Empathy, Empathy (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5849
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
There's a little lack of empathy.

Now back in the day, a major error CCC among others made was not trying to understand SISU. Certain of John Mutton's statements, and actions from other parties such as Hoffman and Elliot were only going to end badly, as they only thought of the straight ahead, what can we do, instead of considering what SISU might do. That was sheer folly and, sometimes, that doesn't seem to have changed, in that often SISU are backed into a corner... and then we get the sound and fury.

However, on other parties' side, there seems to be a fundamental lack of desire to understand Wasps and their position.

Do I want Wasps here? Nope. Would I be delighted if they sodded off? Absolutely! Do I think protests should be aimed at Wasps as well as SISU / Otium / CCC? Of course!

Do I understand Wasps' current negotiating position? You bet!

A wise(?) man once pointed out to me that business was as much about building relationships. Now, it can't be coincidence that Seppala has alienated, well... just about everybody she's tried to deal with, bar Mark Robins! The occasional spat is all well and good but, in terms of building alliances, SISU are spectacularly bad at that.

Do I want Wasps to deal with SISU? Yup. Would I deal with SISU? Nope! The approach can only ever be that the out-of-town franchise ends up usurping the very valid claims of the city's football team to be a cornerstone of the city. It's not as if by magic that gets to that position however, and it's a sedimented sequence of layers of farce and foolhardiness.

The problem with sport is if it becomes a business, it becomes by business rules. In that respect, the statements are entirely correct that SISU / Otium have the right to sue whoever they choose. There is, however, a consequence. This is the consequence. Treating a football club as solely a business, with no empathjy for its social and cultural role, sees it removed from the very place where it claims as home.

The statements about a new stadium have had a consequence too, they show SISU to be insincere, prone to making a grandiose claim without any substance, and end up with us without a ground because we've ended up having short term deals as a result. The lack of transparency means nobody trusts SISU. Again, would you? If you had a choice of parties to deal with, would you choose SISU?

Do I want SISU to sacrifice the club to Wasps so it ends up subservient? Nope. Do I want SISU to start to try to rebuild relationships? Again, you bet.

I'm a firm believer that nothing is insurmountable, but a basic level of understanding of all parties by all parties would be a start. That's something SISU appear to lack, which is a certain irony given their current approach appears to be one to play on a misunderstanding of themselves.

Perhaps instead of the antagonistic confrontation, it would be as well to set out just exactly what SISU do want, to move us forward constructively, to heal rather than hack. That's probably asking too much however. instead we'll get abrasive soudbytes.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
There's a little lack of empathy.

Now back in the day, a major error CCC among others made was not trying to understand SISU. Certain of John Mutton's statements, and actions from other parties such as Hoffman and Elliot were only going to end badly, as they only thought of the straight ahead, what can we do, instead of considering what SISU might do. That was sheer folly and, sometimes, that doesn't seem to have changed, in that often SISU are backed into a corner... and then we get the sound and fury.

However, on other parties' side, there seems to be a fundamental lack of desire to understand Wasps and their position.

Do I want Wasps here? Nope. Would I be delighted if they sodded off? Absolutely! Do I think protests should be aimed at Wasps as well as SISU / Otium / CCC? Of course!

Do I understand Wasps' current negotiating position? You bet!

A wise(?) man once pointed out to me that business was as much about building relationships. Now, it can't be coincidence that Seppala has alienated, well... just about everybody she's tried to deal with, bar Mark Robins! The occasional spat is all well and good but, in terms of building alliances, SISU are spectacularly bad at that.

Do I want Wasps to deal with SISU? Yup. Would I deal with SISU? Nope! The approach can only ever be that the out-of-town franchise ends up usurping the very valid claims of the city's football team to be a cornerstone of the city. It's not as if by magic that gets to that position however, and it's a sedimented sequence of layers of farce and foolhardiness.

The problem with sport is if it becomes a business, it becomes by business rules. In that respect, the statements are entirely correct that SISU / Otium have the right to sue whoever they choose. There is, however, a consequence. This is the consequence. Treating a football club as solely a business, with no empathjy for its social and cultural role, sees it removed from the very place where it claims as home.

The statements about a new stadium have had a consequence too, they show SISU to be insincere, prone to making a grandiose claim without any substance, and end up with us without a ground because we've ended up having short term deals as a result. The lack of transparency means nobody trusts SISU. Again, would you? If you had a choice of parties to deal with, would you choose SISU?

Do I want SISU to sacrifice the club to Wasps so it ends up subservient? Nope. Do I want SISU to start to try to rebuild relationships? Again, you bet.

I'm a firm believer that nothing is insurmountable, but a basic level of understanding of all parties by all parties would be a start. That's something SISU appear to lack, which is a certain irony given their current approach appears to be one to play on a misunderstanding of themselves.

Perhaps instead of the antagonistic confrontation, it would be as well to set out just exactly what SISU do want, to move us forward constructively, to heal rather than hack. That's probably asking too much however. instead we'll get abrasive soudbytes.

I am not saying it isn't true, but, where does your knowledge about Seppalla's business relationships come from?
 

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
There's a little lack of empathy.

Now back in the day, a major error CCC among others made was not trying to understand SISU. Certain of John Mutton's statements, and actions from other parties such as Hoffman and Elliot were only going to end badly, as they only thought of the straight ahead, what can we do, instead of considering what SISU might do. That was sheer folly and, sometimes, that doesn't seem to have changed, in that often SISU are backed into a corner... and then we get the sound and fury.

However, on other parties' side, there seems to be a fundamental lack of desire to understand Wasps and their position.

Do I want Wasps here? Nope. Would I be delighted if they sodded off? Absolutely! Do I think protests should be aimed at Wasps as well as SISU / Otium / CCC? Of course!

Do I understand Wasps' current negotiating position? You bet!

A wise(?) man once pointed out to me that business was as much about building relationships. Now, it can't be coincidence that Seppala has alienated, well... just about everybody she's tried to deal with, bar Mark Robins! The occasional spat is all well and good but, in terms of building alliances, SISU are spectacularly bad at that.

Do I want Wasps to deal with SISU? Yup. Would I deal with SISU? Nope! The approach can only ever be that the out-of-town franchise ends up usurping the very valid claims of the city's football team to be a cornerstone of the city. It's not as if by magic that gets to that position however, and it's a sedimented sequence of layers of farce and foolhardiness.

The problem with sport is if it becomes a business, it becomes by business rules. In that respect, the statements are entirely correct that SISU / Otium have the right to sue whoever they choose. There is, however, a consequence. This is the consequence. Treating a football club as solely a business, with no empathjy for its social and cultural role, sees it removed from the very place where it claims as home.

The statements about a new stadium have had a consequence too, they show SISU to be insincere, prone to making a grandiose claim without any substance, and end up with us without a ground because we've ended up having short term deals as a result. The lack of transparency means nobody trusts SISU. Again, would you? If you had a choice of parties to deal with, would you choose SISU?

Do I want SISU to sacrifice the club to Wasps so it ends up subservient? Nope. Do I want SISU to start to try to rebuild relationships? Again, you bet.

I'm a firm believer that nothing is insurmountable, but a basic level of understanding of all parties by all parties would be a start. That's something SISU appear to lack, which is a certain irony given their current approach appears to be one to play on a misunderstanding of themselves.

Perhaps instead of the antagonistic confrontation, it would be as well to set out just exactly what SISU do want, to move us forward constructively, to heal rather than hack. That's probably asking too much however. instead we'll get abrasive soudbytes.

A lot of sweeping statements there m8. Here’s another one:

How do you know there was no intent to build a stadium? According to one of the million statements hurled around, the council took months to return phone calls, even regarding simple matters.

Edit to add: It ‘seems’ that the council never had any intention of allowing SISU to build....or, at least, make it verrrry fuckin’ difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TTG
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
How do you know there was no intent to build a stadium?
Six years and we have a rip-off of a rejected Brentford design. The land which was set to be purchased (outside of the city council boundaries so it didn't affect them - we were told this direct. It therefore wouldn't need CCC involvement) has not been purchased. No sites have been revealed until, suddenly, Woodlands comes up. That hadn't even closed when the stadium was set to be built! We were all set to move into our new ground by that point, according to SISU timescales.

You seriously have to ask about the stadium? Seriously?
 

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
Six years and we have a rip-off of a rejected Brentford design. The land which was set to be purchased (outside of the city council boundaries so it didn't affect them - we were told this direct. It therefore wouldn't need CCC involvement) has not been purchased. No sites have been revealed until, suddenly, Woodlands comes up. That hadn't even closed when the stadium was set to be built! We were all set to move into our new ground by that point, according to SISU timescales.

You seriously have to ask about the stadium? Seriously?

Erm, yeah.

You reckon the council ever wanted second Coventry City FC stadium to compete with the Ricoh ?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
There's a little lack of empathy.

Now back in the day, a major error CCC among others made was not trying to understand SISU. Certain of John Mutton's statements, and actions from other parties such as Hoffman and Elliot were only going to end badly, as they only thought of the straight ahead, what can we do, instead of considering what SISU might do. That was sheer folly and, sometimes, that doesn't seem to have changed, in that often SISU are backed into a corner... and then we get the sound and fury.

However, on other parties' side, there seems to be a fundamental lack of desire to understand Wasps and their position.

Do I want Wasps here? Nope. Would I be delighted if they sodded off? Absolutely! Do I think protests should be aimed at Wasps as well as SISU / Otium / CCC? Of course!

Do I understand Wasps' current negotiating position? You bet!

A wise(?) man once pointed out to me that business was as much about building relationships. Now, it can't be coincidence that Seppala has alienated, well... just about everybody she's tried to deal with, bar Mark Robins! The occasional spat is all well and good but, in terms of building alliances, SISU are spectacularly bad at that.

Do I want Wasps to deal with SISU? Yup. Would I deal with SISU? Nope! The approach can only ever be that the out-of-town franchise ends up usurping the very valid claims of the city's football team to be a cornerstone of the city. It's not as if by magic that gets to that position however, and it's a sedimented sequence of layers of farce and foolhardiness.

The problem with sport is if it becomes a business, it becomes by business rules. In that respect, the statements are entirely correct that SISU / Otium have the right to sue whoever they choose. There is, however, a consequence. This is the consequence. Treating a football club as solely a business, with no empathjy for its social and cultural role, sees it removed from the very place where it claims as home.

The statements about a new stadium have had a consequence too, they show SISU to be insincere, prone to making a grandiose claim without any substance, and end up with us without a ground because we've ended up having short term deals as a result. The lack of transparency means nobody trusts SISU. Again, would you? If you had a choice of parties to deal with, would you choose SISU?

Do I want SISU to sacrifice the club to Wasps so it ends up subservient? Nope. Do I want SISU to start to try to rebuild relationships? Again, you bet.

I'm a firm believer that nothing is insurmountable, but a basic level of understanding of all parties by all parties would be a start. That's something SISU appear to lack, which is a certain irony given their current approach appears to be one to play on a misunderstanding of themselves.

Perhaps instead of the antagonistic confrontation, it would be as well to set out just exactly what SISU do want, to move us forward constructively, to heal rather than hack. That's probably asking too much however. instead we'll get abrasive soudbytes.

You never met Daniel Gidney did you?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
It would have to be far enough from the boundary that CCC weren't involved, just going over the boundary doesn't end CCC influence.
So that would back up my point about the SISU statements being insincere, no?
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
So that would back up my point about the SISU statements being insincere, no?
Context is king. I believe what you might be referring to is a conversation Fisher had where he said SISUs investors, if they ever existed, had concerns about interference from CCC. This followed the collapse of the project at Brandon and, according Kieran Crowley, a stadium site just over the city boundary near the MTC.

The clear inference in Fishers comments is that any site to be considered should be free of CCC influence.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Context is king. I believe what you might be referring to is a conversation Fisher had where he said SISUs investors, if they ever existed, had concerns about interference from CCC. This followed the collapse of the project at Brandon and, according Kieran Crowley, a stadium site just over the city boundary near the MTC.

The clear inference in Fishers comments is that any site to be considered should be free of CCC influence.
Nope, I'm referring to the one that was specifically about a deal set to be tied up.

There never was a project at Brandon.
 

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
And it’s not like councilors from different districts don’t fake box each other and eat egg ‘n cress sarneys together either. ‘IF’ SISU wanted to build a stadium, it would probably be made nigh-on impossible.
 

shy_tall_knight

Well-Known Member
Whilst there seems to be something going on in the background consortiums, SISU doing publicity lets not discuss a new stadium being built under SISU's ownership as Al Pacino said in the Godfather before he has Carlo killed "it insults my intelligence"
It's just noise, they are not going to commit £50m, 2013 exit was to distress ACL, the 2019 exit is to distress WASPs
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Whilst there seems to be something going on in the background consortiums, SISU doing publicity lets not discuss a new stadium being built under SISU's ownership as Al Pacino said in the Godfather before he has Carlo killed "it insults my intelligence"
It's just noise, they are not going to commit £50m, 2013 exit was to distress ACL, the 2019 exit is to distress WASPs

why do people bring this up?
No matter what side of this debate people are on I have never heard one person state they believe sisu will build a stadium. It's probably the only part of this debate there seems to be consensus on.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Quite happy if that is the case... but it's not necessarily a wrong statement, is it?

No, I don't think that is the case. It was Wasps who stopped a deal happening. The EC thing is just noise.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
It comes up because people insist on dragging up quotes Fisher made years ago as if it somehow impacts on what is happening at the moment.

Yeah, Fisher lies about everything except the stadium thing, because that fits my POV.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Can't find that statement on the club website, where was it made?

Was an interview with Linnell on CWR.

That's... interesting. That's certainly not my understanding! Pretty sure the party GVA are talking about is not the football club. That's also academy rather than stadium. I'll repeat my understanding of Brandon:

  • RBC have been firm in their desire for Brandon to remain a speedway stadium.
  • The speedway team were expecting to stay there, and had a lease to do so. Indeed, I went to meets where the promoters said in no uncertain terms that rumours about the football club building a ground there were false, and unwelcome.
  • The owners of Brandon want to build houses on it. They have no desire to sell it for a football stadium. That's been the case for a fair while.

Discussions between RBC and CCFC were never formal, never on record beyond enquiries about sites for a training ground. They did indeed speak informally, about land opportunities for a football stadium in a general sense, and little progress was made. These talks were also rather hastily arranged after the FOI requests started going in - we're talking March 2015.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

shy_tall_knight

Well-Known Member
Joy mentioned in yesterday's SKY interview a new stadium. If the club ever move to a new stadium it won't be when owned by SISU. As far as I can see we are fooked, SISU have lost millions on their investment and they will try to recoup their losses an unless there is a huge purchase price for a club with very little assets they will continue to run the club like it has been since 2011.
 

Ricketts

Well-Known Member
Joy mentioned in yesterday's SKY interview a new stadium. If the club ever move to a new stadium it won't be when owned by SISU. As far as I can see we are fooked, SISU have lost millions on their investment and they will try to recoup their losses an unless there is a huge purchase price for a club with very little assets they will continue to run the club like it has been since 2011.
I didnt hear that bit. Have you a link?

However she did say that the Ricoh is a [can't remember the exact word,, but meaning] fantastic 32,000 stadium
 

MusicDating

Euro 2016 Prediction League Champion!!
Joy mentioned in yesterday's SKY interview a new stadium. If the club ever move to a new stadium it won't be when owned by SISU. As far as I can see we are fooked, SISU have lost millions on their investment and they will try to recoup their losses an unless there is a huge purchase price for a club with very little assets they will continue to run the club like it has been since 2011.
I assume when you say we, you mean the council?
 

win9nut

Well-Known Member
Yeah, Fisher lies about everything except the stadium thing, because that fits my POV.
That's what CCC keep saying too... Instead of actually looking for a meeting with Fisher and getting him to lay out what he wants and his starting position, they just quote media clippings of his nonsense as if that's actually evidence of anything...
 

shy_tall_knight

Well-Known Member
I assume when you say we, you mean the council?

No I mean CCFC, if you remove your SISU rose tinted spectacles, SISU got the club for free, took a punt on promotion to the premiership, invested money, failed, treated us fans disgracefully, northampton operation own goal, next season playing to crowds of 3-4,000, in Birmingham, are only hope is a billionaire investor - sounds fooked to me but we should be ok as long as we can blame the council/ WASPs
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
It’s simple, SISU deliberately reneged on a legaly binding tenancy agreement, and in so doing ccc then cut them out of any negotiations to buy the Ricoh.
Sisu then complained to the courts, saying it’s not fair that we weren’t allowed to bid, whereupon the courts said “but you deliberately renaged on a legaly binding tenancy agreement, so go fuck off” (or words to that effect)
Fast forward years, and here we are.
Every thing else is just hot air.
 

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
It’s simple, SISU deliberately reneged on a legaly binding tenancy agreement, and in so doing ccc then cut them out of any negotiations to buy the Ricoh.
giphy.gif

Sisu then complained to the courts, saying it’s not fair that we weren’t allowed to bid, whereupon the courts said “but you deliberately renaged on a legaly binding tenancy agreement, so go fuck off” (or words to that effect)
Fast forward years, and here we are.
Every thing else is just hot air.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top