So the SB trust want administration (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter italiahorse
- Start date
ashbyjan
Well-Known Member
Just to reiterate it the SKY BLUE TRUST DOES NOT WANT OR ADVOCATE ADMINISTRATION - as has been said previously we were answering a question "as we were heading for admin what was the fans current mood" and what people were saying to us on Saturday was that large numbers whilst not wanting it accepted it if it meant new owners and a new start.
LarryGrayson
New Member
it didnt cum out that way on the telly mate
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
No self respecting fans want administration as you have so rightly pointed out. They just want the club stable. It has been said so many times on this forum. The admin option is either foolhardy or brave. Faced with the rhetoric from SISU I would back us trying to sort this out. I don't want the club to be liquidated. Someone at SISU does.
TurkeyTrot
New Member
Really helpful that, I'll watch it again and look out for it. Or is this the real purpose of the thread?
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
It's down to the personal stuff again.
TurkeyTrot
New Member
Unfortunately I think you're right FF. The Club is in the worse place its ever been in but let's try score cheap points instead. 
Black6Osprey
New Member
How many new clubs are we trying to start here?
At this rate we will have AFC Coventry, ACL Utd, SISU Rovers, Council Town and SBT Terriers (I have visions of them in a pink home strip).
Can we not just stick with CCFC?
At this rate we will have AFC Coventry, ACL Utd, SISU Rovers, Council Town and SBT Terriers (I have visions of them in a pink home strip).
Can we not just stick with CCFC?
MichaelCCFC
New Member
Jan's posts on this thread make the Trust's position crystal clear (btw, last week the Trust was being accused on twitter of being pro sisu)
I've been in involved in lots of different groups over the years but I have never seen anything like the increase in membership the Trust has had in the last 72 hours. Majority are local but it's also great seeing City fans from Cornwall to Inverness joining over the weekend. I think we've just gone through the 1,200 member mark.
skyblueman
New Member
Sorry Pal but I suggest you have another good look at that interview in the cold light of day - I had to run it 3 times myself just to believe it - you ALL to a man said you thought ADMIN was the best option - ALL members of a supporters trust - ALL united in what you were saying - me well I'm gobsmacked - there is NO WAY this is the best option and you don't have the right to go on TV to the nation and put forward the 'fans' view - it's not mine and not that of plenty others
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
So why don't you join the trust and put your point across to them. I'm sure they are all open minded individuals who are better informed than most on here. Playing the interview three times is a little Obsessive. It was clear what the interviewees were saying from the outset.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Now obviously I'm a SBT newbie, but I certainly don't agree with Admin. I haven't seen the programme, but will watch later when I get home.
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
There is a link further up if you can access it from where you are. Only 5 minutes.
skyblueman
New Member
I was just so shocked with what they were saying
Why would I join a self appointed trust to try and convince them of an alternative view-point?
Did the trust poll their members to arrive at this party line? If they did fair enough it's legitimate from one body of fans
You can't go on TV as a collective of a trust and put a unanimous point of view across like that without it looking like this is the official trust's viewpoint
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
It's a tough world out there.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I'm a new member and I don't either. I will also have a look and see what was said.
MichaelCCFC
New Member
Last week there were people on twitter saying the Trust was pro sisu, today some people here are saying it's pro admin; who knows what it'll be tomorrow. It goes with the territory when you get out from behind your keyboard and anonymity. Everyone has their own view, and most people most of the time interpret new info to fit with their pre-existing outlook. As at other clubs, some people will never support the idea of a Trust but membership is now over 1,200 which is 10% of average home gate (according to http://stats.football365.co.uk/dom/ENG/D2/attend.html our average home league crowd is 10,950). If anyone has anything specific they would like to ask about the Trust feel free to PM me or email [email protected]
nobbynutkins
New Member
I think the issue is not so much whether the Trust is pro- or anti-administration, but whether they are pro- or anti-SISU.
Certainly, the Late Kick Off interview makes it appear that, as far as the Trust are concerned, the problem lies exclusively with the owners.
Certainly, the Late Kick Off interview makes it appear that, as far as the Trust are concerned, the problem lies exclusively with the owners.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
The boy who cries wolf
Grendel
Well-Known Member
If it guaranteed it who wouldn't?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
What like announcing the rent is £150,000 and we will play in the Evo Stick League if the action was of taken. Why would that be?
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
No. One was an incorrect declaration of the net position of the current rent discussions. Wrong, but with a basis in fact.
The other being the latest in a long list of threats, which appear to have no basis in fact, and have delivered us to where we are.
Tell me; when Fisher states that unless discussons go his way, he'll 'fold the club'. What do you think?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
No like saying you are going to build a 30 million stadium when you are not.
Like saying liquidation is likely if you don't mean it.
Like saying you the chopping and changing of managers has to stop because we have had something like 12 in 11 seasons. Then we have 5 in one season.
Like saying you are considering using Hinkleys ground
Like saying you are considering using Rusden and Dismonds ground
Like saying gentleman we can put all this behind us then threaten to build a new stadium.
Thats the boy who cried wolf
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
I was thinking of joining but after seeing last nights interview I am not sure whether they represent me.
It appears that it was not a democratic statement of its members but a reiteration of a discussion with fans they bumped into at the match on Saturday.
Otis
Well-Known Member
I've just watched the programme and can see nowhere where it suggests the SBT want administration.
Think it was Jan who said that fans were prepared for it and that some would even welcome it, but I don't see how anyone can deduce from that interview, that that is the stance of the SBT. I really don't.
The way the interview was conducted was upon the basis that it is almost certain that we would be going into administration.
We have already passed the point now of will we won't we, it's in the hands of the High Court and unless anything happens out of the ordinary this week, then admin looks almost certain to happen.
This was the standpoint the interview was conducted from.
And there most certainly wasn't anything to suggest that all 4 interviewed were saying exactly the same thing.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
OK I've joined .............. Lets move forward
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Watch it again. These were our representatives with their big moment. They were fed up with it all and wanted a change. Which means ..................... administration to get SISU out.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Don't think I do need to see it again.
We all want change don't we? We have to change to move forwards, under whoever owns the club, including Sisu.
When Moz started talking I thought you might have had a point, but I don't believe the did all say the same thing and Jan was talking about the fans they had spoken to, not the SBT's standpoint.
We all want change don't we? We have to change to move forwards, under whoever owns the club, including Sisu.
When Moz started talking I thought you might have had a point, but I don't believe the did all say the same thing and Jan was talking about the fans they had spoken to, not the SBT's standpoint.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
The programme was at fault - not the trust here. They should have been reported as XYZ - Coventry City Supporter as opposed to XYZ Trust member etc and something they would not have had control of.
Naturally I disagreed with their view, but they are entitked to hold that opinion and it's getting the word out there into the public and any vehicle that can be used to highlight our plight in the media is a good thing.
It would have been nice to see a cross-section of opinion in the interest of balance to have seen both sides represented, but with such a limited sample of fans that is always likely to happen.
Naturally I disagreed with their view, but they are entitked to hold that opinion and it's getting the word out there into the public and any vehicle that can be used to highlight our plight in the media is a good thing.
It would have been nice to see a cross-section of opinion in the interest of balance to have seen both sides represented, but with such a limited sample of fans that is always likely to happen.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
"Actions speak louder than words!" - take this into consideration.
coundonskyblue
New Member
Basically then there is people on here who will only support a group designed to protect ccfc fans interest if all members have exactly the same personal opinions as them.
As far as I've seen the trust hasn't said anything about admin. Its members have only expressed a personal opinion (which I happen to agree with). Even a moron can distinguish between a personal opinion and an organisational policy.
As far as I've seen the trust hasn't said anything about admin. Its members have only expressed a personal opinion (which I happen to agree with). Even a moron can distinguish between a personal opinion and an organisational policy.