bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
So then, back to the point (and for the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting wrongdoing by *anybody*).
Say what you will, the Ricoh has *always* been tied up with urban regeneration for CCC, they've been entirely consistent in that. Indeed, to persuade the likes of Nellist to vote for the project, they had to make that even more explicit. The club, meanwhile, peddled the rhetoric that either the council backed this project, or the club died...
It's worth asking the question though, surely, why in effect a charity connected to a CCFC director in effect gave the club what was supposed to be a short term loan to provide some working capital. Even more surprising when not only loss-making football club struggles to meet their objectives as a charity if we decide they're all for the little children, and not propping up failing commercial enterprises... and the involvement with club/ACL has to be shoehorned a little to fit said objectives. It can be, but you'd raise an eyebrow, wouldn't you.
The option was always there of *not* providing said working capital, after all (would they have got involved with a different board?), and letting the directors at the time either find the cash needed themselves... or admit defeat, write off what owed, and see club (and half the stadium management company, at least) be on offer as one package.
As I said, not suggesting wrongdoing, but there are always, *always* many ways to see the same narrative. When it comes to Higgs however, it's always pure white knights, with noi challenge whatsoever.
it could be argued that in all this, only the council have been consistent, in fact, in seeing the football club as a sideline, and viewing the bigger project of urban regeneration as *their* main motivation.
In fairness to the Higgs, despite the rhetoric on here (of which even I have been guilty of), they are not solely a children's charity. They seem to see themselves as a charity that helps to regenerate parts of the city, and regardless of how things have worked out, I think their aim was always to do what is right for the city.
I would be more critical of CCC for decisions taken back in 2003 as from what I can see they were based on short term popularity. The myth is that a football ground had to be built to regenerate that area is something the council liked to promote at the time. I was told by a councillor at the time though that the regeneration would have gone ahead anyway.
Had the stadium not gone ahead, there were other proposals. One would have been the much rumoured snow dome, another was an extension of the shopping park to cover all the site, even a prison was on the proposals list. There were others as well that I cant remember now.