Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Scared shitless :jerkit:
Wonder what would happen if a group got together and threatened legal action against the FA or FL for letting a business take a club away from a community. Wonder if it would be possible to do?
Wonder what would happen if a group got together and threatened legal action against the FA or FL for letting a business take a club away from a community. Wonder if it would be possible to do?
They are concerned about the attendance figures,perhaps a total boycott would concern them. :thinking about:
Of course. They could then release a statement saying "it's a concern that no one is turned up at Sixfields, but we cannot interfere...", etc etc
'It's up to the Midland Alliance, who have strict rules in place on these matters, to administer this issue.'
For a minute there I thought you were taking about the Phoenix club...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I'd disagree with that. The FA has never publicly admitted that, frankly, it doesn't seem to care all that much about what's going on with CCFC.
Maybe the reaction they get from supporters to that statement could help sway that stance. Then again, it might not.
Either way I thought you deserved an answer to some of the many questions that remain unanswered by the football authorities. Unfortunately, this is all they are willing to say at this stage.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They could try telling them to stick to the contract/agreement they signed when they took control of the clubOur 'temporary' groundshare and Hulls proposed 'rebranding' are 2 completely different issues.
Still not sure what the fl or the fa were supposed to do, short of saying no groundshare and telling the club they have to pay whatever ACL want or no golden share.
They could try telling them to stick to the contract/agreement they signed when they took control of the club
What is the statement anyway?
Our 'temporary' groundshare and Hulls proposed 'rebranding' are 2 completely different issues.
Still not sure what the fl or the fa were supposed to do, short of saying no groundshare and telling the club they have to pay whatever ACL want or no golden share.
Had the League told the club that it was play in Coventry or face expulsion, they would very quickly have seen sense. They showed no qualms at all about interfering with Portsmouth's case to make sure that the previous owners, of which there were several, got no chance of regaining control.
The once that ceased to exist once ACL chose to liquidate CCFC Ltd....
Don't feed the troll
They didn't choose that. At the time from their perspective it was thought to be their best option as a business.
PUSB
That's all well and good but to do that would've given ACL carte blanche to charge what they want because the club have to agree it or be expelled...unless they also have the power to make ACL offer league one average rent.
(Yes I know they did in the end but that was mainly due to the threat of being able to leave, without that there would never have had to offer lower deals, it would be put up or go)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
ACL's final offers to the club weren't much higher than what we're paying at Northampton and arguably Northampton will have jacked up the price knowing we were apparently so desperate not to play in Coventry. It's a feeble excuse on the League's part when they have made big efforts for other sides.
The once that ceased to exist once ACL chose to liquidate CCFC Ltd....
The once that ceased to exist once ACL chose to liquidate CCFC Ltd....
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?