Grab a beer or a cup of tea, it’s CCFC!! (2 Viewers)

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Imagine this

I write an article ignoring everything sisu had done and put fisher down as just pr when he lies to brush it away

My mate and ex fellow director works for sisu and strangely has a number of social media accounts to defend sisu and make things up about other parties.

It's checked over by labovitch and igwe to make sure it all adds up

I write it after the group I am heavily involved with has just met with joy.

Where do we start with the reaction it would get?

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Otis said:
I would re-word that and say 'not as much to blame as Sisu'.

I know some side with the council, but I think there are very few who think the y have done NOTHING wrong.

It's all about degrees, but it's all become a bit polarised.

Think maybe the only thing that would open up everyones eyes would be if Sisu DID drop the legals and still there was no deal or goodwill.

They SHOULD drop them legals though. It's caused nothing but harm and consternation.n

Nobody has said they shouldn't stop them, again probably only RFC.

However people are saying that if we want a ground to play in we should shout at all sides including sisu to pressure them all with the aim of getting a deal.

People are strongly against that though? Why if they main focus is ccfc?

Grendel · Feb 10, 2019

Otis said:
I would re-word that and say 'not as much to blame as Sisu'.

I know some side with the council, but I think there are very few who think the y have done NOTHING wrong.

It's all about degrees, but it's all become a bit polarised.

Think maybe the only thing that would open up everyones eyes would be if Sisu DID drop the legals and still there was no deal or goodwill.

They SHOULD drop them legals though. It's caused nothing but harm and consternation.n

The ability to persue legal action is the basis of democracy

Otis · Feb 10, 2019

Ashdown · Feb 10, 2019

To provide complete balance and to aid fairness from all perspectives why doesn't someone write a similar article from the 'other side' ?! As long as it's factual and not just emotional speculation. I'd like to see an 11 year programme of happenings, discussions, evidence of offers, minutes of meetings and a new and revised plan of action for the future of our football club from the present owners. I read snippets of all sorts in 'defence' of the SISU legacy but I want to see them all together in one article.

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Ashdown said:
To provide complete balance and to aid fairness from all perspectives why doesn't someone write a similar article from the 'other side' ?! As long as it's factual and not just emotional speculation. I'd like to see an 11 year programme of happenings, discussions, evidence of offers, minutes of meetings and a new and revised plan of action for the future of our football club from the present owners. I read snippets of all sorts in 'defence' of the SISU legacy but I want to see them all together in one article.

The fact you are saying that it is on a side and it needs one from the other side to give balance proves my point. Thanks.

Covstu · Feb 10, 2019

Ashdown said:
To provide complete balance and to aid fairness from all perspectives why doesn't someone write a similar article from the 'other side' ?! As long as it's factual and not just emotional speculation. I'd like to see an 11 year programme of happenings, discussions, evidence of offers, minutes of meetings and a new and revised plan of action for the future of our football club from the present owners. I read snippets of all sorts in 'defence' of the SISU legacy but I want to see them all together in one article.

Agree with this, whilst we can sling arrows at all parties SISU have made no effort to put across why they have taken this action throughout their tenure. I would give them more credit if they come out and said ‘yep we fucked up, we tried to get the ground on the cheap and it didn’t work’.

As for legals, I agree they should be dropped but clearly they see some value in persuing this action even after 27 previous failed attempts! It would be nice to understand why they feel this is still an appropriate course of action.

Ultimately anything that comes out of their mouth isn’t going to be believed no matter whether it’s Joy, Fisher, Boddy and any of the other cronies that they roll out

Ashdown · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
The fact you are saying that it is on a side and it needs one from the other side to give balance proves my point. Thanks.

It doesn't prove any point, I'd just like to see in print the arguments by those as to why they think this isn't a fair reflection of the recent history ?! Over to you !

Otis · Feb 10, 2019

Covstu said:
Agree with this, whilst we can sling arrows at all parties SISU have made no effort to put across why they have taken this action throughout their tenure. I would give them more credit if they come out and said ‘yep we fucked up, we tried to get the ground on the cheap and it didn’t work’.

As for legals, I agree they should be dropped but clearly they see some value in persuing this action even after 27 previous failed attempts! It would be nice to understand why they feel this is still an appropriate course of action.

Ultimately anything that comes out of their mouth isn’t going to be believed no matter whether it’s Joy, Fisher, Boddy and any of the other cronies that they roll out

Yup. Agree with all that.

bawtryneal · Feb 10, 2019

Grendel said:
The ability to persue legal action is the basis of democracy

Very true Grendel but face the costs of your actions.

SkyBlueZack · Feb 10, 2019

Covstu said:
Agree with this, whilst we can sling arrows at all parties SISU have made no effort to put across why they have taken this action throughout their tenure. I would give them more credit if they come out and said ‘yep we fucked up, we tried to get the ground on the cheap and it didn’t work’.

As for legals, I agree they should be dropped but clearly they see some value in persuing this action even after 27 previous failed attempts! It would be nice to understand why they feel this is still an appropriate course of action.

Ultimately anything that comes out of their mouth isn’t going to be believed no matter whether it’s Joy, Fisher, Boddy and any of the other cronies that they roll out

So why bother writing their version of events? It’s clear from threads on here and other platforms that the only lying is done by Sisu. Despite other parties lying, it’s just ignored and forgotten. It’s what annoys me, I couldn’t give a shit about Sisu and any shit they get their way. I just wish all other parties got their share of abuse/questions/essays.

SkyBlueZack · Feb 10, 2019

Ashdown said:
It doesn't prove any point, I'd just like to see in print the arguments by those as to why they think this isn't a fair reflection of the recent history ?! Over to you !

Because it isn’t truly reflective of what’s happened. There is bits that have been missed out, it’s written in a certain tone.

SkyBlueZack · Feb 10, 2019

Also, what makes everyone certain that if legals are dropped, we’ll get a deal? A fair deal? What if that doesn’t happen? What then?

Ashdown · Feb 10, 2019

SkyBlueZack said:
So why bother writing their version of events? It’s clear from threads on here and other platforms that the only lying is done by Sisu. Despite other parties lying, it’s just ignored and forgotten. It’s what annoys me, I couldn’t give a shit about Sisu and any shit they get their way. I just wish all other parties got their share of abuse/questions/essays.

Fine I agree with you but then an article that contains the factual evidence and a timeline of wrong doing should be out there for people to try and see some balance. If it really contained hard evidence that SISU were done over at times and that the council were negligent or vindictive then I want to see it in the media or at least on here and other fan forums.

Otis · Feb 10, 2019

SkyBlueZack said:
Also, what makes everyone certain that if legals are dropped, we’ll get a deal? A fair deal? What if that doesn’t happen? What then?

It's what I am saying. If the legals got dropped and we still weren't offered a deal or support from the council, many would then start gunning for the council and Wasps.

Covstu · Feb 10, 2019

SkyBlueZack said:
So why bother writing their version of events? It’s clear from threads on here and other platforms that the only lying is done by Sisu. Despite other parties lying, it’s just ignored and forgotten. It’s what annoys me, I couldn’t give a shit about Sisu and any shit they get their way. I just wish all other parties got their share of abuse/questions/essays.

SISU are the easy target of course but their history and actions are quite demonstrable throughout this timeline. I don’t take it as read, it would be interesting to understand why they chose this course of action. If you don’t give a shit about SISU then you are missing the point as they are the key to resolving this matter

Covstu · Feb 10, 2019

SkyBlueZack said:
Also, what makes everyone certain that if legals are dropped, we’ll get a deal? A fair deal? What if that doesn’t happen? What then?

We all know that we are not going to get close to what we have enjoyed recently but again who’s fault is that. Through the legal action all goodwill has gone between all parties so it will be a commercial view on what wasps feel they want out of the deal. We are likely to get fucked over in my opinion and pay a heavy price as they truly have us over a barrel and either we take it or we don’t exist

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Covstu said:
We all know that we are not going to get close to what we have enjoyed recently but again who’s fault is that. Through the legal action all goodwill has gone between all parties so it will be a commercial view on what wasps feel they want out of the deal. We are likely to get fucked over in my opinion and pay a heavy price as they truly have us over a barrel and either we take it or we don’t exist

Other parties have had us over barrels for years because they know they can do what they want and people won't say a word.

We even have people rewriting history for them.

chiefdave · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
You will also see why the council leader is so confident about public opinion being on his side, we have people re writing history for him

We’ve literally got the council leader making public statements that they can do whatever they like as they don’t get any scrutiny and still people don’t get it.

bawtryneal · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
Other parties have had us over barrels for years because they know they can do what they want and people won't say a word.

We even have people rewriting history for them.

Thought you were going swimming

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Thought you were going swimming

Already been... Good to see that's your only point.

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

chiefdave said:
We’ve literally got the council leader making public statements that they can do whatever they like as they don’t get any scrutiny and still people don’t get it.

Exactly. Then he sits back and watches articles like this.

He openly lied about something (as fisher has done plenty before anybody says that) and then just said it doesn't matter as people are on their side.

What happens after that? A few social media accounts get fired up.

bawtryneal · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
Already been... Good to see that's your only point.

Sorry, should have asked.
How many lengths did you swim ?

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Sorry, should have asked.
How many lengths did you swim ?

Not that many today, did most on Friday evening. Thanks for asking.

Captain Dart · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
Other parties have had us over barrels for years because they know they can do what they want and people won't say a word.

We even have people rewriting history for them.

Here we go again with the unsubstantiated claims.

It is nonsense to claim no one has said a word. Plenty of parties have tried to fix the problem via mediatation and failed.

What history has been rewritten?

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Captain Dart said:
Here we go again with the unsubstantiated claims. What history has been rewritten?

Erm that bits are completely left out? Its not unsubstantiated.

You are still trying the play it dumb act I see.

Captain Dart · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
Erm that bits are completely left out? Its not unsubstantiated.

You are still trying the play it dumb act I see.

You can't lay your hands on one fact to substantiate anything you say. You can't win this argument without facts.

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Captain Dart said:
You can't lay your hands on one fact to substantiate anything you say. You can't win this argument without facts.

What are you on about?

Are you saying particular things haven't been missed out? It's a simple yes or no.

Like every other thread you jump in, you don't read it or pay any attention to what's being said before you start.

Otis · Feb 10, 2019

Captain Dart said:
You can't lay your hands on one fact to substantiate anything you say. You can't win this argument without facts.

Hardly stopped anyone on here before has it.

Captain Dart · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
What are you on about?

Are you saying particular things haven't been missed out? It's a simple yes or no.

Like every other thread you jump in, you don't read it or pay any attention to what's being said before you start.

Tell me what these crucial game changing omissions are?

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

Captain Dart said:
Tell me what these crucial game changing omissions are?

Answer the question as you clearly aren't following the thread or reading things.

Has anything been missed out to suit the agenda or not?

oldskyblue58 · Feb 10, 2019

The article is an opinion piece written by someone who is staunchly anti Sisu. It makes clear from the start that it sets out to place the blame squarely on Sisu and that it is the writers opinion. It does not set out to provide a detailed analysis of the history of all parties involved nor does it intend to. It is not meant to be a balanced history of the parties in this saga..... It is a clear attack on the owners and their ownership.. The content.should be no surprise.

It is hard to argue with the facts and quotes provided. They are selective to the opinion but not untrue. To back his opinion the writer doesn't have provide other information that's for others to counter his argument with. The piece though lengthy is well written even if you do not agree the opinion.

He doesn't set out to apportion blame to other parties but their part in this saga is not ignored.. he has a right, as do you and i, to express his opinion and to demonstrate it with the facts or quotes he chooses.

I would think that it would be very hard to find anyone who didn't place the majority of the blame for the saga and our predicament on Sisu. Most sensible people know others played a part, that still doesn't change the main responsibility belonging to sisu then and now

I found it a decent read taking in to account the above comments. Not sure I disagree with much of it. But the article is only one opinion.

Not sure how it moves things forward though.

Nick · Feb 10, 2019

oldskyblue58 said:
The article is an opinion piece written by someone who is staunchly anti Sisu. It makes clear from the start that it sets out to place the blame squarely on Sisu and that it is the writers opinion. It does not set out to provide a detailed analysis of the history of all parties involved nor does it intend to. It is not meant to be a balanced history of the parties in this saga..... It is a clear attack on the owners and their ownership.

It is hard to argue with the facts and quotes provided. They are selective to the opinion but not untrue. To back his opinion the writer doesn't have provide other information that's for others to counter his argument with. The piece though lengthy is well written even if you do not agree the opinion.

He doesn't set out to apportion blame to other parties but their part in this saga is not ignored.. he has a right, as do you and i, to express his opinion and to demonstrate it with the facts or quotes he chooses.

I would think that it would be very hard to find anyone who didn't place the majority of the blame for the saga and our predicament on Sisu.

I found it a decent read taking in to account the above comments. But it is only an opinion.

Not sure how it moves things forward though.

It moves things forward by getting people angry about sisu and to get some protests going. It also makes people forget things others have bullshitted about.

There's a reason for it.

Otis · Feb 10, 2019

oldskyblue58 said:
The article is an opinion piece written by someone who is staunchly anti Sisu. It makes clear from the start that it sets out to place the blame squarely on Sisu and that it is the writers opinion. It does not set out to provide a detailed analysis of the history of all parties involved nor does it intend to. It is not meant to be a balanced history of the parties in this saga..... It is a clear attack on the owners and their ownership.

It is hard to argue with the facts and quotes provided. They are selective to the opinion but not untrue. To back his opinion the writer doesn't have provide other information that's for others to counter his argument with. The piece though lengthy is well written even if you do not agree the opinion.

He doesn't set out to apportion blame to other parties but their part in this saga is not ignored.. he has a right, as do you and i, to express his opinion and to demonstrate it with the facts or quotes he chooses.

I would think that it would be very hard to find anyone who didn't place the majority of the blame for the saga and our predicament on Sisu.

I found it a decent read taking in to account the above comments. But it is only an opinion.

Not sure how it moves things forward though.

Exactly! Well said, OSB. Mirrored my thoughts pretty much exactly.

bawtryneal · Feb 10, 2019

Nick said:
What are you on about?

Are you saying particular things haven't been missed out? It's a simple yes or no.

Like every other thread you jump in, you don't read it or pay any attention to what's being said before you start.

We had this debate earlier.
You couldn't state anything that has been missed out or misquoted or was not factual in his article.
All you did was mention his boycott and his aledged social media status, which I couldn't give a monkeys about.
Maybe he has an angle or an agenda. Who knows and who cares.
However, don't criticise a well written peice that is factual.
We should all want the same thing on here.
Unfortunately it will not happen without the court case being dropped or enormous goodwill from Wasps.

Grab a beer or a cup of tea, it’s CCFC!! (2 Viewers)

Administrator

Administrator

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

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

CCFC Finance Director

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency