Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
The house analogy is fucking stupid. It’s like people trying to understand economics by comparing household budgets.
Groundshare back on (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter Forever_Blue
- Start date
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Because its been made up by Fisher to suit his statements at the time of no option but the Ricoh.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
sorry, maybe your right, replace house for stadium
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
I think there might be something in the 6 mile thing. The EFL has maybe said in private discussions that they wouldn’t want the club to build a new stadium any further than that from the centre. This has been reported and twisted by various parties to suit their agendas.
It.isnt.a.rule.
It.isnt.a.rule.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I can only hope whatever it is is poorly worded frustration at wanting rid of Sisu and not a genuine desire to see us kicked out. But I’ll take your word for it if I’m wrong.
Personally I see two routes out for them: they get the Ricoh somehow and push to make us at least a Championship club before sale. Or they lose and wind the club up to extract any value in Ryton and the rest. At which point who knows what happens.
So I’m really hoping anyone thinking we should get kicked out is thinking it because that will means sisu have gone and not the other way around (kicking us out will get rid of Sisu)
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
I think Brendan better buy Callum Wilson for mega bucks . and maybe that will reduce Arvo debt to levels which new owners can manage.
Not holding out much hope though.
Not holding out much hope though.
The only people who have said this 6 mile rule exists are Fisher and Boddy.
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
Well-Known Member
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
It wasn't an analogy at all. It was as logical as. In other words, it was as stupid as, that's all. Maybe you find it difficult to understand something quite simple.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
It's not that simple, it's idiotic.
Well it wouldnt would it, it will just prolong the life of SISU in Cov. FFS, it's so obvious but the propaganda is scary on SBT !
Nick
Administrator
How's that propaganda exactly?
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
It costs money to defend yourself, even if you've done nothing wrong.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Another stupid analogy
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
We're in a country where 3 elections have been won with that argument
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Yup that is the point, you don't have to be right just much richer than the defendant, eventually they will cave.
Great_Expectations
Well-Known Member
I’ve never understood the thought process behind not supporting your team because of the owners.**
**unless said team gets to Wembley.
**unless said team gets to Wembley.
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
You get awarded costs
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
With this 6 miles business, which apparently only Fisher and Boddy have mentioned but no-one seems to be able to find in the actual EFL rules. So it must have just been a verbal thing between EFL and Fisher. If not, why hasn't Fisher just produced the paperwork proving it has to be within 6 miles? Similarly, why haven't the EFL moved to clarify the position by saying the 6 mile rule definitely does/nt exist?
Could this have been to do with the site of a new stadium, which Fisher used as a means to get the EFL to agree to the Sixfields move, rather than a stadium for us to play in? I'm not really sure the EFL could just add arbitrary terms onto individual clubs that wouldn't apply to others.
If there was nothing written down, you could say you interpreted it as within 6 miles of anywhere named Coventry - Coventry Street, Coventry Road, Coventry Close-
in which case we can use Wembley....
Could this have been to do with the site of a new stadium, which Fisher used as a means to get the EFL to agree to the Sixfields move, rather than a stadium for us to play in? I'm not really sure the EFL could just add arbitrary terms onto individual clubs that wouldn't apply to others.
If there was nothing written down, you could say you interpreted it as within 6 miles of anywhere named Coventry - Coventry Street, Coventry Road, Coventry Close-
in which case we can use Wembley....
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
They usually don't cover the full costs incurred.
SkyBlueCRJ
Well-Known Member
I thought a similar thing. If Boddy and Fisher have effectively publicly lied to suit their own agenda, a section posters on here seem to think that the EFL wouldn’t clarify their own position despite the fact that by stating CCFC are not permitted to play outside of the 6-mile radius, both Fisher and Boddy are misleading the clubs entire fan-base (or trying to anyway). Why would the EFL stand idly by whilst the club publicly involve them in a lie? They’re already considered useless by the majority so from a PR POV they’d have no choice to put a statement out under these circumstances.
Hence why I think there is something to the ‘6-mile radius’ but it probably doesn’t go any further as a verbal warning if anything, as realistically like you said the EFL can’t just start adding rules to suit their own views as what kind of precedent does that set for clubs that are in dire plights in the future?Like you said if it isn’t in writing, it automatically becomes subjective, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if both Bobby and Fisher have twisted whatever has been said, if anything has been said that is.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Fisher usually takes things out of context and attempts to leave you with a false impression. This 6 mile thing is probably about a brand new stadium and nothing to do with temporary groundshares.
SkyBlueCRJ
Well-Known Member
It's probably something along those lines. With regards to taking things out of context though, if you look through his past comments there are examples where he could've taken things out of context and attempt to leave you with a false impression as you say.
For instance in his Talk Sport interview, IMO he's made carefully worded statements where the language used shows he could've purposely taken any comments from the EFL out of content.
E.g.: “We have had it in writing umpteen times that we have to play in Coventry."
An easily twistable comment. For instance with regards to the "had it in writing comment" bit, IMO that could full well mean he's simply received comments via email/s. So it's not an official letter of intent but rather a verbal warning via email.
Nick
Administrator
The talksport thing was bollocks.
Anybody worth their salt would have made him specify what was said live on air and made him squirm.
I genuinely think that Wasps / CCC weren't expecting the club to file accounts for starters, people now seem shocked they will be looking at options other than the Ricoh.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Just a thought regarding the alternative ground and signing the accounts
To be able to sign off in the way they did the auditors had to have evidence that there were viable alternatives. The accounts were signed by the directors and auditors on 28th February. The audit work would have had to be completed before that and before that the spread sheets for the budgets & forecasts for each scenario would need to be put together. Before that of course the club would need to source the other venues. Even staying at the Ricoh would be based on assumptions about rent and costs. The auditors are supposed to check the assumptions etc in the forecasts. They are not supposed to just accept a directors say so, especially in a high risk situation like this. This says to me that the senior management at the club have known about the alternatives for some time - despite what we were assured.
There is a plan on both sides of the fence in my opinion, and each plan distresses the other
To be able to sign off in the way they did the auditors had to have evidence that there were viable alternatives. The accounts were signed by the directors and auditors on 28th February. The audit work would have had to be completed before that and before that the spread sheets for the budgets & forecasts for each scenario would need to be put together. Before that of course the club would need to source the other venues. Even staying at the Ricoh would be based on assumptions about rent and costs. The auditors are supposed to check the assumptions etc in the forecasts. They are not supposed to just accept a directors say so, especially in a high risk situation like this. This says to me that the senior management at the club have known about the alternatives for some time - despite what we were assured.
There is a plan on both sides of the fence in my opinion, and each plan distresses the other
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
That would reflect better on their competency, mind you!
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Makes me feel more comfortable that the club will exist beyond Star Wars day this year.
Nick
Administrator
I think it would be pretty naive to think there hasn't been something up their sleeve, it's what I have been worried about more.
You would think the auditors wouldn't be able to just take their word on things and would demand figures / proof rather than just ticking it off.
My issue is that people seem to have been hedging their bets on the accounts not being filed and no other option than the Ricoh.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
I wonder how the casino feel about this loss of income I would imagine they will be looking for a reduction in their rent
Nick
Administrator
There's also the local pubs and businesses (not many left now though).
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
I don't know where the away fans go, there are places like Cov Welsh who charge for the car park and then open the bar up which will be getting a chunk of income from the football so will be hit with them going.
SkyBlueCRJ
Well-Known Member
You don't even need an understanding of the media to realise his interview was scripted. He would've known full well the type of questions that would've been asked and realistically I doubt he would've been too worried about being interrogated. He most likely would've sat down with a PR professional to go through questions and responses beforehand. Why do you think he went onto Talk Sport specifically? He was questioned by presenters and ex-footballers who neither have the nous or expertise to instigate a formal investigative interrogation of TF and CCFC's woes. Like I said he would've been advised about the type and tone of the questions asked and would've gone into the interview knowing full well the question's asked wouldn't have gone into any specifics - as to put it simply 95% of Talk Sport's listeners aren't interested.
I doubt they were expecting it either. The club has clearly banged on the same drum for all parties to hear, including Wasps and CCC, and now they've suddenly done a 180 by filing the accounts, in which they have stated that they are exploring other options. Is the timing of this tactical by SISU, given that the EFL deadline is today or is there nothing in it?