D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
And the football league have been consulted every step of the way on the Butts proposal, and shown round the site.
sisu gave an undertaking to propose their new ground venture ages ago and haven't have they
I would take an educated guess the FL would not see SISU as being blackmailed, sisu gave an undertaking to propose their new ground venture ages ago and haven't have they ? That is why the FL gave us a concession to their 10 year ground rule and allowed us a 2+2 temporary deal to rent the Ricoh and I seem to remember at the time some rumblings from other clubs about it. Remember there are loads of ex FL clubs with very adequate grounds looking to get in the FL.
Dropping them or choosing not to go ahead with them is the same result, either way it means no legal action. You knew that was what Astute meant.
Can you make you're mind up about this?
"SISU choosing not to proceed is them dropping it isn't it?" - the answer to this is, as I've said several times, no.
You then say turn it 'pretty much' - no it's not.
Now you've switched to it being the same result!
Not going ahead with JR2 is not them dropping it. You can't drop something you haven't started.
What I'm on about is the fact that our current deal at the Ricoh ends before JR1 is likely to run its course, let alone JR2.
If Wasps won't restart talks with CCFC while SISU are engaged with CCC in JR1 or JR2 that will impact the club severely. We will have no choice other than to leave the Ricoh. It is naive in the extreme to think it won't be present as the fault of CCFC and / or SISU rather than those operating the stadium.
Christ, I've never known anyone be so obtuse!Not going ahead with JR2 is not them dropping it. You can't drop something you haven't started.
SISU want to proceed with legal action, whilst I don't believe it's the correct course of action, if they believe it is then they should be able to proceed as they deem appropriate.
Wasps want to put negotiations on hold, whilst I don't believe it's the correct course of action, if they believe it is then they should be able to proceed as they deem appropriate.
Nick, I will say this again the Butts will not happen, never pass planning in a million years which could include the Secretary of State by the way. SISU gave the Football League a promise, guarantee, assurance call it what you want to give hard and fast new ground proposals ages ago which would have to include the financing details too, forget BPA !
And the only conclusion you can draw from that is that unless SISU drop (or don't even start in the case of JR2 if you're going to argue semantics) legal action against a third party (CCC) we will no longer be able to to play at the Ricoh. If CCFC are willing to talk to Wasps and Wasps aren't willing to talk to CCFC do you not think, at the very least, a percentage of the blame would lie with Wasps?
The league will be in a tough position. You have to remember here SISU and Otium are different entities from a legal perspective. What do the league do if Otium, as the football club, go to them and say Wasps refuse to even talk to them about staying at the Ricoh and a new stadium, at the Butts or elsewhere, could be years away - citing the fact that the council have already tried to block them playing at the Butts.Just that in the FL's eyes I think the club would give them enough to show issues they are against wouldn't they?
I certainly don't believe that continuing with court action is what SISU should be doing. It continues to harm our football club. But who are Wasps to give SISU the ultimatum of give up all legal actions before they will continue with negotiations on us staying at the Ricoh? All this shite was going on before they arrived on the scene. They know that they can't tell SISU what they can or can't do. It is their legal right. But they can refuse to negotiate on us staying there. So yes they have not told SISU that they can't continue with legal matters. But it is blackmail at best. And why have they added a clause to negotiations?SISU want to proceed with legal action, whilst I don't believe it's the correct course of action, if they believe it is then they should be able to proceed as they deem appropriate.
Wasps want to put negotiations on hold, whilst I don't believe it's the correct course of action, if they believe it is then they should be able to proceed as they deem appropriate.
The one thing that is happening Nick is this pot is starting to bubble now and will continue too and needs to.I'm not saying it will.
Just that in the FL's eyes I think the club would give them enough to show issues they are against wouldn't they?
But the Football League have a duty to the 91 other members in a soon to be re-gigged league. Some of those may say as well as others on the outside wanting in all armed with lawyers how many chances do we get and I think it would be difficult to seperate otium and sisu to be honest.it may have been otium representing the football club who gave ground proposal promises anyway.The league will be in a tough position. You have to remember here SISU and Otium are different entities from a legal perspective. What do the league do if Otium, as the football club, go to them and say Wasps refuse to even talk to them about staying at the Ricoh and a new stadium, at the Butts or elsewhere, could be years away - citing the fact that the council have already tried to block them playing at the Butts.
The options for the league will be either kick us out or allow another groundshare. Kick us out and no doubt more legal action will follow.
It is quite clear what Astute was getting at, why are you obsessing over an exact word?
It wouldn't be an easy desicion either way. As far as we've fallen the FL kicking Coventry City out of the league would be big news and might shine more of a spotlight on how the league is run than they'd like.But the Football League have a duty to the 91 other members in a soon to be re-gigged league. Some of those may say as well as others on the outside wanting in all armed with lawyers how many chances do we get and I think it would be difficult to seperate otium and sisu to be honest.it may have been otium representing the football club who gave ground proposal promises anyway.
But it is blackmail at best.
"A person is guilty of blackmail if, with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces."
What do you think the intended result of Wasps not speaking with he football club is?
It wouldn't be an easy desicion either way. As far as we've fallen the FL kicking Coventry City out of the league would be big news and might shine more of a spotlight on how the league is run than they'd like.
If we're worrying about league regulations being broken I'm more concerned that yet again the rugby has dictated when we can play at the Ricoh, with our first game of the season having to be away to accommodate the rugby. That's a clear and direct breach of the regulations that require the football club to have primacy.
The football fixtures aren't released until 22nd June Dave, rugby fixtures some weeks later. How do you know this?
"A person is guilty of blackmail if, with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces."
What do you think the intended result of Wasps not speaking with he football club is?
What are the 'unwarranted demand with menaces' ?
"The negotiations are on hold until the legal matters are resolved" isn't, so maybe you can enlighten me?
You know me...I'd be the first to criticisee Wasps but in their defence, it's a tournament they're hosting and have done so before...it's not necessarily a Wasps game. And we could be drawn away on the first game of the season so it would be irrelevant.
If we have many Sunday games this season then I'd agree but I a one off for a tournament, I don't think it's a big thing.
Really?? Surely the menace is knowing that it could screw the football club over?
Where's the demand? What demand have they made? You can't just pick and choose the parts that you think fit.
They have said they won't negotiate until the legal matters are resolved. I am sure you aren't stupid.
The demand is that legal matters are resolved, what are the chances of all legal avenues being exhausted before the current agreement expires?
That's not a demand.
A demand is telling someone they must do something - "You must drop the legal action".
Allowing a course of action already underway to conclude prior to negoations isn't telling anyone to do anything, therefore not a demand.
It's not blackmail.
It is if there is a timescale involved though isn't it? ie the only way for the legal action to be stopped before the current rent agreement is for SISU to stop it, otherwise the club aren't at the ricoh.
'You must stop all legal actions or we won't continue with negotiations'Where's the demand? What demand have they made? You can't just pick and choose the parts that you think fit.
'You must stop all legal actions or we won't continue with negotiations'
'We will only continue with negotiations if all legal actions stop'
Both mean exactly the same. One was said. Yet you say the other is totally different. Why?
One was said? Where and when? It's a direct quote?
Are you suggesting that there circumstances where the legal actions would continue for ever, they'd never stop?
What demand has been made?
Why aren't SISU/CCFC pursuing legal act regarding this apparent blackmail?
For clarification, this isn't blackmail.
So what do you think was said and what do you think was meant by it?One was said? Where and when? It's a direct quote?
Are you suggesting that there circumstances where the legal actions would continue for ever, they'd never stop?
What demand has been made?
Why aren't SISU/CCFC pursuing legal act regarding this apparent blackmail?
For clarification, this isn't blackmail.
So what do you think was said and what do you think was meant by it?
And do you wear black and yellow at weekends?
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?