Put your name down m8 ; )
I’m not putting my name to it until we get real with the Trust’s involvement in this mess. It’s the reason why we were moved to action but now seemingly we’re tip-toeing around it.
Are people worried about threats ?
Statement on behalf of the Sky Blues Talk online forum.
Sky Blues Talk is a forum of 7500 members; it is the oldest and one of the largest online Coventry City Football Club (CCFC) fan communities. Xxxx members responded to a recent survey, with xx% confirming that they fully support this statement made on their behalf.
We, the representatives of Sky Blues Talk, would like to express our disappointment and frustration with all parties who have contributed to Coventry City playing its home games outside the city that bears its name.
We call upon Wasps RFC to drop any request that CCFC (or its owners) indemnify Wasps against potential or actual costs and losses incurred by them as a result of the State Aid case currently being considered by the European Commission. If the European Commission decides that the sale of the Ricoh Arena to Wasps contravenes State Aid regulations, then this will have been through no fault of CCFC; if CCFC were to agree to indemnify Wasps, the size of any likely financial settlement would in all likelihood bankrupt the club we all love so much.
Equally, we call upon Sisu as owners of CCFC to recommit to halting all legal action surrounding the sale of the Ricoh Arena, as it did prior to last year’s talks regarding playing home games at the Ricoh Arena for the 2019-2020 season. Any continued legal action by Sisu is a roadblock to repairing the relationships required to find CCFC a home in Coventry, either temporarily at the Ricoh Arena or if necessary, in any new stadium (which will obviously require support of the city).
We are very disappointed in the recent press release (dated 15th January 2020) from the Sky Blue Trust. The bewildering absence of any mention of the request by Wasps for financial indemnity by CCFC leaves many members of our community wondering if the Sky Blue Trust can legitimately claim to represent CCFC supporters’ interests in an unbiased manner.
We need to be back playing our home games in Coventry. Staying away is playing Russian roulette with our future and our existence
We acknowledge that our fans have different opinions on whether to travel to St Andrews this season and we hold no grudge against any fan attending or not attending. It is a personal choice for every individual.
We would like to praise Mark Robins and the CCFC squad for continuing the hard job of rebuilding the playing side of the club and turning us into an attractive winning team deserving of a far wider match day audience than has yet been seen in Birmingham.
Finally, we plead with all elements of the media to actively pursue a resolution to the current impasse, and to help facilitate a move back to Coventry without delay.
PUSB
Sky Blue Pete on behalf of the Sky Blues Talk Community
Following the survey the first paragraph will be populated with the figures so please encourage as many posters to vote in the next 5 days
I clicked the wrong radio button by accident so you can take 1 vote off the “not in my name” and it to the other one.
What sort of numbers are we hoping for in order for this to be seen as credible?
It’s a fantastic idea and using this forum as a mouthpiece for fans is something we’ve discussed before, so I’m glad it’s coming to fruition with this exercise.
It’s key we get good numbers though, else it’ll be too easily swatted away by the Trust, CET, CCC etc.
Anyone help, please?What statement have the SBTrust put out on the 15th Jan, I've missed the article!?
A link would be great, cheers!
Anyone help, please?
Same hereDon’t post often but read everyday, I’m 100% behind this statement and applaud those who’ve done this of their own backs CTID PUSB
It has oneI voted for it, however I'm with Usskyblue. It could do with a paragraph on the trust. They obviously don't represent the views of the majority of the fan base, and this is the perfect opportunity to let the media know that.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
220 - 3 as close to unanimous as it can be. I will tweak certain parts but not fundamentally. Publish and sharing is being targeted for next Tuesday or so. Need to work out what next and how we can be professional respectful and have a legitimate voice after to seek some common ground to move us forward213 to 4 as it stands.
Now 214 to 4 (98.1% to 1.9%)213 to 4 as it stands.
Yeah I PM'd Pete before it went up and suggested making usernames visible in case Orca and the rest all signed up just to skew the results so we could see fi they were new users etc. Ah well, can't restart it now or we'll lose what we already have.
Yep I agree which is why I didn’t do it and hoped loads of people wouldn’t jump on just to make it skewed. Really pleased how it’s going. Would love 500 to vote with about the same percentagesWhilst how I vote, and indeed whether I choose to or not, is up to me, why would you try and make something representative of all and then try and make it difficult for people to share their view without being shouted down? How would people expressing their personal opinion 'skew' the result? It's almost as if you're trying to force a view onto people, much like many on here accuse others of doing?
As it turns out, I'm in favour of the statement and I'm largely in agreement of everything within it. Fair play Pete - gets my vote.
PS. I'd take issue with this site being the 'oldest online community', but I'll let that slide
Probably thinking next steps each time. And limiting the length. But it’s not a bad shoutGreat work Pete.
Any reason why we should not be calling on the council to demonstrate how they are helping the Club get back to the city by helping them find suitable sites for a new stadium ?
PS. I'd take issue with this site being the 'oldest online community', but I'll let that slide
Probably thinking next steps each time. And limiting the length. But it’s not a bad shout
I miss neo from 606:angelic:It must be the oldest active online community though, of note anyway. It predates the social media pages and outlasted GMK et al, unless I've missed one.
606 was a decent forum.I miss neo from 606:angelic:
It must be the oldest active online community though, of note anyway. It predates the social media pages and outlasted GMK et al, unless I've missed one.
Don’t post often but read everyday, I’m 100% behind this statement and applaud those who’ve done this of their own backs CTID PUSB
It must be the oldest active online community though, of note anyway. It predates the social media pages and outlasted GMK et al, unless I've missed one.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?