Otis
Well-Known Member
There is an awful lot of second guessing on here.
There are two simple questions.
1. Why do Sisu need the CVA to be signed if they are going to get ownership of the club anyway? Is it just about the -15 points? Or is there more to this than meets the eye?
2. Why would it be in ACL's interest not to sign the CVA? Is it just about an investigation?
Fact is, none of us know the real reasoning here, or the outcome of either scenario (signed or not signed).
It's all guesswork. Some saying that if we sign the CVA that means the end of the Ricoh for CCFC and some are saying not signing the CVA will mean the end of the Ricoh for CCFC.
Seems like none of us truly knows that will happen. Lots of second guessing though on the forums.
There are two simple questions.
1. Why do Sisu need the CVA to be signed if they are going to get ownership of the club anyway? Is it just about the -15 points? Or is there more to this than meets the eye?
2. Why would it be in ACL's interest not to sign the CVA? Is it just about an investigation?
Fact is, none of us know the real reasoning here, or the outcome of either scenario (signed or not signed).
It's all guesswork. Some saying that if we sign the CVA that means the end of the Ricoh for CCFC and some are saying not signing the CVA will mean the end of the Ricoh for CCFC.
Seems like none of us truly knows that will happen. Lots of second guessing though on the forums.
Last edited: