today (37 Viewers)

[torchomatic]

WTF?! I think the horse has already bolted. You were saying that if ZERO fans turned up then the FL would force SISU to find an alternative. It doesn't say that anywhere.

You will need to wait for TF autobiography if you want facts.

FL Rules

13.4 Ground sharing will only be approved at the discretion of the Board. The Board will not generally approve any ground-sharing arrangement where the club plays its matches outside the conurbation, as defined by the Board, from which the Club takes its name or with which it is otherwise traditionally associated.
13.5 Except in cases where a Club seeks consent to enter into a ground-sharing agreement with another Club, it shall be a condition of any such consent that the ground-sharing agreement shall contain provision to ensure that:

13.5.1 the playing of any of the Club's first team matches will always take precedence over the activities of the other party to the agreement; and

13.5.2 the Club shall have the ability to postpone other activities scheduled to take place on the pitch in the immediately preceding 48 hour period where in the opinion of the Club, acting reasonably, there is a risk that such activity may result in the subsequent postponement or abandonment of a match to be played under the auspices of the League.

13.6 Each Club shall register its ground with the Executive and no Club shall remove to another ground without first obtaining the written consent of the Board, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld.

13.7 In considering whether to give any such consent, the Board shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case and shall not grant consent unless it is reasonably satisfied that such consent:

13.7.1 would be consistent with the objects of The League as set out in the Memorandum of Association;

13.7.2 would be appropriate having in mind the relationship (if any) between the locality with which by its name or otherwise the applicant Club is traditionally associated and that in which such Club proposes to establish its ground;

13.7.3 would not adversely affect such Club's Officials, players, supporters, shareholders, sponsors and others having an interest in its activities;

13.7.4 would not have an adverse effect on visiting Clubs;

13.7.5 would not adversely affect Clubs having their registered grounds in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location; and

13.7.6 would enhance the reputation of The League and promote the game of association football generally.

13.8 The Club must disclose, as soon as practicable, plans and details of any proposed future move to a new stadium.

13.9 Subject to any dispensations granted by the Board, a Club shall either own its ground or have a legally enforceable agreement with its ground's owner for its use by the Club, expiring not earlier than the end of the current Season.

 

---

[Spionkop]

Keep digging your hole.

 

[italiahorse]

WTF?! I think the horse has already bolted. You were saying that if ZERO fans turned up then the FL would force SISU to find an alternative. It doesn't say that anywhere.

Italia horse has not bolted.

13.4 is already breached.
13.7.3. would be proven for fans, if none attended, sponsors ?, others like businesses around the Ricoh ..................

 

[torchomatic]

Italia horse has not bolted.

13.4 is already breached. And what did the FL do about it?
13.7.3. would be proven for fans, if none attended, sponsors ?, others like businesses around the Ricoh .................. Wouldn't happen, wouldn't work. The Football League will NEVER EVER EVER step in and try and end this farce. EVER EVER EVER.

 

[stupot07]

Italia horse has not bolted.

13.4 is already breached.
13.7.3. would be proven for fans, if none attended, sponsors ?, others like businesses around the Ricoh ..................

How is 13.4 already breached? It's says that the FL do not generally approve groundshares outside a conurbation. It also says that the it up to the discretion of the FL board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[italiahorse]

Whether they would is different to whether they should.

 

[italiahorse]

WTF?! I think the horse has already bolted. You were saying that if ZERO fans turned up then the FL would force SISU to find an alternative. It doesn't say that anywhere.

Its interpretation. If you want it too read "Sisu must never take us to Northampton" then you need to get a job at the FL.

I did say earlier that SISU were stretching the rules, its up to us to persuade the FL that they have gone too far. Zero attendance would help.

 

[torchomatic]

The 'Sixfields Few' have as much influence as you. Zero. It's up to ACL & SISU. Pure and simple.

The Sixfields few could try it. They keep telling us they want City back in Coventry. But we don't see any moves from them to bring that about.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Deleted member 5849]

It's just as valid an argument that those going are keeping the club alive long enough to come back to Coventry.

So if we come back to COventry, and if the club's foundations are improved as a result of that, than those who go are the true heroes in all this.

Or we can just live and let live, without the moronic sniping from either side, and actually recognise whenever and however the club ends up back in Coventry, it's got a better chance of success if as many of us want to turn up to watch them.

Rather than being put off because they don't want to sit next to a scab apologist scab shouty moron who beats Marlon King at lunchtimes before stealing a motor to go searching for instant success in the form of a newmarket scheme.

 

[James Smith]

How is 13.4 already breached? It's says that the FL do not generally approve groundshares outside a conurbation. It also says that the it up to the discretion of the FL board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I thought most things were up to the discretion of the FL board, which then covers their asses against almost everything?

 

[James Smith]

The 'Sixfields Few' have as much influence as you. Zero. It's up to ACL & SISU. Pure and simple.



Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

From reading the words of Joy (and that sounds so wrong) in the Les Reid interview it's up to Coventry Council and SISU, with ACL making an appearance in the discussions.

 

[italiahorse]

How is 13.4 already breached? It's says that the FL do not generally approve groundshares outside a conurbation. It also says that the it up to the discretion of the FL board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

So the next step is too understand why they have let this case happen and challenge it.
For example. If they think that fans are reasonable in favour of this groundshare (which 2000 are) then it can continue. If no fans go we can then challenge them that this situation is unacceptable.

 

[torchomatic]

And what "discretion" or leadership have they shown so far? The fixture list is king. Nothing else matters.

I thought most things were up to the discretion of the FL board, which then covers their asses against almost everything?

 

[torchomatic]

Emotive claptrap. No one is in favour of us playing at Sixfields.

It's not just SISU who are a dab hand at splitting the fan base. You're an expert at it too.

For example. If they think that fans are reasonable in favour of this groundshare (which 2000 are) then it can continue. If no fans go we can then challenge them that this situation is unacceptable.

 

[Nick]

It is amazing how people can get so much information out of so little information.

So literally by walking into Sixfields people can automatically know your thoughts, opinions, situation etc. Must be magic!

How can so much be stated as fact when it clearly isn't? I am pretty sure if it was 100% fact that if nobody went to Sixfields then we would be back at the Ricoh the next week then not many people will go.

 

[torchomatic]

Yeah, you're right. I always get confused about CCC and ACL and they are obviously nothing to do with each other...but yeah, I meant CCC.

From reading the words of Joy (and that sounds so wrong) in the Les Reid interview it's up to Coventry Council and SISU, with ACL making an appearance in the discussions.

 

[James Smith]

And what "discretion" or leadership have they shown so far? The fixture list is king. Nothing else matters.

I thought they had used that discretion to bend over forwards to help SISU which in turn allows them to compile the fixtures list.

 

[ajsccfc]

If they think that fans are reasonable in favour of this groundshare (which 2000 are)

Again, no. If attendance merely indicates approval, there were a hell of a lot of confused Sisu fans last season.

 

[James Smith]

Yeah, you're right. I always get confused about CCC and ACL and they are obviously nothing to do with each other...but yeah, I meant CCC.

No worries if journalists can make mistakes like that us mere mortals can too.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Again, no. If attendance merely indicates approval, there were a hell of a lot of confused Sisu fans last season.

Think of all those who positively endorsed woman beating too!

 

[Grendel]

Its interpretation. If you want it too read "Sisu must never take us to Northampton" then you need to get a job at the FL.

I did say earlier that SISU were stretching the rules, its up to us to persuade the FL that they have gone too far. Zero attendance would help.

As usual you live in a fantasy world.

The fact is legally the club is owned by a new limited company and is homeless as it cannot do a deal with the landlord the prior company played at.

The league cannot and should not decide what is a fair rent for any club. This is a private matter and I suspect it would be illegal for the league to insist that the rent is fair.

So it has zero to do with attendances. It won't act and it can't act.

 

[italiahorse]

As usual you live in a fantasy world.

The fact is legally the club is owned by a new limited company and is homeless as it cannot do a deal with the landlord the prior company played at.

The league cannot and should not decide what is a fair rent for any club. This is a private matter and I suspect it would be illegal for the league to insist that the rent is fair.

So it has zero to do with attendances. It won't act and it can't act.

Mark my words. Things will change as a result of our experiences.
You are not stupid enough to think that this is anything other than a hedge fund stressing a business in the hope of gaining it.

Similar to Leicester administration changed the rules for all that follow on.
Unfortunately in our case CCC/ACL may need to play Sisu at their game and if they do not have a plan for a new stadium SISU will liquidate us.

So the predictions I want to put in your bedroom database are 'ACL say lease or nothing' 'SISU have no plans for a stadium' 'SISU liquidate CCFC'

 

[italiahorse]

Again, no. If attendance merely indicates approval, there were a hell of a lot of confused Sisu fans last season.

So 2000 fans are not reasonable in favour of the ground share ?
They are be because they just want to watch their team. They certainly are not strongly against it like 90% of fans !!

 

[ajsccfc]

So is this the point where you're taking the whole meaningless and ridiculous statement gimmick and running with it, or does logic just seem like a dirty word in your world?

 

[Nick]

So 2000 fans are not reasonable in favour of the ground share ?
They are be because they just want to watch their team. They certainly are not strongly against it like 90% of fans !!

What are you on about? So if you go into Sixfields it means you automatically approve?

Nothing like trying to create an argument is there, it is almost as if you and BHSB and LAST like to go fishing...

 

[torchomatic]

What are you on about? So if you go into Sixfields it means you automatically approve?

Nothing like trying to create an argument is there, it is almost as if you and BHSB and LAST like to go fishing...

Presumably everyone who attended the Ricoh, including Mr Italia, approved of Sisu? Seems how his twisted logic works.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[bigfatronssba]

Presumably everyone who attended the Ricoh, including Mr Italia, approved of Sisu? Seems how his twisted logic works.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

No they approved of playing in Coventry.

 

[torchomatic]

No they approved of playing in Coventry.

And sisu. They brought tickets, merchandise.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[bigfatronssba]

And sisu. They brought tickets, merchandise.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

For most of us there is a line that cant be crossed.

 

[italiahorse]

I had no problem with SISU until they moved us out of Coventry. I understood the reasons for reducing costs. All owners will get slated if the team are performing badly it's how the fans vent there frustrations. SISU saved us from administration after all when it appeared no one was interested. But they have now switched into bully business mode and it has no respect for fans.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

when it appeared no one was interested.

There were others interested.

Oh, and bully business mode was there from the very start, both in their other projects, their 'clock is ticking' and their threats about what would happen if people didn't hand over their shares.

But that's so yesterday, it'd be a bit ridiculous to hold a body of fans culpable for the actions of the owners after all, whatever their views on the situation...

 

[italiahorse]

There were others interested.

Oh, and bully business mode was there from the very start, both in their other projects, their 'clock is ticking' and their threats about what would happen if people didn't hand over their shares.

But that's so yesterday, it'd be a bit ridiculous to hold a body of fans culpable for the actions of the owners after all, whatever their views on the situation...

The shares were worth nothing so don't make out they were.
Joe Elliott did the right thing at the time.

 

[italiahorse]

The shares were worth nothing so don't make out they were.
Joe Elliott did the right thing at the time.

There were no other interested parties at the time. Quote them ?

 

[torchomatic]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/coventry_city/7033426.stm

There were no other interested parties at the time. Quote them ?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

There were no other interested parties at the time. Quote them ?

Not entirely sure how often I have to pop such things up before they get attention!

City council leader Ken Taylor revealed that two other "derisory" bids had been received from two other firms.

One, called Sisu, had offered £15million.

The other was from a firm called Shapiro, which offered £26million but wanted the club to pay off its debts and the city council to give it a longer lease on the Ricoh Arena and some spare land to the north of the site.

Guess it doesn't fit a world view though.

The same as Haskell was sought to be positioned as the sole alternative, so SISU positioned themselves as the only alternative.

There are always alternatives.

And who said the shares had a monetary value?!? The whole point was they were an avenue to question what the club was doing, as opposed to it becoming closed and secretive...

And SISU bullied people into handing that connection with the club over.