chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Also noticed covrugby's only like comes from a user who has just started posting again having not posted since 2013. All of his posts are negative towards the club. Must be a coincidence.
Brainstorm (19 Viewers)
- Thread starter Grendel
- Start date
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
The point was that sometimes less is more.
Two marches worked, because they were able to grasp some profile and build-up. The regular, over and over mini protests done seemingly on the hoof didn't, because there were so many mini efforts it was impossible to keep pace, and it made for protest apathy.
Look, I admire your efforts, and have always said fair play for going along all the time - that's not in doubt. Believe it or not what I don't want is for you to be left out doing anything alone this time around however.
I do think that protests for us are an uphill battle anyway however, and the best (only?) chance of getting a sizeable number is to keep it focussed and clear what and where actually is the protest. Forget the splinter groups, forget the politics of who's right and wrong, but make sure there's a time and a place people can turn up.
And, who knows, it might just be three/four men a dog and a whistle again... but you've got a better chance of it being more.
They wouldn't be going to 'protest'; they would be going to watch the game, cheer on the local rugby club and show some solidarity.
Where have you been? Both clubs have been working closely with each other recently. We use some of the facilities. There have been joint ticket offers, the clubs are talking about pooling resources - as discussed by your own CE at a meeting with CCFC supporters. I think you're mischief making and you are not been bullied, you're being challenged.
Nick
Administrator
Here we go ..... Another poster 'bullied' because you don't like to hear something said you don't Agree with
Feel free to report the posts, I still haven't seen any reported posts about the criminal damage you are so worried about.
"bullied"? Jesus christ, you rugby lot are soft aren't you?
Nick
Administrator
Not sure why Cov Rugby wouldn't welcome people from the city supporting them over Wasps. Like you say lots of people did at the Sixfields time.
The poster doesn't really seem to know what they are talking about and just trying to cause trouble.
The PR game is not strong in this case and this is the type of shit we are up against.
Last edited:
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
I wonder if he has the same hostility to all those local rugby fans who were so desperate to watch the game they follow that they turned out in their thousands when London Wasps showed up, having completely ignored their own local rugby for decades.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I probably
Just a guess but yes I would say nearly all foitball clubs out there if they went through 20 years of decline with no success. Their attendances would drop.
Them if they had a sustained period of success their attendances would rise.
Last edited:
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
I'm a regular poster and covrugby has a point and looks like has hit a nerve, don't give a shite if he had posted from Timbuctoo these protest suggestions and ideas are ok but will only have affect on proper organised format and won't come to anything through a little little website with respect.Also it can only work if we are 100% united against all the protagonists and that includes sisu, I have my doubts if the likes of Grendel and others including yourself Nick are to be honest.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Hahaha....yea right! Yet another pathetic attempt by the franchise PR team.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Wasps say they won't conclude long term rent unless the legal action is dropped.
Wasps are not offering a good enough academy option
They need pressure to continue negotiations and improve the academy access.
SISU need to be pressured into stating that they will be dropping pointless legal action if they get a long term rent deal and academy deal sorted.
If they refuse to do this the only option is a new stadium. They need to do a hell of a lot more than identifying a couple of sites which is all they have done in 3-4 years.
Council need to be pressured into helping CCFC by identifying sites in the city. If the BPA is acceptable at its size then plenty of other sites that size are in the city itself.
All sides need pressure from the fans
Wasps are not offering a good enough academy option
They need pressure to continue negotiations and improve the academy access.
SISU need to be pressured into stating that they will be dropping pointless legal action if they get a long term rent deal and academy deal sorted.
If they refuse to do this the only option is a new stadium. They need to do a hell of a lot more than identifying a couple of sites which is all they have done in 3-4 years.
Council need to be pressured into helping CCFC by identifying sites in the city. If the BPA is acceptable at its size then plenty of other sites that size are in the city itself.
All sides need pressure from the fans
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
Nobody can blame Wasps for their stance on dropping the legals. To me this is following a similar path to us returning a bit out of blue from the Northampton debacle, has to be said with the sisu tail a little between its legs. I get the wiff of a bit of desperation from our owners, coming up with potty ground ideas after four years of searching, are we reaching a crisis point ? or maybe even an end game.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I've asked several times - how can you insist an organisation that owns another organisation stop legal action against another party?
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
You can't really but I am sure it goes on all the time in the murky business world sisu deal with
Last edited:
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Wow, the level of anger on this thread (and other recent ones) in doing and supporting action against an organisation doing untold damages to our club is quite encouraging. It is just a damn shame that some of those same posters sat back and did nothing (except say we need to blame all sides but still pile into just one) when a similar organisation did untold damage to our club.
When we had the chance to stage mass sit ins, walk outs or pitch invasions at Northampton, what did we get from some people? Oh that's it, "we just want to support the team".
When Sisu/Otium or whoever staged and ran the administration for their own end, what did get from some people? Oh that's it, "we just want all of the truth to come out" (whilst just blaming one side).
When we had the JR's going we had some posters talking about smoking guns and legal wrong doings. Judges with far more knowledge than anyone on here decided that there wasn't so then some posters moved said goalposts and spoke about things that were morally wrong.
Now before I get all the usual (as I've had before) council lover, Wasps lover and CCFC hater shite, I have always believed all parties have had a part to play in where we are. However, the council have far more than us to think about, who can blame the owners of Wasps for seizing an opportunity which presented itself and the Higgs trust for the way they were stuck in the middle. People talk about underlying factors in our situation but the main fact to me is that Sisu/Otium ARE our owners, they have a direct responsibility to the care of our club and a duty of care to us fans. They have failed miserably on all counts.
So people now give out the usual "we blame all sides" bollocks yet forget that any action should be against EVERYONE. If we flood a Wasps game, then the next week why don't we all boycott a CCFC game when we could have a mass protest/kickabout outside the council house. Why don't we put pressure on ALL local news outlets to get answers from everyone involved. Why don't we try and get contact details to phone/email/talk to anybody in positions of power, such as Higgs and the academy, Wasps and negotiations, Fisher and imaginary stadium plans and the council and why they have taken such a stance towards the club.
But no, I get the impression that some posters will just continue on certain paths against certain organisations except the one that has a direct responsibility to our club and us.
Oh and Samo, grow up.
When we had the chance to stage mass sit ins, walk outs or pitch invasions at Northampton, what did we get from some people? Oh that's it, "we just want to support the team".
When Sisu/Otium or whoever staged and ran the administration for their own end, what did get from some people? Oh that's it, "we just want all of the truth to come out" (whilst just blaming one side).
When we had the JR's going we had some posters talking about smoking guns and legal wrong doings. Judges with far more knowledge than anyone on here decided that there wasn't so then some posters moved said goalposts and spoke about things that were morally wrong.
Now before I get all the usual (as I've had before) council lover, Wasps lover and CCFC hater shite, I have always believed all parties have had a part to play in where we are. However, the council have far more than us to think about, who can blame the owners of Wasps for seizing an opportunity which presented itself and the Higgs trust for the way they were stuck in the middle. People talk about underlying factors in our situation but the main fact to me is that Sisu/Otium ARE our owners, they have a direct responsibility to the care of our club and a duty of care to us fans. They have failed miserably on all counts.
So people now give out the usual "we blame all sides" bollocks yet forget that any action should be against EVERYONE. If we flood a Wasps game, then the next week why don't we all boycott a CCFC game when we could have a mass protest/kickabout outside the council house. Why don't we put pressure on ALL local news outlets to get answers from everyone involved. Why don't we try and get contact details to phone/email/talk to anybody in positions of power, such as Higgs and the academy, Wasps and negotiations, Fisher and imaginary stadium plans and the council and why they have taken such a stance towards the club.
But no, I get the impression that some posters will just continue on certain paths against certain organisations except the one that has a direct responsibility to our club and us.
Oh and Samo, grow up.
Tbf that kind of opinion does exist in their fanbase,
TBF that sort of opinion does exist down, got told to fuck off back to the footy while chatting about all the shit and being overheard.
Basically, I'm here for the Rugby and don't want to hear about that shit.
There will be a fair bit of suspicion and distrust down there among their fanbase from conversations I've had.
That's mostly rubbish I'm afraid and I'm not really sure what your point is. The 3 most effective and visible protests to have taken place were the two marches and the Arsenal protest. How much anti-council sentiment was displayed then? None. Were you complaining about that then? I doubt it.
Recent talk of protests relate specifically to the actions of the council/Wasps on a number of specific issues - but of course any such protest would also focus on the actions of SISU, how couldn't they? And why do you think they wouldn't?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Quite simple you sign an out of court settlement on same moment you sign up for the 20 year rental contract and academy deal.
The deal is the out of court settlement.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Where are the others, the only one I have heard them identify is the Butts.[/QUOTE]
Tim Fisher said there was an out of town site the other day
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Do you think that they would put that on the table?
My concern is that Wasps/CCC are not exactly trustworthy. It could easily transpire that SISU drop legals and then suddenly their promises don't come to pass.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Tim Fisher said there was an out of town site the other day[/QUOTE]
you'll forgive me if I await to hear where that it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
An out of court settlement for what. Surely the minute it's signed sisu would go straight to court and said it's been forced to sign an agreement to avoid bankruptcy that protects a third party.
This potentially would be explosive as it surely would imply that there's been collusion between wasps and the council?
What's actually to stop action resuming the minute something is signed?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
The out of court settlement would stop it. That's the whole point of them. You can try and deflect it as much as you like.
It's a compromise reached by two parties if SISU are happy to sign it and it is what Wasps want an end to SISU's legal action that involves them as an interested party then that's that.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
you'll forgive me if I await to hear where that it.[/QUOTE]
I know, but my point is they need pressure if they refuse to offer to drop legal action if a negotiation is agreed. Then the only option is a new stadium so we need a dam sight more than what we have had so far!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Both contracts signed at the same time.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So the agreement would be asking for wasps to be removed from any claim?
Surely you aren't seriously suggesting they would agree to that and why should they? That's effectively trying to usurp legal process and having agreed a deal there would be no legal requirement to sign it - they would certainly instantly be able to take wasps to court and seek to invalidate it.
Also they would still be able to pursue new action.
Interestingly of course wasps refuse to make a statement saying talks have stopped due to legal actions. I wonder why.
Is suggesting that we come and make a united fan base a St Trinian's misdemeanour? We ( our club ) could be your Partners soon. Both clubs could be adversly affected by Wasps expansion. I would have thought we shared ( at least in part ) the Same agenda. Our club is/ was negotiating with Wasps. Now on hold. Watching one of your games and maybe going to a pub afterwards and swapping points of view wouldn't hurt anyone. Are you in favour of the BPA proposal?
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
The only thing Fisher will be investing in is The Rev's ambulance.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
That would no be legal it would tie both actions together.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
It would be legal
You do know what an out of court settlement is don't you?
The Reverend Skyblue
Well-Known Member
Covrugby must be having the worst holiday ever if he's sat on a forum that isn't his sport.
Get a life , start by going down the bar and having a pint of Guiness man.
Why would he want to restrict his clubs attendance by not wanting folk to go down and watch some rugby. That's bloody strange in the extreme.
There's some strange folk out there
Get a life , start by going down the bar and having a pint of Guiness man.
Why would he want to restrict his clubs attendance by not wanting folk to go down and watch some rugby. That's bloody strange in the extreme.
There's some strange folk out there
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Yes it's a settlement where both parties agree to settle out of court a legal dispute.
This has to be agreed by both parties without consideration to other influences.
The settlement would not involve Wasos but the party the club is taking action against - the council and ACL in its prior guise.
So the two actions are not mutually exclusive and the council wouldn't agree to it in a million years - their legal team would block it for very obvious reasons given prior history.
Generally Midfield
Well-Known Member
Talking to someone today who agreed with the pipe dream bit and said if we want to make a point straight away then why not one evening this week ribbon the Ricoh and council house. Won't change the world but better than doing nothing! Would only take you and a couple of others on here to say what day and a fair few would turn up