His expectation is that people should response to communications, so yes it's exactly the same thing.
He's failing to practice what he preaches.
Then again you aren't really involved in it all (no disrespect). It isn't really the same thing.
I'm not lapping anything up, I am not saying it isn't possible but if CA wants to downgrade / close down then him being persistent on everything being in writing is pretty much him asking to have his pants pulled down and everybody going in dry on him isn't it?
I am not saying it isn't possible, but if that was the play they were going with it doesn't make sense to want everything in writing does it? As it just takes a letter that is cc'd to the telegraph saying "this is what you wanted" showing a fantastic offer etc.
Is he that stupid? I am not saying he isn't as I don't know him.
This is what makes me think there is a reason he wants it in writing (does he think / know Wasps cant offer anything)? Saying he won't go to a face to face meeting without anything written first gives Wasps too much of a way to shut him up doesn't it?
So why do the trust come out of meeting with them with the impression everything is ok?It really depends what's on the list doesn't it Nick. If it's a list of everything to the latter of the FA regulations regarding cat 2 status and he's expecting it all on the one site then he can present it as they don't want to accommodate us, woe us woe us, we're a victim.
However, if he goes and talks to them he gives them the opportunity to say no we can't provide this but then we never did and the FA accepted that, this will have to be moved to another location but the FA accepts multiple locations etc. then they've taken away CA's victim card.
You're talking about an outfit who helped with the original cat 2 application, they understand something about it probably more than CA. Have you not thought for one moment that they've already seen the writing on the wall that's why they won't put it in writing before the meeting? They want to talk, agree and suggest compromise before committing in writing? Given our track record would you blame them? They've already seen them take the sites previous owners to court, would you not operate caution and not put anything in writing until it's been discussed and agreed first?
I think people's views changed when It became apparent it was actually ourIt isn't sharing your view, you were trying to persuade others not to go weren't you?
My point was how it changed as soon as wasps put a statement out.
Not half as proud as pr teams sat pissing themselves at our fans. The wasps bloke has said himself how easy it was hasnt he?
Which is exactly the same as this situation.
So why do the trust come out of meeting with them with the impression everything is ok?
Hasnt he just asked for what's available? If they say x is available it's either enough or it isn't.
The sites previous owners took them to court didn't they? And didn't get what they wanted.
If legal action is a worry, even more reason to document it all isn't it?
Why would he contact someone who has known council associations like you?
ust to repeat it yet again: CA knows full well that with the changes going on at Higgs that they will not be able to fulfill all the written down criteria of academy status so why does he need this written down? The lack of trust from both sides is palpable and totally unproductive. What has been established is that where there are shortfalls they are not ones that are beyond the whit of anyone who actually wants an academy to sort to get sorted. The Trust has established that the academy framework is flexible but to get it resolved it needs the co-operation of all the current parties and probably some new ones like maybe Warwick Uni. It all smacks of the club building some sort of reasoning for moving the club out of Cov again. I hope I am wrong as it will be the final straw for many loyal fans but the evidence seems to be pointing that way.The trust didn't just seek assurances from them before saying everything is OK, they also seeked assurances and clarification from the FA. Even then I don't think that they said everything is OK, I think they said it's possible if all parties are willing to talk and work it out. That happens at meetings like the one CA wouldn't attend.
CA is holding this up. No one else.
J
ust to repeat it yet again: CA knows full well that with the changes going on at Higgs that they will not be able to fulfill all the written down criteria of academy status so why does he need this written down? The lack of trust from both sides is palpable and totally unproductive. What has been established is that where there are shortfalls they are not ones that are beyond the whit of anyone who actually wants an academy to sort to get sorted. The Trust has established that the academy framework is flexible but to get it resolved it needs the co-operation of all the current parties and probably some new ones like maybe Warwick Uni. It all smacks of the club building some sort of reasoning for moving the club out of Cov again. I hope I am wrong as it will be the final straw for many loyal fans but the evidence seems to be pointing that way.
He's not asking CSF to tell him what the criteria for an academy are, he's asking what they can offer us isn't he?CA knows full well that with the changes going on at Higgs that they will not be able to fulfill all the written down criteria of academy status so why does he need this written down?
The lack of trust from both sides is palpable and totally unproductive.
I've just reread the minutes from the CCFC Supporters Consultative Group meeting on 22nd July - http://mobile.ccfc.co.uk//news/arti...ers-consultative-group-22nd-june-3174245.aspx
The following stuck out taking into account the subject of this thread -
"Q: When will you (CA) sit down with the relevant parties to discuss a way forward in order to save the academy? CSF have agreed to sit down with you, as have Wasps.
A: There is a strict set of technical requirements we have to fulfil to retain our Category 2 status, which are non-negotiable – not from our end, but as far as the Premier League are concerned in order to fulfil the upcoming audit by the football authorities. It’s not simply a matter of finding some pitches to play on and negotiating the use of pitches. TS added there is the restrictive legal clause on top of all that. There is no negotiation to be had with other parties around a table because the football club doesn’t have a choice to either comply or not comply with those technical requirements, which have been communicated to Coventry Sports Foundation."
This is incorrect isn't it? There is flexibility as the current setup demonstrates?
Just to repeat it yet again: CA knows full well that with the changes going on at Higgs that they will not be able to fulfill all the written down criteria of academy status so why does he need this written down? The lack of trust from both sides is palpable and totally unproductive. What has been established is that where there are shortfalls they are not ones that are beyond the whit of anyone who actually wants an academy to sort to get sorted. The Trust has established that the academy framework is flexible but to get it resolved it needs the co-operation of all the current parties and probably some new ones like maybe Warwick Uni. It all smacks of the club building some sort of reasoning for moving the club out of Cov again. I hope I am wrong as it will be the final straw for many loyal fans but the evidence seems to be pointing that way.
I've always thought it more likely that the academy needs to be down rated as a cost saving exercise (time, effort and money) and this is the perfect excuse for doing it while playing the victim.
He's not asking CSF to tell him what the criteria for an academy are, he's asking what they can offer us isn't he?
Is there anything we can do to help resolve this?
Thing is, as Grendel says, would downgrading the academy be *that* big a deal to many? The petition suggests not, too.
Plus (as myself and wingy said ages ago) there seems a strategy for the current manager to want to buy in the likes of Jones, rather than use the academy, so there is an argument that money channelled there well could be more effective (on a purely player level, anyway).
I'm keeping an open mind on this until it all plays out, but I don't see the need for a huge subterfuge just to downgrade the academy.
What and risk getting the wrong answer, Joy would be incandescent.What does he lose- apart from his time- by going to a meeting and insisting on having the meeting minuted? Worse way he can say 'told you so, it won't work'. Best way he gives the minutes to the FL and asks if there is a way of solving the problem with a short term cat II extension until the new Stadium is built or an alternative found.
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?