Supporters' group tells Coventry City FC owners to clarify stadium plans (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
The trust weren't asking for clarity, the telegraph approached them to help push something. Quite obvious really what it was about and why.
There's no mention of crfc in the article, but there is wasps? So the second paragraph doesn't make sense.
Will.hide it in a match thread or about players next time!Just think, if Wasps hadn't been mentioned you might have missed it completely
The whole Butts park story is a conspiracy you Numpty so hardly my conspiracy is it.
If you go back to the start of the thread you will see most people agree there is a need for some clarity over what is going on but question why the trust, who have been silent for months, suddenly issued a statement. That came hot on the heels of a story in the CT about Wasps potentially taking over Higgs.
Turns out people were right to question that as the Trust hadn't actually issued a statement but had been approached by the CT and asked to comment.
You could question why the CT are running this type of story.
Turns out people were right to question that as the Trust hadn't actually issued a statement but had been approached by the CT and asked to comment.
You could question why the CT are running this type of story.
Just think, if Wasps hadn't been mentioned you might have missed it completely
I suggest you look at your own post count on Wasps threads, what wasn't Wasps threads but are now Wasps threads to actual football threads before you start judging my post history.
He's posted quite a few on football threads in the last couple of hours? You haven't.
Thread: Back to being the biggest club in Coventry?
Post count table:
Thread: Wasps Training Centre
Post count table:
Thread: Wasps Training Centre
Last edited:
So you admit to starting a wasps thread in the Coventry City general chat section. Don't you think that you should have started it in or move it to the Wasps sub forum then?
As I've pointed out many times to you. I stopped taking this site seriously as a CCFC site long ago. This thread being all the proof you need.
It's become a soap box for people to blame anyone other than the people who are actually responsible for the club and there aren't too many threads on here where that doesn't happen.
There's plenty of football discussion on here, you even tried the other day but got it wrong.
There are also plenty of users who just come on and talk about football.
So you have an issue because people don't agree with you? They did when dongo, big fat Ron etc were here though..
There's loads of football related threads, you just choose not to post on them. To say that the reason for this is because you stopped taking this site seriously ages ago, is a pathetic cop out tbh. The majority of people on here mainly post on the footy threads and dip in and out of Wasps related ones. You don't though. Why??
Let's take page #1 as an example. Despite the title of the thread by post #2 You're straight onto Wasps, #5 you're onto Elliot and Hoffman and post #9 you're onto Higgs and Wasps again. You didn't despite the title mention our owners or anyone on the current board. It's pretty obvious from the off which direction you wanted this thread to go and it had nothing to do with the thread title.
To be fair to FP he did try to keep it on topic pointing out that the Trust is right to ask this question of the owners. You briefly agree and then go of on a tangent again.
Because it's blatantly obvious that the article is part of some silly pr game isn't it? How did the telegraph want the reaction to be when they published it?
The difference is I'm an individual, not a local media outlet who keep going on about fair reporting and just reporting the truth etc.
The title of the thread doesn't explain everything does it? The same as a headline, there's content in the op too.
Is that a Nick SBT exclusive? I know you put a question mark at the end of the first sentence but it does read as a statement.
Said the man on his soapbox.
You might not take the site seriously but it doesnt explain why you dont know who the CCFC players are.
Why would the cet approach the trust for comments about it? They wanted to push that story for some reason.
Nah, I don't buy that. Remember when we returned, CCC were stating that they were glad we were back but it was too early to talk about ownership; to build bridges...at the same time as doing a deal with Wasps. If SISU knew that then you can be sure we'd have heard all about it in a courtroom somewhere!
The CT are an absolute farce these days, I have no idea how anyone can take them seriously after all they've done to conspire against CCFC. Their agenda has been clear for years.
Exactly. Everyone knows SISU have been awful owners but what I cannot fathom is anyone defending CCC. They're not a business, they're supposed to represent the people of Coventry. Instead they accelerated the sale of the stadium built for the football club to a London rugby club with no prior consideration of the consequences or consultation with the people they claim to represent.
To add to that they've colluded with some of the local media to ensure they come out as positive as possible whilst keeping their public in the dark.
I think that "building trust" was somewhere in there too, Torchy. They certainly did that, didn't they? :sarcasm:
Surely people can see the reasoning why CCC could not take a risk of putting all their eggs in one basket and wait for Sisu to buy the stadium?
They had only just returned after removing the club to Northampton and at the time said they could not afford it.
They were still talking of a new stadium (and still are) effectively saying when we move CCC you can pick up the pieces.
As for representing the people of Coventry I would guess that most of them would say they did.
Sisu gambled with our club, for 'their' gain and lost.
Sometimes we need to see the bigger picture by taking off our sky blue tinted glasses.
Just as a matter of balance, what did Sisu say about building bridges at the time ?
The bigger picture includes the social construction of a city, its heritage and how that works in the embedded consciousness, and can also work in selling the idea of a city overseas.
It seems very few take this into account!
Including Tim Fisher on our return
"Tim Fisher, the Sisu-appointed club chairman, declined to respond to the MPs’ criticisms, telling the Guardian he wants to look ahead to the Ricoh return. However he maintains Sisu “have to own our own ground”. and that it is continuing with plans to build a new one."
Unfortunately you appear to have picked a quote that backs up my point.
Which is a shame from your POV, as there are many he says which don't!
Alas, moving Wasps in may offer CCC a short term capital gain, but the intrinsic cultural value that comes with time and therefore the association will take decades to build. Unless we want to go for a civic identity like MK (new, vibrant, playing on its lack of heritage and the specacle, ahead of any reference to its past) then it just won't work.
And the problem is, Coventry *depends* upon its past to create its own distinct identity, its own aura if you will. Wasps just won't help that.
But then that's the problem with politics and the economy full-stop nowadays - there's no incentive to look long term. It's a shame that CCC ended up playing the SISU game by mirroring the SISU policy really.
Well, they didn't get Cardozed like Northampton CC did.
Did they say "See you in court"?
I don't recall Sisu saying anything about buiding bridges, Italia, but I may be mistaken. However, that's not relevant. It was CCC (in the form of Cllr Townshend) who spoke about building bridges, not slamming the door in anyones face and building trust while at the same time CCC were negotiating with Wasps. That was hardly a trust building exercise, was it?
There's people on here who had a clue about Wasps before it was announced. Do a search and you'll find posts.
I know who the players are. It was an honest mix up. If you find the OP when I made that honest mix up ask yourself what happened that day, what time of day it was when I made it and what state I might have been in given what happened that day.
The funniest thing about that post is watching certain posters bring it up everytime they can't concede the point I've just made (down to little man syndrome would be my guess) so they just throw that out instead of admitting I've made a point that they can't argue against because it flies in the face of their opinion. Or as some call it "fact".
Last edited:
