Interesting Tweets from Kieren Crowley (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Nick
Administrator
There's no point in a forum if everybody just agrees with each other and pats each other on the back all the time.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I just don't understand why people blindly support the likes of the Telegraph and the council.
I mean I can understand italia sticking up for Wasps as he has a vested financial interest and I can understand that council troll going for Kieran and supporting the Telegraph.
But why would you average football fan support them over their own football club no matter what new information or evidence comes to light?
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
1, After all they've done to our club and are still doing, you still try to lay the blame anywhere else,
and I'm not always doing the SISU lover stuff.
2, when have I thrown out statements that aren't right, but don't like it when corrected, would be
divorced by now if that were the case.
3, it's the way a certain group comes across, they share a certain point of view and tend to look
down on other posters.
4, err, no I wouldn't.
Nick
Administrator
Well it depends what the blame is for isn't it?
It was a few posts ago you said about people lapping it up, I asked where? All the talk I see is if and woulds rather than whens.
I missed this story then. Did he communicate this at the time?
Higgs had an agreement which on the face of it looked reasonable. It was for costs and both sides had signed it. An unforeseen Situation arose and the judge said that as both sides had lost interest Higgs couldn't follow it through. Both sides had to pay their own costs because of SISUs 200000 ridiculose counter claim. Had SISU negotiated they could have saved their costs and a lot of badwill. The JRs are far less clear and are speculative. Up until Now they have cost fortunes and annoyed everyone therefore creating massive problems in dealings with the council ( and yes dealing with councils including CCC is not always easy - have had some experience dealing with CCC myself ). Why do you not think negotiating will get CCFC further than just - in effect - carrying out Joy's constant legal Action threat against the council? We've lost the ground, the council have blocked the BPA and the war of attrition is still going on.
Don't lose your rag with him. Just point out that this offer was only 25000 pounds more. The history of non payment of Rent, throwing keys on the table, the Counter claim against the charity for 200000 - which the judge said was hopeless -, laughing at PWKH in Court ( was funny, but not clever if you later seriously want something from him ), and so on and so on. You then offer less than 1% more and a flowery letter about working together with the charity in the Future as a token halfhearted gesture - my answer would have been 2 words long, the second word being "off". Tim also stated he didn't want ACL because of the 14 Million debt.
Where have I said you shouldn't post?
Have another read of my post, what I'm trying to say is very clear.
"Most important of all, there is goingto be a massive cut down on the "beef". Myself included as one of the worst culprits, I am going to look into getting a couple of moderators to help and will try and encourage things to be nipped in the bud earlier when things are going off topic or somebody is kicking off.
Everybody has their views and they are welcome to share them, so hopefully it will be a bit of a "fresh start" where everybody is a bit nicer and hopefully can be more about the football!"
When is this fresh start going to start by the way?
...............right OK.
Because the repetitiveness comes about because the same points are gone over again and again and again and again.......
If someone (like the forum moderator maybe!?) stood back from posting in such away the problem would be greatly reduced.
Go back and have another look through my Tweets - I think all of Les Reid's Tweets are absolutely hilarious and the responses from his little fan club.
It's not only about his CCFC stuff, every single one of them.
My post re breaking the Butts news was tongue in cheek - a cheeky dig and the out pouring of adulation for Reid that was going on - the Tweets he found the need to RT the vast majority of!
I'm sure you'll dismiss this as me just back covering, that it's not what it meant, that I'm a Telegraph/SG fanboy or whatever - but simply because it's your take on it or your opinion wouldn't make it correct.
On the other hand, you, like me, like the idea of a Central Stadium ( this is a dream for us both in reality ) in a rejuvenated City Centre more geared to culture and leisure - if I understood correctly. That Will Never Happen with SISUs current stance. Whether you love CCC or not, we ( or rather SISU ) are getting nowhere fast owing to past history and an on-going war. The new evidence of a small - 25000 more - advantage over Wasps bid is a joke in itself. A History of years of crap or selling to new people. Not a hard decision. Tim didn't want the share anyway according to him. It is not a choice of council or club, but council or SISU. SISU won't be here for ever, but the club will - in some form. If SISU do do something good - things on the pitch are getting better - then fair Play to them, back them all the way. The problem being what you class as good might not be what others class as good......
Nick
Administrator
So would you be moaning if you agreed with my posts?
Still strange you ignore all the goings on to take a pop at me?
Ironic that you have just come on to have a go at me, meanwhile moaning about me being confrontational.
Have a look through the posts, there are far more repetitive posters. I guess you would prefer it to be like the telegraph comments where everything is blame sisu and nobody actually goes to football matches or talks about that.
Last edited:
Nick
Administrator
Pretty much sums it up
Not sure how/why you're missing the point - it's the repetitiveness I'm making reference to. A large percentage of thread go down the same route and it's tiresome it's almost as if the forum needs a fresh start.........
Because you're the admin.
Nick
Administrator
Again, there's a lot more repetitive goings on.
Good to see your thoughts on the goings on the last few days, same as when actual football happens.
The point isn't being missed, if here was running some sort of anti les reid thing you would be all over it. The same as people loved it when it was all anti sisu shouting, now that people question things more or put myths to bed like sisu taking all the player money etc people don't like it.
Yes I agree I do argue a lot, but I don't see you having an issue with the people who come on irregularly just to have digs at me then wonder when they get a little bit back. Maybe if people stopped reeling off bullshit so much they wouldn't get called on out it so much, but as most of the uninformed stuff is anti sisu I doubt you have an issue.
Still strange how you are saying I.shouldn't post as much but defended a wasps fan posting because it didn't break any rules
Last edited:
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yep, but doesn't mean he's telling the truth though. Always two sides to every story.
You only have to listen to Prime Minister's Questions.
Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk
Yes and if a conversation loop starts you're normally front and centre.
The fact I've been prevented from being able to post here might have something to do with that - you never did reply to my emails.
The point is being missed.
You argue a lot - that's the point I'm making. What does that ever result in, aside from the number of people who post here getting less and less? How many members do you have here? How many on average are online on the forum each day? How many people actually post or comment?
Again you're missing the point.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
All very interesting but to what purpose nearly 2 years after the event. Why would he have seen it yesterday?
Adding 25k isn't really going to test the resolve of the Charity on a £2.77m deal with extras. Putting in a condition of independent valuation makes the offer conditional.
From the Charity point of view it was an offer
- from someone they had a fractious relationship with, and dare I say did not trust
- they had an unconditional offer on the table, the due diligence etc of a Wasps offer had been done
- it wasn't necessarily about who would pay the most money
- Wasps had a detailed plan including community elements CCFC had a list of charity partnership ideas
- the Charity was free to sell to whoever best matched the charity objectives in the opinion of the AEHC trustees and would have assessed it on more than the £ value. Nor were they legally bound to consider the needs of CCFC
- Quite probably the Charity Trustees were fed up of the involvement in football and wanted a clean break
Not really surprised the Charity response was short and to the point. It doesn't need to be more than that and you certainly wouldn't provide details that a litigious potential buyer may try to use against you in court
Finally and crucially any deal the Charity did had to be approved by the other shareholder in ACL. The resolve that should have been tested was the first sale by CCC to Wasps. The reaction of JS/TF was "we wont interfere" wasn't it?
The Charity is gone, except for being linked in to JR1 & 2 as related party, they have no part to play in the future of CCFC
Adding 25k isn't really going to test the resolve of the Charity on a £2.77m deal with extras. Putting in a condition of independent valuation makes the offer conditional.
From the Charity point of view it was an offer
- from someone they had a fractious relationship with, and dare I say did not trust
- they had an unconditional offer on the table, the due diligence etc of a Wasps offer had been done
- it wasn't necessarily about who would pay the most money
- Wasps had a detailed plan including community elements CCFC had a list of charity partnership ideas
- the Charity was free to sell to whoever best matched the charity objectives in the opinion of the AEHC trustees and would have assessed it on more than the £ value. Nor were they legally bound to consider the needs of CCFC
- Quite probably the Charity Trustees were fed up of the involvement in football and wanted a clean break
Not really surprised the Charity response was short and to the point. It doesn't need to be more than that and you certainly wouldn't provide details that a litigious potential buyer may try to use against you in court
Finally and crucially any deal the Charity did had to be approved by the other shareholder in ACL. The resolve that should have been tested was the first sale by CCC to Wasps. The reaction of JS/TF was "we wont interfere" wasn't it?
The Charity is gone, except for being linked in to JR1 & 2 as related party, they have no part to play in the future of CCFC
Last edited:
Nick
Administrator
Which emails? In fairness I don't check them often so they are sometimes delayed but I do go through them once every few days?
Can you forward one over to take a look (or send it via PM)?
In terms of posts / visits. It is pretty much consistent for the past 3 or so years, shoots up for matchdays or when something political happens and then drops a bit in the pre season.
Nick
Administrator
I think he said the club gave them 2 options. They would either match Wasps bid with a bit more OR they could get somebody in to value it and then offer a bit more.
Just what he was saying, he says he saw it yesterday after he was discussing it with Simon Gilbert.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
And Lucas would only sell as long as it didn't damage the football club or CRFC.
They are potentially chucking out of the Higgs and CRFC have stated promises haven't been kept.
Still as long as Wasps are doing ok.
Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
The thing I don't get in all this is, we don't believe Maton, we didn't believe Mutton, we didn't believe Lucas, we don't believe the council, we don't believe Fisher, we don't believe Seppala, we don't believe Sisu, we don't believe Joe Elliot, we don't believe Simon Gilbert, we don't believe the Telegraph, but we believe Kieren Crowley?
How does that all work then?
How does that all work then?
Nick
Administrator
I think people, like with anything take it all with a pinch of salt don't they?
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yep, exactly where I am. I take everything with a pinch of salt and that obviously includes the Butts too.
Talk is cheap as they say.
Nick
Administrator
Yep, exactly where I am. I take everything with a pinch of salt and that obviously includes the Butts too.
Talk is cheap as they say.
Even with the butts, I don't think anybody is talking about it as a "when we move there". It is all just ifs and woulds.
Otis
Well-Known Member
True, but people are getting a tad excited over something that will probably never, ever happen.
I wouldn't get the least bit excited until the first breeze block went in.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
could have given them 5 options Nick. The ducks were already in a row as far as the deal was concerned. Did CCFC have detailed plans to back the offer up, looking at it from the Charity stand point even without the veto what entices them away from what they already have on the table?. Either way the Charity rejected the proposals.
Yes interesting that there were two options but more than having a snippet more information this all moves us forward how?
Are you not curious about the deluge of information suddenly coming out of a club this week? The timing the purpose? In the past it has always meant something else has been going on when such things have happened. Perhaps I am getting too old and cynical about all this.
Yes interesting that there were two options but more than having a snippet more information this all moves us forward how?
Are you not curious about the deluge of information suddenly coming out of a club this week? The timing the purpose? In the past it has always meant something else has been going on when such things have happened. Perhaps I am getting too old and cynical about all this.
hill83
Well-Known Member
Stop ruining the thread
Nick
Administrator
So if the ducks were already in a row it is pretty much safe to say that it was pointless CCFC bidding anything as they were always going to accept Wasps bid anyway? So all of the crap about "come and make an offer, it is down to the club" was all a bit cheeky. Somebody from Wasps was posting on here saying that it was always about 100% for Wasps, I very much doubt Wasps would have come here for 50%.
I am more curious about what part Cov Rugby have to play in it, as they seem to have kicked it all off.
olderskyblue
Well-Known Member
I think lots of people on here believe it (or not) and use it when it suits there argument,