Fisher: Butts Park Arena is our preffered option (3 Viewers)

samccov1987 · Jun 3, 2016

In my opinion we're pushing for a better deal to stay at the Ricoh. We won't be playing league football at the butts.

That said what stops us locating our academy there on a rebuilt site? Academy could play on a 4g pitch with small stands either side. Room for an indoor training facility for ours and community use plus function rooms for all important pie money.

Would make more sense for both us and the rugby club. We'd own something, retain academy status and rugby club would play in facility suitable for championship.

Just a thought

Skyblueweeman · Jun 3, 2016

Covstu said:
For me this sound bite is a prelude to 'as we said the butts deal was the one we wanted but it's just not big enough for what we need and therefore this is no longer an option, only only option is the site 15 miles outside of coventry'

Better than 32 miles away!

IrishSkyBlue · Jun 3, 2016

I wonder where the money is going to come from if they have to go down the butts or another site route?

Samo · Jun 3, 2016

skybluegod said:
Yet the Ricoh isn't possible. We cannot get more Revenue than we already are, CA has said while Wasps are accommodating they cannot give us anymore than they already do.

But that's not what wasps are saying... They are saying they could if only the pesky legals would stop (no doubt with the encouragement of our lovely council nagging in their ear)

shmmeee · Jun 3, 2016

samccov1987 said:
In my opinion we're pushing for a better deal to stay at the Ricoh. We won't be playing league football at the butts

This is pretty much my feeling. Sisu like to have an second option when renegotiating no matter how outlandish it seems. More concerning is after 3 years they've still not got a proper site so have to go to the Butts. I thought we were down to two sites over a year ago!

It's got to the point that I don't care where we play, just want it sorted so we can worry about other things.

oldfiver · Jun 3, 2016

colin101 said:
Coventry City chairman Tim Fisher has told supporters the club has identified a site outside Coventry for a possible new stadium and Academy base.

Mr Fisher stressed the option was only a back-up and that club officials preferred a potential ground share with Coventry Rugby Club at Butts Park Arena when he made the revelation during a Supporters’ Consultative Group meeting last week.

He also said the club still retained hope that a long term deal could be agreed at the Ricoh Arena.

So it Mr Fisher now I think I understand.

What we want is the preferred option to ground share at the Butts whilst at the same time having a long term deal at the Ricoh.

Have I now got this right?

Is that what the SCG minutes say or Simon Gilbert ?

IrishSkyBlue · Jun 3, 2016

Is there anyway sbt can start trying to force sisu hand in this mess, as in getting a clear answer that they will def follow through with what they say and if not just give up and sell the club, there backed into corner and throwing mud thats not sticking while the fans get messed around!

Grendel · Jun 3, 2016

fernandopartridge said:
Why do they have to roll Tim Fisher out?

Has he been interviewed or is this a quote from the SCG meeting?

chiefdave · Jun 3, 2016

Grendel said:
Has he been interviewed or is this a quote from the SCG meeting?

Its just a rehash of the SCG minutes isn't it?

oldfiver · Jun 3, 2016

IrishSkyBlue said:
Is there anyway sbt can start trying to force sisu hand in this mess, as in getting a clear answer that they will def follow through with what they say and if not just give up and sell the club, there backed into corner and throwing mud thats not sticking while the fans get messed around!

SCG and SBT were represented at the BPA meeting - am sure one of them will comment soon

oldfiver · Jun 3, 2016

chiefdave said:
Its just a rehash of the SCG minutes isn't it?

Looks it but it has a touch of the Gilberts in it!

chiefdave · Jun 3, 2016

oldfiver said:
Looks it but it has a touch of the Gilberts in it!

And its lost its context.

oldfiver · Jun 3, 2016

chiefdave said:
And its lost its context.

Not if you are a WASPIE or CCC type !

ashbyjan · Jun 3, 2016

Tim Fishers quote about another ground was at the SCG - it was an answer to a question about what had happened to the other proposed sites. In my opinion (for what little its worth) his reply was a bit laboured and stuttering. I think he was a bit embarrassed to be talking about other possible sites with Jon Sharp of Cov rugby stood next to him having spouted on for several minutes about the benefits of the joint BPA option. As far as I remember Simon wasn't at the SCG meeting so I expect his report was sourced from the minutes.

oldfiver · Jun 3, 2016

Kingokings204 said:
Why does he say and I quote

"We have two years left at the Ricoh and can extend if we need to."

How exactly?

Ashbyjan - did he say this - it is not in the minutes

Nick · Jun 3, 2016

ashbyjan said:
Tim Fishers quote about another ground was at the SCG - it was an answer to a question about what had happened to the other proposed sites. In my opinion (for what little its worth) his reply was a bit laboured and stuttering. I think he was a bit embarrassed to be talking about other possible sites with Jon Sharp of Cov rugby stood next to him having spouted on for several minutes about the benefits of the joint BPA option. As far as I remember Simon wasn't at the SCG meeting so I expect his report was sourced from the minutes.

so he was just replying to a question? The context was a bit lost.

armybike · Jun 3, 2016

oldfiver said:
Ashbyjan - did he say this - it is not in the minutes

From the minutes -

"The football club needs somewhere to play – we have at least 2 more years at the Ricoh and could extend if needed."

ashbyjan · Jun 3, 2016

To be honest I don't remember the comment about having two years left etc. Whenever the issue of the Ricoh came up he tended to defer to CA as he was the point of contact with Wasps - Fisher was focussed on the BPA project that evening. Also the reported £75k per match figure quoted is incorrect - it was £75k (£72k F&B and £3k parking) per season.

Armybike - If it's in the minutes he must have said it - the minutes are vetted by club before publication so they must be happy with comment. Maybe I had glazed over by then!!

Skyblueweeman · Jun 3, 2016

ashbyjan said:
To be honest I don't remember the comment about having two years left etc. Whenever the issue of the Ricoh came up he tended to defer to CA as he was the point of contact with Wasps - Fisher was focussed on the BPA project that evening. Also the reported £75k per match figure quoted is incorrect - it was £75k (£72k F&B and £3k parking) per season.

We don't do ourselves any favours when two of the most senior people at the club are saying differing things like this. I hope it was just an honest mistake of not differentiating between match/season but they don't help themselves...

chiefdave · Jun 3, 2016

Skyblueweeman said:
We don't do ourselves any favours when two of the most senior people at the club are saying differing things like this. I hope it was just an honest mistake of not differentiating between match/season but they don't help themselves...

Its a CT mistake isn't it?

Skyblueweeman · Jun 3, 2016

chiefdave said:
Its a CT mistake isn't it?

You're right, it is indeed. I mis-read.

***WM gets coat, re-treats from thread***

colin101 · Jun 3, 2016

Dance band on the titanic
Sing "Nearer, my God, to thee"
The iceberg's on the starboard bow
Won't you dance with me?

Mama stood cryin' at the dockside
Sayin' "Please son, don't take this trip"
I said "Mama, sweet mama, don't you worry none
Even God couldn't sink this ship"

Sounds like CCFC to me

Read more: Harry Chapin - Dance Band On The Titanic Lyrics | MetroLyrics

oldfiver · Jun 3, 2016

armybike said:
From the minutes -

"The football club needs somewhere to play – we have at least 2 more years at the Ricoh and could extend if needed."

Ta !

dongonzalos · Jun 3, 2016

Nick said:
CCFC Seem to be trying to fight the massive PR Fire fight with this:

Do you really think so?
Seems loads of spin coming from both sides.

One side, you had your chance. You didn't want it. Now we have it, all of a sudden you want to be part of it?
Here is the best we can offer you drop your legal action and you will get a better deal. However be warned we don't need you either way.

Verses

You can have it, we wouldn't have done the deal you did.
You need us but if you don't give us what we want we have two other stadium ideas ready to go.
Let us carry on with the legal action and sign us up for a long time on our terms. Otherwise we will suggest building a stadium in a location popular with supporters, that if it happens will help give you some competition on the rugby front hopefully damaging your business model.

Both a bunch of idiots in my book both playing the PR game and both with tanks not water pistols.

They both need to grow up we need to ditch the legal action in exchange for the 17 points in full and acceptable academy access. Both on 20 year deals.

Bunch of idiots very frustrating.

Grendel · Jun 3, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Do you really think so?
Seems loads of spin coming from both sides.

One side, you had your chance. You didn't want it. Now we have it, all of a sudden you want to be part of it?
Here is the best we can offer you drop your legal action and you will get a better deal. However be warned we don't need you either way.

Verses

You can have it, we wouldn't have done the deal you did.
You need us but if you don't give us what we want we have two other stadium ideas ready to go.
Let us carry on with the legal action and sign us up for a long time on our terms. Otherwise we will suggest building a stadium in a location popular with supporters, that if it happens will help give you some competition on the rugby front hopefully damaging your business model.

Both a bunch of idiots in my book both playing the PR game and both with tanks not water pistols.

They both need to grow up we need to ditch the legal action in exchange for the 17 points in full and acceptable academy access. Both on 20 year deals.

Bunch of idiots very frustrating.

Lying again

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 3, 2016

I can't believe so many people on here would rather we would be 15 miles out of the city centre in a 30k stadium, over a 25k stadium in the city centre.

People have such short memories it's unreal, and so selective.

'What about parking?' - Look at Highfield road.

'There is no pedestrian access.' - You really think they're gonna expand a stadium so much and just leave everything else as it is, and be allowed to get away with it?

'The Ricoh killed the soul of the club because it took the heart of it out of the city.' - Yes, well done, it did. So you don't think a stadium in the district of Rugby will do even more to alienate the fan base and kill the club? Of course it fucking would!

Utter horseshit Sky Blues Talk. Wake up.

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

there isn't going to be a 25k city centre stadium mate.

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 3, 2016

clint van damme said:
there isn't going to be a 25k city centre stadium mate.

And there will be a spanking new one in Rugby?

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
And there will be a spanking new one in Rugby?

Doubt it. Unless some one buys one for SISU as a present.

Captain Dart · Jun 3, 2016

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
And there will be a spanking new one in Rugby?

No one has ever said that. But Jon Sharp the Chairman of Cov Rugby made a statement that pretty well buries the possibility of a 25K stadium...

There would need to be discussions around the size of the ground – last season Cov RFC’s highest attendance was 2100. Jon would not want there to be a similar situation to Darlington who have 900 fans in a 22,000 seater stadium.

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/consultative-group-meeting-minutes-3132807.aspx

theferret · Jun 3, 2016

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
I can't believe so many people on here would rather we would be 15 miles out of the city centre in a 30k stadium, over a 25k stadium in the city centre.

People have such short memories it's unreal, and so selective.

'What about parking?' - Look at Highfield road.

'There is no pedestrian access.' - You really think they're gonna expand a stadium so much and just leave everything else as it is, and be allowed to get away with it?

'The Ricoh killed the soul of the club because it took the heart of it out of the city.' - Yes, well done, it did. So you don't think a stadium in the district of Rugby will do even more to alienate the fan base and kill the club? Of course it fucking would!

Utter horseshit Sky Blues Talk. Wake up.

Totally agree. The BPA scheme pisses on any windswept out of town option from a great height. All of the objections about access and parking are bogus and easily debunked. It would feel like a proper home.

As for the capacity - it would need to be 25K, but that has not been ruled out. Also in the SCG minutes were references to blocking off tiers and effectively creating a rugby and football 'mode' that would be sensitive to the size of the crowd. Easily doable, and by far the cheaper option.

clint van damme · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
Totally agree. The BPA scheme pisses on any windswept out of town option from a great height. All of the objections about access and parking are bogus and easily debunked. It would feel like a proper home.

As for the capacity - it would need to be 25K, but that has not been ruled out. Also in the SCG minutes were references to blocking off tiers and effectively creating a rugby and football 'mode' that would be sensitive to the size of the crowd. Easily doable, and by far the cheaper option.

they're not mate, and that's why until I see a plan which offers potential solutions to these issues and an outline on how it's all going to be funded I'll remain very sceptical.
I hope they're forthcoming because it's my preferred option as well.

armybike · Jun 3, 2016

theferret said:
All of the objections about access and parking are bogus and easily debunked.

So even before seeing the plans you're able to debunk points around potential access or parking issues?

Would be intetested to hear how.

Grendel · Jun 3, 2016

armybike said:
So even before seeing the plans you're able to debunk points around potential access or parking issues?

Would be intetested to hear how.

The parking for the Ricoh is wholly unsatisfactory - access tonight will be hugely problematic if 38,000 turned up in cars. You know full well they assume a percentage only will be by car - it's a red herring - chat to one of your council followers on twitter - how bout that imbecile Rachael Lancaster - she used to be transport - your a mate of hers aren't you?

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 3, 2016

armybike said:
So even before seeing the plans you're able to debunk points around potential access or parking issues?

Would be intetested to hear how.

I don't want to make personal judgments on anyone, but I strongly feel that It's beyond belief that any coventry fan who is challenging a proposed move back to the city centre in a co-operation with the local rugby team who got equally fucked over by the Wasps by picking up on parking issues can actually be serious.

How can anyone not get behind this? Are we so negative from all the false promises we've been made that we just don't believe anything good is possible anymore?

Fisher: Butts Park Arena is our preffered option (3 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Facebook User

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Facebook User

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency