Dear Sky Blue Trust (2 Viewers)

shmmeee · Jul 18, 2014

Hmmm.

Trust caught between pleasing everyone and following the views of their majority I'd guess.

I don't really agree with your point NW, and I doubt the majority would to be honest.

Most people want a boycott, that is their position. Most people don't like the owners, that is their position.

If you insist on appeasement when your members are against it, are you a democratic organisation or an irrelevance?

Not that I think the motion will pass, the SBT are far too scared of actually putting out a position. The club saw to that early doors, neutered them good and proper (with the help of a few on here).

sky blue john · Jul 18, 2014

Grendel said:
As long there are no protests against the people going in.

Agreed but you would have to think for that game people would show common sense and not go in ?

Samo · Jul 18, 2014

sky blue john said:
Did I abuse you ?
I'm surprised you used the word thick but because I am with the 90% of ccfc fans that can see what Sisu are doing to our club!!
If you think its cool to follow the likes of others and don't have an opinion that doesn't involve calling people names, that is very sad.

John, I only used those words because I'd said it before and Nick quite rightly deleted it, just messing really. You do invite it though. Just so we understand each other; I despise SISU. I just don't believe its their fault when it rains like most on here.

Grendel · Jul 18, 2014

Spionkop said:
Buster, you'll get opposition to your idea because the Sixfield few don't want their game of football spoiled.
The boycott is definitely working. Pathetic crowds. Why else would Sisu be desperately sending out low budget deals every few days to the people on their database? It's hurting them. Sure, they've got deep pockets, but money is everything to them, they want to make it, not lose it.
And a ground empty of City fans will send a massive message to the football world. Media, FL, FA, fans around the country.
Look at Coventry, they got a crowd of just 297 Stevenage fans for their game. They'd wonder what was going on. They'd say - Coventry fans really don't want their team playing in Northampton. As it is, we've got some holding that up. It's their selfish choice of course. But in mine, and many other City supporter views, it is deeply wrong.
But no, let's not spoil the afternoon for the Sixfielders. Why should they worry about their club.
Nobody is 'turning on the Sixfielders' but we are expressing our view that we think they are wrong.

You say no one is turning on sixfielders but your whole twisted post is a dig at those who attend.

The giving away tickets thing happened just as much at the Ricoh before sisu - reminder average actual price was £10 - less than half the face value ticket price.

Oh and the football world wouldn't give a flying fuck if less than 300 people went to a game - as I wouldn't of the same happened at Preston.

Moff · Jul 18, 2014

sky blue john said:
Is it only me that can see the same people turning on Micheal and the trust rather than confront the real culprits of this mess ??

Thats amazing John, as I havent turned on Michael or the Trust (it would help if you actually read my posts rather than just making shit up), I have only turned on you, re what you have posted on this thread, which in my humble opinion is divisive.

Otis · Jul 18, 2014

Buster said:
Do any of you lot think that if sisu where getting 7000 gates at sixfields ,they would even think about coming back to the Ricoh ? No, of course not . Therefore the boycott of sixfields is working . If it was an almost total boycott Sisu would be under more pressure to return . Its not rocket science. But no, you carry on watching home games While my son and i continue to travel away .

My view has always been that if we all went and followed the team at Sixfields we would be much more likely to stay there for a lot longer and any return to Coventry in the near future would be unlikely.

I think Sisu have been clinging to the fact that if the club did really, really well on the pitch fans would return. We wouldn't all return for sure, but I dare say if we were top of the league, playing really good football and winning every week, it wouldn't be too far off the 7,000. Fans can be fickle and a winning team can cause the morals of some people to go straight out the window. I think some fans stance would indeed wane.

While hardly anyone attends it puts pressure on Sisu to return to Coventry. I would like everyone to not go at all, but of course I don't think that would ever happen and there will always be some who will go.

I do also agree, we shouldn't give anyone who does go grief for doing so. Yes, we should debate it and try and reason with people, but at the end of the day it is their own personal choice.

Personally I don't see anything wrong in the SBT asking fans to not attend. It's only a declaration of feeling and not a complusory command.

sky blue john · Jul 18, 2014

Moff said:
Thats amazing John, as I havent turned on Michael or the Trust (it would help if you actually read my posts rather than just making shit up), I have only turned on you, re what you have posted on this thread, which in my humble opinion is divisive.

Did I attach this comment to one of your posts ?

oldskyblue58 · Jul 18, 2014

excellent post NW !

torchomatic · Jul 18, 2014

Contradiction alert! Contradiction alert!

A bloke from New England once said. We don't go to Sixfields because it's easy, we go to Sixfields because it's hard.

Spionkop said:
But no, let's not spoil the afternoon for the Sixfielders. Why should they worry about their club.

Nobody is 'turning on the Sixfielders' but we are expressing our view that we think they are wrong.

Buster · Jul 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
I have been particularly pleased with your efforts over the past year, an element of professionalism has come into your operations, the desire to question anybody such as the excellent Q&A on your site shows your awareness of the need for answers, and although sometimes an attempt to adopt a neutral stance sees you maybe shy a little over-much away from asking the difficult questions in public to any side, the march in July was an excellently organised show of strength by the Sky Blue Army. It showed we mattered, it showed we exist.

And this positivity is surely something to build on. This shows that the Sky Blue Army can unite together, and be a passionate force for good. It shows that doing works better than any other approach to drawing attention towards our plight.

So it is with concern that I read of the motion, part of which calls for a total boycott of Sixfields. I understand the desire and sentiment to punish our owners, but I have also seen the most effective ways of publicising our existence have been approaches other than this. What concerns me more however is the sheer impracticality of expecting 100% compliance; if there is a point to be made with low attendances, it has been made. Worse, the desire to make non attendance 100% serves to deflect attention from our plight. Time that should be spent rightly calling to account the protagonists in this farce, be it SISU, ACL, CCC or the Football League, is instead spent turning on fellow fans. This happens as it is, we do not need a mandate, even if unwitting, from the leading supporters' body. What does this serve? And more, who does it serve? Not us, as we need every man, boy and child behind us when we do return to the city (and it will happen, in some form). Whatever others do, we can fight to keep ourselves together whatever our differences.

The beauty of coming from Coventry is it is a cosmopolitan city. We welcome all, we are tolerant of all, and we allow cultures to flourish. We need to show tolerance of others’ views, and we need to focus on events that can bring us together, not split us apart. Please think before voting on this resolution what the consequences may be for our own fanbase, for if anybody is to blame it is not us. Remember, we are all victims in this, do not make this worse by punishing ourselves.

Much respect to the people that have liked this post and dont go to sixfields .

covcity4life · Jul 18, 2014

much respect to you buster, much respect to you!

Travs · Jul 18, 2014

Spionkop said:
Buster, you'll get opposition to your idea because the Sixfield few don't want their game of football spoiled.
The boycott is definitely working. Pathetic crowds. Why else would Sisu be desperately sending out low budget deals every few days to the people on their database? It's hurting them. Sure, they've got deep pockets, but money is everything to them, they want to make it, not lose it.
And a ground empty of City fans will send a massive message to the football world. Media, FL, FA, fans around the country.
Look at Coventry, they got a crowd of just 297 Stevenage fans for their game. They'd wonder what was going on. They'd say - Coventry fans really don't want their team playing in Northampton. As it is, we've got some holding that up. It's their selfish choice of course. But in mine, and many other City supporter views, it is deeply wrong.
But no, let's not spoil the afternoon for the Sixfielders. Why should they worry about their club.
Nobody is 'turning on the Sixfielders' but we are expressing our view that we think they are wrong.

You said it yourself "in your view"

People who attend sixfields do so for a variety of reasons. maybe just maybe some of them don't necessarily think that the club owners give a hoot whether we are there or not.

Go on all you want about your total boycott/NOPM/etc, but that went flying out the window as soon as we got Arsenal in the cup. As someone said on this thread, morals quickly change when there is a bit of success in the air.....

Hobo · Jul 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
I have been particularly pleased with your efforts over the past year, an element of professionalism has come into your operations, the desire to question anybody such as the excellent Q&A on your site shows your awareness of the need for answers, and although sometimes an attempt to adopt a neutral stance sees you maybe shy a little over-much away from asking the difficult questions in public to any side, the march in July was an excellently organised show of strength by the Sky Blue Army. It showed we mattered, it showed we exist.

And this positivity is surely something to build on. This shows that the Sky Blue Army can unite together, and be a passionate force for good. It shows that doing works better than any other approach to drawing attention towards our plight.

So it is with concern that I read of the motion, part of which calls for a total boycott of Sixfields. I understand the desire and sentiment to punish our owners, but I have also seen the most effective ways of publicising our existence have been approaches other than this. What concerns me more however is the sheer impracticality of expecting 100% compliance; if there is a point to be made with low attendances, it has been made. Worse, the desire to make non attendance 100% serves to deflect attention from our plight. Time that should be spent rightly calling to account the protagonists in this farce, be it SISU, ACL, CCC or the Football League, is instead spent turning on fellow fans. This happens as it is, we do not need a mandate, even if unwitting, from the leading supporters' body. What does this serve? And more, who does it serve? Not us, as we need every man, boy and child behind us when we do return to the city (and it will happen, in some form). Whatever others do, we can fight to keep ourselves together whatever our differences.

The beauty of coming from Coventry is it is a cosmopolitan city. We welcome all, we are tolerant of all, and we allow cultures to flourish. We need to show tolerance of others’ views, and we need to focus on events that can bring us together, not split us apart. Please think before voting on this resolution what the consequences may be for our own fanbase, for if anybody is to blame it is not us. Remember, we are all victims in this, do not make this worse by punishing ourselves.

This is a good post.

Yes we do need tolerance of others and let's face it you will never get 100% backing around a group or campaign. People are getting too hung up on that.

The one thing that units us is supporting Coventry City Football Club.

The second one I think is fairly safe is Coventry should be playing in the City of Coventry.

That should be the base of our campaign nothing more nothing less.

I tend to agree with Otis, the more people that pay to go into Sixfields the longer we are likely to stay there. However I don't believe in vilifying those that do or abusing them, There will be all sorts of reasons for their decision and because I also believe in freedom of choice and speech.

We need to be more visual in our protests at Northampton even if it is one concerted effort for one game with people outside and inside working together and respecting each other...As Coventry City fans and with a desire to see the a Sky Blues back in there home town.

If we as fans can't negotiate around that then don't complain about SISU and ACL not getting a deal sorted out.

mark82 · Jul 18, 2014

Good to see the majority on here are sensible. I have boycotted since we moved to Northampton as it is what feels right for me, however, I would never tell anyone else what they should be doing. Everyone is entitled to do what is right for them.

What this thread does do is show up those that are truly divisive on this forum.

covcity4life · Jul 18, 2014

mark82 said:
Good to see the majority on here are sensible. I have boycotted since we moved to Northampton as it is what feels right for me, however, I would never tell anyone else what they should be doing. Everyone is entitled to do what is right for them.

What this thread does do is show up those that are truly divisive on this forum.

and those that have prolonged our stay away from home.

oldskyblue58 · Jul 18, 2014

Resolution 2 proposed by Bruce Walker
The Trust can no longer sit on the fence while our Club is being destroyed. The Trust must represent and give voice to its members, and in particular must:
1. Call for a complete supporters' boycott of City matches at Sixfields.
2. Increase pressure on the Football League to bring about a return of the Club to the Ricoh Arena from the start of the 2014/15 season, by using their powers to encourage the Club and its owners to enter into negotiations with Coventry City Council, ACL and other interested parties who could facilitate such a return, and to ensure that any proposed return is approved by the League as quickly as possible.
3. Take over the www.FixFootball.co.uk petition and use the Trust's fighting fund, other resources and links with Supporters Direct and other fan groups to promote it.
4. Start a campaign of contacting known or suspected SISU investors, drawing their attention to the current position

Everyone entitled to their opinion and I accept the rights to that and to propose such motions

So the assumption is that there has never been any straight talking aimed at SISU in particular or any of the other participants in this farce then. If the Trust was so acquiescent why was there a threat of legal action, the owners refusing to talk, threats to remove from the SCG, etc. Motions are easy at an AGM but what comes next is what matters. How are they followed through and by who - the people who proposed it perhaps? or is it the Trust Board to do that - what if they disagree with it?

1) call for a complete boycott - just how exactly are the Trust in a position to stop people going if they so choose? (I fundamentally object to stopping freedom of choice in any case but that's another discussion) So without some form of enforcement this is just more words. Any sort of enforcement is likely to be confrontational and leave those involved (including the Trust Board) at risk of prosecution. Not to mention how it splits further our fan base. What is the expected result from this because like it or not CCFC do not rely on the match receipts - they made this years budget out of selling Wilson & Christie. Do more empty words really help?

2) so the assumption is that the Trust have not been putting pressure on the FL then? The FL if they are so minded can encourage certainly but they cannot force or impose a solution on ACL or SISU. If SISU wanted back then what steps have they taken to do so? The FL will not force a member to accept a deal that the member feels it can not afford. The FL has no real relationship or power over ACL. Do we think the Trust has never raised these issues before? Do the FL really want to talk to the Trust or do they fob them off repeatedly?

3) the petition. Sorry to be harsh but it is a dead duck. It stands at 19,148 in six months. It doesn't close till next January - do we want to wait that long?

4) So who are these investors to be contacted - any one got a client list? Do you really think the Trust hasn't tried to find out in the past? Do you think those investors really care about a small part of a huge investment portfolio that is at least now paying them interest?

So we have basically a campaign of more words but instead of any sort of balance purely directed in one direction. The effect of this would be? If SISU were really bothered about what the fans think they would have changed tack a long time ago. People need to strip away the emotion to deal with SISU - there is no emotion for them it is the numbers in a long term plan with a set objective that counts. CCFC is just a tool

Right now I think the emotions of the situation are being used and fed by SISU to build up a head of steam that they hope will be directed at ACL and CCC to fall over and do any deal to settle the saga. Ask yourself has there been any approach - then ask why. It comes back to CCFC will come back when SISU are good and ready - it wont be because of fans pressure on them it will be because they have exhausted all their options financially and legally

But hey it will all be the fault of the Trust who sit round doing nothing and are totally clueless as to what is going on - :sarcasm: The reality is they(the Trust Board) know and understand far better than most what is going on and because of that carry more frustration on the process than most can imagine. Knee jerk shouty reactions might make some feel better but are likely to achieve nothing.

Nothing achieved by the Trust by being balanced is the cry - really? The March x 2 wasn't an achievement? the Q&A's wasn't an achievement? The freedom of information on the mystery site? The information gained and given to fans and members wasn't an achievement? Actually having regular access to all parties wasn't an achievement? ........... Information is key in this it allows the lies to be exposed. Yes the Trust have made mistakes, you tell me who hasn't but they have achieved more than some realise and fans know a lot more because of that.

Frankly I can see the Trust returning to what it was 3 years ago and being cut off from the club - the very thing its constitution is at pains to point out it should have a relationship with

The art of a good campaign is to know the opposition, set realistic targets, apply effective pressure, keep it focussed and inclusive. Not just throw the kitchen sink at it

frustrations vented Sorry if that upsets some but just my opinion

LB87ccfc · Jul 18, 2014

Nothing achieved by the Trust by being balanced is the cry - really? The March x 2 wasn't an achievement? the Q&A's wasn't an achievement? The information gained and given to fans and members wasn't an achievement? Actually having regular access to all parties wasn't an achievement? ........... Information is key in this it allows the lies to be exposed. Yes the Trust have made mistakes, you tell me who hasn't but they have achieved more than some realise and fans know a lot more because of that.

Frankly I can see the Trust returning to what it was 3 years ago and being cut off from the club - the very thing its constitution is at pains to point it should have a relationship with

The art of a good campaign is to know the opposition, set realistic targets, apply effective pressure, keep it focussed and inclusive. Not just throw the kitchen sink at it

frustrations vented

Sorry if that upsets some but just my opinion

Marches... in the wrong place, never bothered to take it to SISU or FL who are the ones it needs to be directed at not walking through the City Centre infront of no one = Embarrassing.

Information - Information we can easily gain on a forum or a newspaper.

Same trust who have tried to get places on the board with SISU.

Sat on the fence too many times being soft tarts.

Yep really changed alot haven't they.

Absolute Joke and to think some donated even a quid.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 18, 2014

The OP would hold if the SBT had made an explicit instruction to its members to boycott. It has done no such thing as of yet and it's highly unlikely that the resolution will be carried. The London Supporters Club, rightly or wrongly, called on its members to boycott and the chairman resigned in protest. We have already seen the SBT splinter up to avoid being seen as too one-sided and the impression I get is that they have learned from it. While NW's sentiments are entirely in the right place I think he has jumped the gun a bit on this one.

oldskyblue58 · Jul 18, 2014

LB87ccfc said:
Nothing achieved by the Trust by being balanced is the cry - really? The March x 2 wasn't an achievement? the Q&A's wasn't an achievement? The information gained and given to fans and members wasn't an achievement? Actually having regular access to all parties wasn't an achievement? ........... Information is key in this it allows the lies to be exposed. Yes the Trust have made mistakes, you tell me who hasn't but they have achieved more than some realise and fans know a lot more because of that.

Frankly I can see the Trust returning to what it was 3 years ago and being cut off from the club - the very thing its constitution is at pains to point it should have a relationship with

The art of a good campaign is to know the opposition, set realistic targets, apply effective pressure, keep it focussed and inclusive. Not just throw the kitchen sink at it

frustrations vented Sorry if that upsets some but just my opinion

Marches... in the wrong place, never bothered to take it to SISU or FL who are the ones it needs to be directed at not walking through the City Centre infront of no one = Embarrassing.

Information - Information we can easily gain on a forum or a newspaper.

Same trust who have tried to get places on the board with SISU.

Sat on the fence too many times being soft tarts.

Yep really changed alot haven't they.

Absolute Joke and to think some donated even a quid.

and what are you going to do to change any of it?

Spionkop · Jul 18, 2014

Let's see - 'Torchomatic' - doesn't like opinions - so comes out with sarky 'Chubby Checker' comments. Seems a shade 'divisive' to me. One of a string of them to various posters from Mr. Torch.
Expressing a view (somehow NOPM was brought into the talk - I certainly haven't mentioned it.)
There is no 'divisive' from people, a few more than me I might add - they're expressing an opinion.
But the Sixfielders are trying to deflect the attention away from themselves, by targeting any voice that expresses the view that going to Sixfields is wrong. And, is actually playing a part in prolonging our stay there.
Nobody is being 'vilified' - some of us are simply saying we think it is wrong to attend at Sixfields. Simply that. Shout that down, and you shout down any view but your own. You - the Sixfielders - have your view - some others of us (the vast majority I suspect) have our view.
As long as those views are expressed in a constructive manner, without abusive language, it is perfectly valid.
These things need saying, the future of our club is at stake. Far more than the pleasure of an afternoon watching 'the lads.'
In going along to Sixfields, you go along with Sisu. The destroyers of our club.

Buster · Jul 18, 2014

Sorry OSB 58 ,whilst i agree with most ,and like to read your informative posts, I see a contradiction in your enthusiasm to "apply effective pressure " and the constant berating of anyone with an idea or protest, by a few on this site. Ithink you said once ( appologies if i have it wrong) that people need to get off their arses instead of ranting . Some people arses are firmly fixed to Northampton seats and rant on this site every day.

Hobo · Jul 18, 2014

Buster said:
Sorry OSB 58 ,whilst i agree with most ,and like to read your informative posts, I see a contradiction in your enthusiasm to "apply effective pressure " and the constant berating of anyone with an idea or protest, by a few on this site. Ithink you said once ( appologies if i have it wrong) that people need to get off their arses instead of ranting . Some people arses are firmly fixed to Northampton seats and rant on this site every day.

Buster I agree, but why get hung up on the 1000 arses planted in seats in Northampton...their choice and they are entitled to it. Why are we put off by the huffing and puffing of the likes of Torch?

If the majority (and I believe it is) want us back in Coventry by boycotting Northampton, if they want to mass protest outside Northampton, if they feel SISU are the main protagonists in this situation, why be put off by a few hysterical ranters.

If they disagree with a protest tough, we are expected to tolerate their views, it's a two way street.

Nick · Jul 18, 2014

Hobo said:
Buster I agree, but why get hung up on the 1000 arses planted in seats in Northampton...their choice and they are entitled to it. Why are we put off by the huffing and puffing of the likes of Torch?

If the majority (and I believe it is) want us back in Coventry by boycotting Northampton, if they want to mass protest outside Northampton, if they feel SISU are the main protagonists in this situation, why be put off by a few hysterical ranters.

If they disagree with a protest tough, we are expected to tolerate their views, it's a two way street.

I can't remember anybody saying there shouldn't be a protest to be fair?

Hobo · Jul 18, 2014

Nick said:
I can't remember anybody saying there shouldn't be a protest to be fair?

But lots of argument about the form of protest and sometimes constant undermining of any ideas is the same thing.

oldskyblue58 · Jul 18, 2014

I think everyone is feeling annoyed and frustrated me included. Doesn't happen often but I needed to vent some feelings.

I am not against people taking action - but know the likely outcome of it.

I get frustrated by the keyboard warriors on here etc who put out the ideas, comments, insults, unfounded assumptions & judgements etc. and never actually do anything themselves. They might not be able to do much but get involved.

To be honest it makes you wonder why anyone would get involved in running a fans group of any sort - and then where would we be?

Rob S · Jul 18, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
I get frustrated by the keyboard warriors on here etc who put out the ideas, comments, insults, unfounded assumptions & judgements etc. and never actually do anything themselves. They might not be able to do much but get involved.

To be honest it makes you wonder why anyone would get involved in running a fans group of any sort - and then where would we be?

I'll second that.

jimmyhillsfanclub · Jul 18, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
To be honest it makes you wonder why anyone would get involved in running a fans group of any sort - and then where would we be?

Some might say "exactly where we are now"......

fernandopartridge · Jul 18, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
Resolution 2 proposed by Bruce Walker
The Trust can no longer sit on the fence while our Club is being destroyed. The Trust must represent and give voice to its members, and in particular must:
1. Call for a complete supporters' boycott of City matches at Sixfields.
2. Increase pressure on the Football League to bring about a return of the Club to the Ricoh Arena from the start of the 2014/15 season, by using their powers to encourage the Club and its owners to enter into negotiations with Coventry City Council, ACL and other interested parties who could facilitate such a return, and to ensure that any proposed return is approved by the League as quickly as possible.
3. Take over the www.FixFootball.co.uk petition and use the Trust's fighting fund, other resources and links with Supporters Direct and other fan groups to promote it.
4. Start a campaign of contacting known or suspected SISU investors, drawing their attention to the current position

Everyone entitled to their opinion and I accept the rights to that and to propose such motions

So the assumption is that there has never been any straight talking aimed at SISU in particular or any of the other participants in this farce then. If the Trust was so acquiescent why was there a threat of legal action, the owners refusing to talk, threats to remove from the SCG, etc. Motions are easy at an AGM but what comes next is what matters. How are they followed through and by who - the people who proposed it perhaps? or is it the Trust Board to do that - what if they disagree with it?

1) call for a complete boycott - just how exactly are the Trust in a position to stop people going if they so choose? (I fundamentally object to stopping freedom of choice in any case but that's another discussion) So without some form of enforcement this is just more words. Any sort of enforcement is likely to be confrontational and leave those involved (including the Trust Board) at risk of prosecution. Not to mention how it splits further our fan base. What is the expected result from this because like it or not CCFC do not rely on the match receipts - they made this years budget out of selling Wilson & Christie. Do more empty words really help?

2) so the assumption is that the Trust have not been putting pressure on the FL then? The FL if they are so minded can encourage certainly but they cannot force or impose a solution on ACL or SISU. If SISU wanted back then what steps have they taken to do so? The FL will not force a member to accept a deal that the member feels it can not afford. The FL has no real relationship or power over ACL. Do we think the Trust has never raised these issues before? Do the FL really want to talk to the Trust or do they fob them off repeatedly?

3) the petition. Sorry to be harsh but it is a dead duck. It stands at 19,148 in six months. It doesn't close till next January - do we want to wait that long?

4) So who are these investors to be contacted - any one got a client list? Do you really think the Trust hasn't tried to find out in the past? Do you think those investors really care about a small part of a huge investment portfolio that is at least now paying them interest?

So we have basically a campaign of more words but instead of any sort of balance purely directed in one direction. The effect of this would be? If SISU were really bothered about what the fans think they would have changed tack a long time ago. People need to strip away the emotion to deal with SISU - there is no emotion for them it is the numbers in a long term plan with a set objective that counts. CCFC is just a tool

Right now I think the emotions of the situation are being used and fed by SISU to build up a head of steam that they hope will be directed at ACL and CCC to fall over and do any deal to settle the saga. Ask yourself has there been any approach - then ask why. It comes back to CCFC will come back when SISU are good and ready - it wont be because of fans pressure on them it will be because they have exhausted all their options financially and legally

But hey it will all be the fault of the Trust who sit round doing nothing and are totally clueless as to what is going on - :sarcasm: The reality is they(the Trust Board) know and understand far better than most what is going on and because of that carry more frustration on the process than most can imagine. Knee jerk shouty reactions might make some feel better but are likely to achieve nothing.

Nothing achieved by the Trust by being balanced is the cry - really? The March x 2 wasn't an achievement? the Q&A's wasn't an achievement? The freedom of information on the mystery site? The information gained and given to fans and members wasn't an achievement? Actually having regular access to all parties wasn't an achievement? ........... Information is key in this it allows the lies to be exposed. Yes the Trust have made mistakes, you tell me who hasn't but they have achieved more than some realise and fans know a lot more because of that.

Frankly I can see the Trust returning to what it was 3 years ago and being cut off from the club - the very thing its constitution is at pains to point out it should have a relationship with

The art of a good campaign is to know the opposition, set realistic targets, apply effective pressure, keep it focussed and inclusive. Not just throw the kitchen sink at it

frustrations vented Sorry if that upsets some but just my opinion

Great post. I admire the constructive work carried out by the Trust recently as opposed to the anti everything crap carried out by others. ....oh look another new thread. ...

fernandopartridge · Jul 18, 2014

Spionkop said:
Let's see - 'Torchomatic' - doesn't like opinions - so comes out with sarky 'Chubby Checker' comments. Seems a shade 'divisive' to me. One of a string of them to various posters from Mr. Torch.
Expressing a view (somehow NOPM was brought into the talk - I certainly haven't mentioned it.)
There is no 'divisive' from people, a few more than me I might add - they're expressing an opinion.
But the Sixfielders are trying to deflect the attention away from themselves, by targeting any voice that expresses the view that going to Sixfields is wrong. And, is actually playing a part in prolonging our stay there.
Nobody is being 'vilified' - some of us are simply saying we think it is wrong to attend at Sixfields. Simply that. Shout that down, and you shout down any view but your own. You - the Sixfielders - have your view - some others of us (the vast majority I suspect) have our view.
As long as those views are expressed in a constructive manner, without abusive language, it is perfectly valid.
These things need saying, the future of our club is at stake. Far more than the pleasure of an afternoon watching 'the lads.'
In going along to Sixfields, you go along with Sisu. The destroyers of our club.

What a load of sanctimonious self satisfied drivel

Grendel · Jul 18, 2014

Spionkop said:
Let's see - 'Torchomatic' - doesn't like opinions - so comes out with sarky 'Chubby Checker' comments. Seems a shade 'divisive' to me. One of a string of them to various posters from Mr. Torch.
Expressing a view (somehow NOPM was brought into the talk - I certainly haven't mentioned it.)
There is no 'divisive' from people, a few more than me I might add - they're expressing an opinion.
But the Sixfielders are trying to deflect the attention away from themselves, by targeting any voice that expresses the view that going to Sixfields is wrong. And, is actually playing a part in prolonging our stay there.
Nobody is being 'vilified' - some of us are simply saying we think it is wrong to attend at Sixfields. Simply that. Shout that down, and you shout down any view but your own. You - the Sixfielders - have your view - some others of us (the vast majority I suspect) have our view.
As long as those views are expressed in a constructive manner, without abusive language, it is perfectly valid.
These things need saying, the future of our club is at stake. Far more than the pleasure of an afternoon watching 'the lads.'
In going along to Sixfields, you go along with Sisu. The destroyers of our club.

Moron

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 18, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
excellent post NW !

You get less likes for that than usual

And so I come back to read the (if I may steal a cheap term) usual suspects dividing already, whereas I started by praising the work of the trust.

What does that say?

Otis · Jul 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
You get less likes for that than usual

And so I come back to read the (if I may steal a cheap term) usual suspects dividing already, whereas I started by praising the work of the trust.

What does that say?

People can't read?

skybluetom · Jul 18, 2014

Buster said:
Do any of you lot think that if sisu where getting 7000 gates at sixfields ,they would even think about coming back to the Ricoh ? No, of course not . Therefore the boycott of sixfields is working . If it was an almost total boycott Sisu would be under more pressure to return . Its not rocket science. But no, you carry on watching home games While my son and i continue to travel away .

Of course they would come back, even if they were getting 7000 it's still well down on what we'd be getting at the Ricoh. The move isn't about Northampton; it's about distressing ACL to get hold of the Ricoh. I won't boycott because it serves no purpose, Sisu are not interested in revenue at Northamton because it's got nothing to do with revenue. I said from the very beginning it makes no difference if 7 or 7000 go to Sixfields, tickets are that cheap they practically give them away anyway most of the time. How is the boycott working? Absolutely nothing has changed from 12 months ago.

TheOldFive · Jul 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
I have been particularly pleased with your efforts over the past year, an element of professionalism has come into your operations, the desire to question anybody such as the excellent Q&A on your site shows your awareness of the need for answers, and although sometimes an attempt to adopt a neutral stance sees you maybe shy a little over-much away from asking the difficult questions in public to any side, the march in July was an excellently organised show of strength by the Sky Blue Army. It showed we mattered, it showed we exist.

And this positivity is surely something to build on. This shows that the Sky Blue Army can unite together, and be a passionate force for good. It shows that doing works better than any other approach to drawing attention towards our plight.

So it is with concern that I read of the motion, part of which calls for a total boycott of Sixfields. I understand the desire and sentiment to punish our owners, but I have also seen the most effective ways of publicising our existence have been approaches other than this. What concerns me more however is the sheer impracticality of expecting 100% compliance; if there is a point to be made with low attendances, it has been made. Worse, the desire to make non attendance 100% serves to deflect attention from our plight. Time that should be spent rightly calling to account the protagonists in this farce, be it SISU, ACL, CCC or the Football League, is instead spent turning on fellow fans. This happens as it is, we do not need a mandate, even if unwitting, from the leading supporters' body. What does this serve? And more, who does it serve? Not us, as we need every man, boy and child behind us when we do return to the city (and it will happen, in some form). Whatever others do, we can fight to keep ourselves together whatever our differences.

The beauty of coming from Coventry is it is a cosmopolitan city. We welcome all, we are tolerant of all, and we allow cultures to flourish. We need to show tolerance of others’ views, and we need to focus on events that can bring us together, not split us apart. Please think before voting on this resolution what the consequences may be for our own fanbase, for if anybody is to blame it is not us. Remember, we are all victims in this, do not make this worse by punishing ourselves.

I could not have put it better myself. Are you *sure* you aren't me?

In all seriousness I'm going to Sixfields next season to watch and support the team. I would prefer us to be playing in Cov so there wasn't all this rancour and there might be a better atmosphere but while we are not I can put up with it. I know that seems selfish and wrong to many but not to me, if others feel differently fair play to them. So no, that resolution won't get my vote, guess I'll be in the immoral minority again. :-(

Steve.B50 · Jul 18, 2014

sky blue john said:
Lol !!
Now its the trusts turn to take a battering from the misguided small minded few on here...

Battering from who?

Dear Sky Blue Trust (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency