Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
The house analogy is fucking stupid. It’s like people trying to understand economics by comparing household budgets.
Because its been made up by Fisher to suit his statements at the time of no option but the Ricoh.How come the 6 mile 'rule' didn't apply when we was at sixfields?
The house analogy is fucking stupid. It’s like people trying to understand economics by comparing household budgets.
Was going to comment earlier but had to get to a meeting. I was of the same impression as you but I've seen it with my own eyes now. It's ridiculous. I'll try to find some later if I get chance.
The only people who have said this 6 mile rule exists are Fisher and Boddy.How come the 6 mile 'rule' didn't apply when we was at sixfields?
So it must be true then .The only people who have said this 6 mile rule exists are Fisher and Boddy.
It wasn't an analogy at all. It was as logical as. In other words, it was as stupid as, that's all. Maybe you find it difficult to understand something quite simple.The house analogy is fucking stupid. It’s like people trying to understand economics by comparing household budgets.
It's not that simple, it's idiotic.It wasn't an analogy at all. It was as logical as. In other words, it was as stupid as, that's all. Maybe you find it difficult to understand something quite simple.
Well it wouldnt would it, it will just prolong the life of SISU in Cov. FFS, it's so obvious but the propaganda is scary on SBT !I didn’t go to Northampton but would follow the team to most of the grounds named as this time I feel we are being pushed out and if it helped rid the city of the yellow and black filth I would be delighted.
How's that propaganda exactly?Well it wouldnt would it, it will just prolong the life of SISU in Cov. FFS, it's so obvious but the propaganda is scary on SBT !
It costs money to defend yourself, even if you've done nothing wrong.Nick why are Wasps so worried about SISU legals .? They haven’t done anything wrong have they? <snip>
Another stupid analogynot defending or having a go at anyone here, but if someone was taking me to court because I bought a house that was for sale on one hand and asking to rent the same house on the other, yer, not happening....
We're in a country where 3 elections have been won with that argumentThe house analogy is fucking stupid. It’s like people trying to understand economics by comparing household budgets.
Yup that is the point, you don't have to be right just much richer than the defendant, eventually they will cave.It costs money to defend yourself, even if you've done nothing wrong.
You get awarded costsIt costs money to defend yourself, even if you've done nothing wrong.
They usually don't cover the full costs incurred.You get awarded costs
With this 6 miles business, which apparently only Fisher and Boddy have mentioned but no-one seems to be able to find in the actual EFL rules. So it must have just been a verbal thing between EFL and Fisher. If not, why hasn't Fisher just produced the paperwork proving it has to be within 6 miles? Similarly, why haven't the EFL moved to clarify the position by saying the 6 mile rule definitely does/nt exist?
Could this have been to do with the site of a new stadium, which Fisher used as a means to get the EFL to agree to the Sixfields move, rather than a stadium for us to play in? I'm not really sure the EFL could just add arbitrary terms onto individual clubs that wouldn't apply to others.
If there was nothing written down, you could say you interpreted it as within 6 miles of anywhere named Coventry - Coventry Street, Coventry Road, Coventry Close-
in which case we can use Wembley....
Fisher usually takes things out of context and attempts to leave you with a false impression. This 6 mile thing is probably about a brand new stadium and nothing to do with temporary groundshares.I thought a similar thing. If Boddy and Fisher have effectively publicly lied to suit their own agenda, a section posters on here seem to think that the EFL wouldn’t clarify their own position despite the fact that by stating CCFC are not permitted to play outside of the 6-mile radius, both Fisher and Boddy are misleading the clubs entire fan-base (or trying to anyway). Why would the EFL stand idly by whilst the club publicly involve them in a lie? They’re already considered useless by the majority so from a PR POV they’d have no choice to put a statement out under these circumstances.
Hence why I think there is something to the ‘6-mile radius’ but it probably doesn’t go any further as a verbal warning if anything, as realistically like you said the EFL can’t just start adding rules to suit their own views as what kind of precedent does that set for clubs that are in dire plights in the future?Like you said if it isn’t in writing, it automatically becomes subjective, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if both Bobby and Fisher have twisted whatever has been said, if anything has been said that is.
Fisher usually takes things out of context and attempts to leave you with a false impression. This 6 mile thing is probably about a brand new stadium and nothing to do with temporary groundshares.
It's probably something along those lines. With regards to taking things out of context though, if you look through his past comments there are examples where he could've taken things out of context and attempt to leave you with a false impression as you say.
For instance in his Talk Sport interview, IMO he's made carefully worded statements where the language used shows he could've purposely taken any comments from the EFL out of content.
E.g.: “We have had it in writing umpteen times that we have to play in Coventry."
An easily twistable comment. For instance with regards to the "had it in writing comment" bit, IMO that could full well mean he's simply received comments via email/s. So it's not an official letter of intent but rather a verbal warning via email.
That would reflect better on their competency, mind you!This says to me that the senior management at the club have known about this for some time - despite what we were assured.
Just a thought regarding the alternative ground and signing the accounts
To be able to sign off in the way they did the auditors had to have evidence that there were viable alternatives. The accounts were signed by the directors and auditors on 28th February. The audit work would have had to be completed before that and before that the spread sheets for the budgets & forecasts for each scenario would need to be put together. Before that of course the club would need to source the other venues. Even staying at the Ricoh would be based on assumptions about rent and costs. The auditors are supposed to check the assumptions etc in the forecasts. They are not supposed to just accept a directors say so, especially in a high risk situation like this. This says to me that the senior management at the club have known about the alternatives for some time - despite what we were assured.
There is a plan on both sides of the fence in my opinion, and each plan distresses the other
I wonder how the casino feel about this loss of income I would imagine they will be looking for a reduction in their rent
There's also the local pubs and businesses (not many left now though).
Some of these other places will struggle to make up the loss of income
The talksport thing was bollocks.
Anybody worth their salt would have made him specify what was said live on air and made him squirm.
I genuinely think that Wasps / CCC weren't expecting the club to file accounts for starters, people now seem shocked they will be looking at options other than the Ricoh.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?