugby, or a beer festival and rugby, or a wedding and rugby just say and I'll try my best to explain them to you in words of less than three syllables.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Tell you what guys... every fucking newspaper and poster on here are all fucking massive liars... There we go anddddddd chill.

 

[Grendel]

Not a professional outfit.

Nothing to do with that

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

...and I've already shown how the supposed restriction in the lease is being flouted. If you don't understand the difference between women's football and rugby, or American football and rugby, or a beer festival and rugby, or a wedding and rugby just say and I'll try my best to explain them to you in words of less than three syllables.

I could say something to you in two syllables, but you might not like it.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

I could say something to you in two syllables, but you might not like it.

I think we've reached an impasse and should agree to disagree on this one... unless you've got all night to row about it... I have!

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

I've shown you all a report from the Telegraph dated December 2015, you've shown us a report from the Observer dated May 2016 Yet we are all supposed to believe what you say?.. I'm not asking anyone to believe fook all. I've already said that I'm "Just putting it out there"

 

[Nick]

I've shown you all a report from the Telegraph dated December 2015, you've shown us a report from the Observer dated May 2016 Yet we are all supposed to believe what you say?.. I'm not asking anyone to believe fook all. I've already said that I'm "Just putting it out there"

You posted saying only rugby can be played, Coventry United don't play rugby as well as the other non rugby examples there.

It still doesn't explain why they would want to put a very specific clause in for pro football if it was there already?

 

[oldfiver]

I think we've reached an impasse and should agree to disagree on this one... unless you've got all night to row about it... I have!

Now stop bickering !

Coventry City Council have responded to a leaked email saying that it was attempting to block Coventry City from playing at the Butts Park Arena.

According to the Coventry Telegraph's Simon Gilbert, "Coventry City Council can't block change in Butts Park Arena lease to allow Coventry City to ground share with Coventry Rugby Club but changes in rent between leases would have to be approved by councillors"

A leaked email to the rugby club in January 2016, said the council wanted a new clause inserted which would specifically prevent “professional association football or training associated therewith” in exchange for making other changes to the sub-lease.

The Coventry Telegraph asked Nigel Clews, assistant director of property and asset management at Coventry City Council, why they had tried to insert the clause at that time and he said: “No, it doesn’t look good. But we were trying to flush out details.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

You posted saying only rugby can be played, Coventry United don't play rugby as well as the other non rugby examples there.

It still doesn't explain why they would want to put a very specific clause in for pro football if it was there already?

Wrong!!! I posted a report that said only Rugby could be played there... I also said Don't shoot the messenger, I also said I'm not asking anybody to believe fook all. Do I need a hammer to knock it into your brain or what?

 

[oldfiver]

Wrong!!! I posted a report that said only Rugby could be played there... I also said Don't shoot the messenger, I also said I'm not asking anybody to believe fook all. Do I need a hammer to knock it into your brain or what?

I have just shown you the report was wrong - that's all
CCC ran the line the lease only allowed rugby to delay the transfer. But the line was of the fishing sort not a valid legal position

CCC mislead everyone including the reporter

 

[Nick]

Wrong!!! I posted a report that said only Rugby could be played there... I also said Don't shoot the messenger, I also said I'm not asking anybody to believe fook all. Do I need a hammer to knock it into your brain or what?

Yes, and now Coventry United are going to be playing there. So it proves the report you keep mentioning wrong doesn't it?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Now stop bickering !

Coventry City Council have responded to a leaked email saying that it was attempting to block Coventry City from playing at the Butts Park Arena.

According to the Coventry Telegraph's Simon Gilbert, "Coventry City Council can't block change in Butts Park Arena lease to allow Coventry City to ground share with Coventry Rugby Club but changes in rent between leases would have to be approved by councillors"

A leaked email to the rugby club in January 2016, said the council wanted a new clause inserted which would specifically prevent “professional association football or training associated therewith” in exchange for making other changes to the sub-lease.

The Coventry Telegraph asked Nigel Clews, assistant director of property and asset management at Coventry City Council, why they had tried to insert the clause at that time and he said: “No, it doesn’t look good. But we were trying to flush out details.

I've already said i've shown one account of goings on at the Butts. I really couldn't give a f**k what anyone believes I stated (Don't shoot the messenger for the fifth time) but it seems you're all good at oneupmanship eh

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

I have just shown you the report was wrong - that's all
CCC ran the line the lease only allowed rugby to delay the transfer. But the line was of the fishing sort not a valid legal position

CCC mislead everyone including the reporter

So that is my fault then?

 

[oldfiver]

Who said it was?

I have posted that answer several times over several threads but it continues to be ignored
Some people do not like the idea the Council were caught lying - which is what it was



I

 

[oldfiver]

I've already said i've shown one account of goings on at the Butts. I really couldn't give a f**k what anyone believes I stated (Don't shoot the messenger for the fifth time) but it seems you're all good at oneupmanship eh

The problem is the Messenger was misled - take that up with the person who gave you the message
It is not one upmanship to put down a false story and produce the truth

Take a breather!

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Who said it was?

I have posted that answer several times over several threads but it continues to be ignored
Some people do not like the idea the Council were caught lying - which is what it was



I

And I've said I couldn't give a f**k who is right or wrong, they're all as bad as one another. simple as that. It's all about point scoring on here f**k all to do with debates just slag off someone you don't like! or has a different view to you.