Boddy Update (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Covstu
- Start date
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="500px" width="500px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
If they had a leg to stand on thry would have put it in the statement imo
Yes, but Sixfields took a season and a bit before we came back and a lot of pressure on everyone from the marches etc. I would imagine talks didn't continue then straight away, happy to be proved wrong
cc84cov
Well-Known Member
Is that the best they’ve got ? Pathetic.
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
Generally NDAs that I’ve signed or had prepared exclude things that were public knowledge prior to the agreement. Mostly with regards to intellectual property but think if it’s similar it’s still really murky water.
Nick
Administrator
I'd say hammer all the pricks.
mr_monkey
Well-Known Member
There will be get outs as there were when we came back mid season from sixfields
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Technically, you’re right about the SISU promising to waive the NDA. It’s easy for them to say ‘sure, we’ll drop it’ - without considering other parties
What has peaked my interest is the comparative willingness for CCFC to lay all the ‘facts’ bare.
Wasps could’ve said ‘we’re willing to drop the NDA’ (like SISU did), then all pressure lies on the other parties. Wasps didn’t even go as far to say they had the evidence to back their claims up if it were not for the NDA. In my view, this suggests a lack of openness. Then again, it could be far less damaging to CCFC than Wasps.
This looks suspicious. Would you agree on that?
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="100px" width="78px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Someone has fucked with the Large Hadron Collider again.
Nick
Administrator
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="270px" width="480px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
Fucking hell - has global warming hit hell?
tisza
Well-Known Member
That's against Wasps though isn't it?
If the EU decision goes against CCC then that's where the legal action would surely be aimed? Can't see anywhere CCFC would have a case directly against Wasps anyway. If CCC "undersold" the Ricoh then it's up to them to get the correct money back from Wasps.
The other issue would be how bondholders ( who have lost money) would react to the possibility information behind the bond sale was not entirely correct.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I've got a standard one here, exception to the obligation of confidentiality where confidential info was, is, or comes into the public domain other than a result of an act or omission by the receiving party in violation of the NDA
AOM
Well-Known Member
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="53px" width="100px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
It doesn’t look great. There were many routes to progress that other than “it wasn’t this” and “that’s not important”, they could’ve been much clearer, hence my initial frustrated reply to the statement
But equally, I’m wary of how good Sisu are with dead cats. I wish Wasps would just come out and be clear about what they need and Sisu about what they find objectionable.
No one is being clear here at all. Everything raises more questions than it answers and it all feels very 2014.
Nick
Administrator
Dave Boddy was quite specific with this bit:
Wasps could have gone to town on that without having to actually say anything confidential.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Youve missed my point. The implication seems to be that the EFL deadline ended talks, but surely there was an EFL deadline in 2014 that passed as we started the season at Sixfields, before coming back to the Ricoh. So it’s not like the EFL deadline for CCFC to say where they’re playing precludes CCFC carrying on negotiations and the EFL letting is come homehalf way through the season.
Are we seriously saying if a deal was reached tomorrow the EFL wouldn’t allow it? Pull the other one.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Maybe you and I have different definitions of specific. Unless we know what the exact situation was last time (we don’t) or why there was a timer on the negotiations (we don’t), it’s just more bollocks mate.
I know you like him, and generally I have too, but Boddy has very much been channelling Joy the last few weeks. A lot less straight talking than he normally is when this topic comes up. Words very carefully chosen and not much given away.
Nick
Administrator
The deadline was when CCFC had to tell EFL where they planned to play next season.
Wasps pretended to be surprised by the announcement it was St Andrews, surely they would have known the deadline and that nothing had been signed and sealed at that point?
Boddy's comments about being "timed out" are telling, Wasps could have easily refuted them:
"We worked hard right up to the deadline to try and sort a deal before the EFL deadline."
Nick
Administrator
That's the thing, quite detailed and damning. Not too hard for Wasps to disprove either.
Maybe people at the club are getting pissed off? Tynan and Mike Reid were pissed off in the statement last year too.
jordan210
Well-Known Member
Has hell frozen over. He has a go at wasps a few times on bis feed
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
That’s a CCFC deadline, why is it a Wasps deadline?
Are you saying if we agreed a deal tomorrow we wouldn’t be allowed back by the EFL? That it’s not worth starting Negotiations for next season?
It’s a dead cat mate. It’s had the exact effect that was intended which is to get fans all excited about how mean Wasps are but it doesn’t make any sense or relevance. He doesn’t say Wasps were told they had to negotiate by then, just that they knew about the deadline. Doesn’t say we told them it was our deadline too.
As Insay, considering in 2014 Wasps and CCFC agreed after the season had started its hardly out of line to assume the EFL deadline doesn’t impact negotiations this time around.
To be clear, you could be right. But so could I. Both are accurate readings of the statement. Hence my frustration at lack of clarity. It’s needless and they don’t do this stuff off the cuff.
(Was it 2014? Was it Wasps then? Seems too long ago. Whoever it was at Sixfields)
Nick
Administrator
Because that is when CCFC needed to tell the EFL where they were going to be playing. It pretty much says exactly that they were trying to negotiate by the deadline and it was extended. That goes against Wasps saying they were trying their hardest for a deal, doesn't it?
Boddy literally names who him and the EFL sent written confirmation about the deadline to in writing, to say we didn't tell them is a bit silly?
Wasps didn't agree anything in 2014, that was when the council were building bridges on Trust.
It could well be that in a few weeks after the season a deal could have been done. We did end up compensating Northampton that time so maybe trying to avoid that and pissing BCFC about.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It reminds me of Fisher back in 2013. Initially people got on with him, a deal was agreed, hands were shook. Then Seppala started looking over his shoulder, we got misdirection, and a friendly handshake to say goodbye...
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
I think the deadline is being used to beat them more.
the club could easily have told the EFL - put us down at St Andrews and we’ll continue negotiating
it’s a bit of a non point in the story
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
I know nothing, other than if we were in serious negotiations, why walk away after having put in such time and effort, unless something had changed? Or maybe nothing changed, and we walked away from that. We will only know later down the line. If Tim Fisher had told me the turn of events, I wouldn't have believed a word, but Dave Boddy, I do believe (no rational reason, other than I like the latter). Obvious that we'd rather be back at The Ricoh, and would pay good money to know the truth. Fact is, Wasps do not have to want us back at The Ricoh, but if they do -- as you have said Shmmeee - be open about what the offer is.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
So why can’t we move back during a season like we promised to do last year and actually did in 2014?
Maybe CCFC wanted a deal done by then but clearly they didn’t *need* it, so why break off negotiations? Why not say “We’re still happy to negotiate”? See what I mean about both sides being vague?
Nick
Administrator
Not sure it is as simple as that as the EFL have been working out fixtures I think? That would have had to be worked around with BCFC too now they are in the same league. It also could end up with us pissing BCFC off by messing them about.
I think it's pretty obvious Wasps were asked to do the deal before the deadline so it could be done in time for the EFL. Wasps have hardly refuted any of that have they?
That's why I have asked Journos to ask Wasps directly if they knew about the deadline etc.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I know nothing either. Could equally ask why when we knew we weren’t willing to agree to Wasps demands did we start talking again? We can’t be saying Wasps fell for the same letter trick two years running.
That’s all I’m saying. For me I’m fairly happy I understand what Wasps are asking. I also understand why Sisu wouldn’t want to agree to it. I fail to understand why they were talking In the first place and why they stopped.