skybluegaz2
New Member
I haven't posted for a long time, but feel I have to as the Telegraph does not allow ANY comments on a Les Reid story, especially as any criticism of Les on Twitter and his fan club jumps down your throat.
Todays classic Tweet from Les is : "Are there some #CCFC fans who still support ACL/council refusal to sign CVA which lost team 10 points? Tweet me & have yr say " Interesting that most tweets in response so far support ACL yet STILL Les spouts anti-ACL rubbish.
This coming from a reporter who claims less than 50 people "protesting" outside the Council House means we all support the line ACL are the villains for not gifting the Ricoh to SISU.
I'm really getting racked off that with a few wins behind SISU FC all of a sudden the "most important thing is to get SISU FC back at the Ricoh" - at ANY COST? Like gifting the Ricoh to SISU because we know they want itit for peanuts. So why can't Les see that. I would respect him more if he argued that. He also talks about the minimal cost of building the Ricoh to the taxpayer "as £40m came from Tesco." But what he fails to mention is that that £40m IS a cost to the taxpayer as it COULD have been spent on a school, but the Council chose to support the football club - so as a taxpayer I want that £40m back too if the Ricoh is sold.
Generally, Les's line is that we all want CCFC back at the Ricoh (we do) but ACL are equally at fault and cannot survive without CCFC (they aren't, and can - £400k rent a year from CCFC won't go far will it?). Am I alone in disagreeing with Les's biased reporting?
Todays classic Tweet from Les is : "Are there some #CCFC fans who still support ACL/council refusal to sign CVA which lost team 10 points? Tweet me & have yr say " Interesting that most tweets in response so far support ACL yet STILL Les spouts anti-ACL rubbish.
This coming from a reporter who claims less than 50 people "protesting" outside the Council House means we all support the line ACL are the villains for not gifting the Ricoh to SISU.
I'm really getting racked off that with a few wins behind SISU FC all of a sudden the "most important thing is to get SISU FC back at the Ricoh" - at ANY COST? Like gifting the Ricoh to SISU because we know they want itit for peanuts. So why can't Les see that. I would respect him more if he argued that. He also talks about the minimal cost of building the Ricoh to the taxpayer "as £40m came from Tesco." But what he fails to mention is that that £40m IS a cost to the taxpayer as it COULD have been spent on a school, but the Council chose to support the football club - so as a taxpayer I want that £40m back too if the Ricoh is sold.
Generally, Les's line is that we all want CCFC back at the Ricoh (we do) but ACL are equally at fault and cannot survive without CCFC (they aren't, and can - £400k rent a year from CCFC won't go far will it?). Am I alone in disagreeing with Les's biased reporting?