The coventrian
Well-Known Member
Because its lies to keep gullible fans onside plus keeps the FL happy.
Because its lies to keep gullible fans onside plus keeps the FL happy.Brilliant work @mark82 and @Sky Blue Pete.
In 3 months you’ve done what the trust should have been doing for 5 years!
One thing that does my head in is “we have a shortlist of sites” why haven’t we bought a site in the time we’ve been told this?
Need to read the whole thread still,
They think what happened was unfair? You mean the council gifting wasps a lease on the ground sisu had vacated and said they didn't want? That ship has sailed etc etc.They were asked they won’t as they think what happened was unfair and even if they did the complaint would continue. As mark said that’s the answer we may not like it but we need something else
Stockholm syndrome??This is kinda my point. She can say “I love CCFC” and also “If rather keep them out of the city and potentially kill the club than say words I don’t believe and won’t have any impact but think are unfair” and that’s fine apparently.
Ditto “we are definitely looking for land” despite saying the same for six years with no evidence of progress.
And we just....accept that? Not just accept but get very very grumpy with anyone who doesn’t.
I honestly don’t get it. CET print “sky is blue” half the forum loses their mind and demands proof. Seppala says “court case that has nothing to do with CCFC is worth killing CCFC for and we’re buying land trust us” and no one bats an eyelid?
When I ask I get “lol of course there’s no stadium”. And we are fine with this?
Has us being top of the league convinced people we’d be OK out of Cov for the foreseeable? I swear just two days ago the same people were saying another year away would kill us. Yet now it’s fine for Seppala to not say some words cos she thinks that’s unfair. And we all get excited about the old fashioned stadium that we also admit isn’t real?
First bit is it’s also pointless. I’m reporting what was said by our owner I’m not agreeing with them. The final bit Is your opinion,I like you Pete so I say this with all the restraint I can manage.
You say it. Because the other party has been using backchannels to put out that they want you to say it. If you are convinced it won’t work then there is literally no downside to saying it and only upsides. The only possible downside is if you aren’t convinced it won’t work and are worried it will.
And it’s very easy to say “you can love CCFC and put in a court action against CCC” but that glosses over the fact that the court action is against the only stadium in the City you’re supposed to play in.
Same personal question to you as you support the court action: at what point do you stop believing it has merit and isn’t worth damaging the club for? A year? Another appeal? Two? Five years? Ten? What price justice when the cost is CCFC playing at home?
Just humour me even if you don’t think that’s the sticking point (though if that’s the case I’d love to hear what is in your opinion).
OP says they spoke to Wasps...
They think what happened was unfair? You mean the council gifting wasps a lease on the ground sisu had vacated and said they didn't want? That ship has sailed etc etc.
How in depth do you think?OP says they spoke to Wasps...
She said no, but that she thinks Schofield might be interested.Got a bit bored with Shmmee’s hissy fit so got in touch with Holly Willoughby to sound her out about the bj...looking promising!
Perhaps it was the crowds have been better than anticipated and we will continue to fund the club bit which has given the another year would kill us brigade (of which I'm one) a little bit of reassurance rather than the continually vague stadium plans.
Think you’ll find efl have allowed St. Andrews for 3 years then it’s back to Coventry.Because its lies to keep gullible fans onside plus keeps the FL happy.
Everyone is done with that.Fair enough. That makes sense. Personally while I’m glad the team are getting crowds that they deserve (well they deserve 30k every week) and that our owners aren’t about to pull the plug, I’m not convinced it’ll keep us up next year or be sustained through a likely relegation battle as well as the Ricoh would. It does also kinda tip the “where the fuck is the new ground?” Scale a little further. I want to know what’s different from the last six years where we’ve been looking for land? What are we doing differently and why weren’t we doing it six years ago? Who do we hold accountable, how and by when? I’m so fucking done with bullshit like “oh it’ll be a proper ground with pubs and standing and everything” before we’ve done step one.
First bit is it’s also pointless. I’m reporting what was said by our owner I’m not agreeing with them. The final bit Is your opinion,
I don’t support the court action. It’s insane it puts the very existence of our club in jeopardy but I’m not tyre director of the company that owns our football club. I have no idea if it has merit I know that one country giving back handers to companies so that they don’t move their business is something that inhibits free trade but I don’t know state aid law. We all assume we know that it will be thrown out I have no idea
If wasps paid £30m less for the lease than it was worth then that seems unfair. Do you know it’s not true? They were able to do a bond issue and have lots of money to spend. Imagine what an advantage this would give any sporting club to receive such an advantage?
As I said and it’s been reported Wasps have says their door is open for talks so I don’t think it’s the sticking point. For us fans we should attack each step until an agreement is made
OP says they spoke to Wasps...
I go cause I support ccfc. This season is too long isn’t it?????Im out for the night so need to end this madness. But: I 100% agree that the law on state aid is what it is (though ironically is one thing we will apparently be looking to change post Brexit), however it’s been rejected by the highest court in the land more than once, the council employs people who’s entire job is to check this stuff is legal, and it had unanimous council support. The chances of a serious error having been made are vanishingly small in reality.
The reason I’m so hung up on the magic words Wasps want said is precisely because Sisu are digging their heels in on it. It’s so pointless if you take the official line. “Oh I won’t say it because it’s pointless” as almost playground level distraction. It’s a few meaningless words that’ll have no effect and expose your negotiating partners lies to the public. Or it’s not and they could stop all this and they either know it or kinda suspect it after advice. And Wasps must be asking for a reason.
So as I see it yes the indemnity is shit and Wasps need quizzing on it and I hope if you get the chance you do and you’ve done excellent work getting it into the mainstream. But this thread is about discussions as fans with the owners and as a fan I have questions if they also have a lever to pull.
Is Sisu can withdraw the action, even potentially, I want them to. I’m convinced there’s no case to answer that’s clear enough to be missed by councillors, advisors and judges that’s worth the continued exile of the club. The club took a gamble, it didn’t pay off and now they’re over a barrel. It happens. Learn and move on.
The other indicator for me that I’m right is that Sisu insist on keeping the right to appeal and take further action. Dress it up as “not against Wasps” or whatever but to pretend Wasps would take an interest in an action not to do with the Ricoh itself is preposterous.
So we have a landlord who wants the legals to go away to help them finance in the future as I understand it, and have one lever to pull in withholding a deal. And a tenant who refuses to give up an ever decreasing chance of... what exactly? Are we even planning to get the Ricoh after a “win”? And is willing to stay away.
So my question is when do you get where I am, considering court action in one form or another can take decades? Maybe 20 years is hyperbolic, but is five? Or three? As the joke goes: we know what you are, we’re just negotiating on price. There will come a point I assume that everyone gets where I am, so I’m curious as to what people’s individual threshold is.
Now we’ve got two biased entrenched fans groups with half the info each and a refusal to ask questions lest they lose access. Yay.
Or a healthy understanding of each position. I recognised in my interactions with the ceo of wasps that I was allowing my frustration to mean I forgot to be polite I have since put this right. I will be extremely disappointed on a personal level if I was fobbed off about a meeting being possible if I managed to arrange this with Joy Seppala but if I was then so be it. It won’t change my belief that there has to be a resolution here somewhere.Apologies if I start this up again, because I confess at page six I skipped
tbf to Pete (and I'm sure he can correct me if I'm remembering badly) I vaguely remember him saying he knew Anne Lucas and John Mutton in some capacity, there was much he could understand from their POV and much he couldn't.
I'm not saying he'll get the answers because, let's face it, they all tell us what we want to hear (new stadium? Ha! Although I look forward to being shocked) but I am confident he's being sincere and is just reporting back what they say.
Personally, I'd consider this to be access to information, but I wouldn't trust the people giving the information as they have their own agendas. If, however, it gets us a step closer to the actual powerbrokers (Seppala and Richardson) talking to one another, then I can accept that.
And also it does no harm, as long as we always keep a healthy scepticism about whatever anybody involved in this palava says.
Im out for the night so need to end this madness. But: I 100% agree that the law on state aid is what it is (though ironically is one thing we will apparently be looking to change post Brexit), however it’s been rejected by the highest court in the land more than once, the council employs people who’s entire job is to check this stuff is legal, and it had unanimous council support. The chances of a serious error having been made are vanishingly small in reality.
The reason I’m so hung up on the magic words Wasps want said is precisely because Sisu are digging their heels in on it. It’s so pointless if you take the official line. “Oh I won’t say it because it’s pointless” as almost playground level distraction. It’s a few meaningless words that’ll have no effect and expose your negotiating partners lies to the public. Or it’s not and they could stop all this and they either know it or kinda suspect it after advice. And Wasps must be asking for a reason.
So as I see it yes the indemnity is shit and Wasps need quizzing on it and I hope if you get the chance you do and you’ve done excellent work getting it into the mainstream. But this thread is about discussions as fans with the owners and as a fan I have questions if they also have a lever to pull.
Is Sisu can withdraw the action, even potentially, I want them to. I’m convinced there’s no case to answer that’s clear enough to be missed by councillors, advisors and judges that’s worth the continued exile of the club. The club took a gamble, it didn’t pay off and now they’re over a barrel. It happens. Learn and move on.
The other indicator for me that I’m right is that Sisu insist on keeping the right to appeal and take further action. Dress it up as “not against Wasps” or whatever but to pretend Wasps would take an interest in an action not to do with the Ricoh itself is preposterous.
So we have a landlord who wants the legals to go away to help them finance in the future as I understand it, and have one lever to pull in withholding a deal. And a tenant who refuses to give up an ever decreasing chance of... what exactly? Are we even planning to get the Ricoh after a “win”? And is willing to stay away.
So my question is when do you get where I am, considering court action in one form or another can take decades? Maybe 20 years is hyperbolic, but is five? Or three? As the joke goes: we know what you are, we’re just negotiating on price. There will come a point I assume that everyone gets where I am, so I’m curious as to what people’s individual threshold is.
Apologies if I start this up again, because I confess at page six I skipped
tbf to Pete (and I'm sure he can correct me if I'm remembering badly) I vaguely remember him saying he knew Anne Lucas and John Mutton in some capacity, there was much he could understand from their POV and much he couldn't.
I'm not saying he'll get the answers because, let's face it, they all tell us what we want to hear (new stadium? Ha! Although I look forward to being shocked) but I am confident he's being sincere and is just reporting back what they say.
Personally, I'd consider this to be access to information, but I wouldn't trust the people giving the information as they have their own agendas. If, however, it gets us a step closer to the actual powerbrokers (Seppala and Richardson) talking to one another, then I can accept that.
And also it does no harm, as long as we always keep a healthy scepticism about whatever anybody involved in this palava says.
To be clear, what was said to be possible? A meeting between you, Mark and Derek Richardson along with Joy and Dave Boddy?Or a healthy understanding of each position. I recognised in my interactions with the ceo of wasps that I was allowing my frustration to mean I forgot to be polite I have since put this right. I will be extremely disappointed on a personal level if I was fobbed off about a meeting being possible if I managed to arrange this with Joy Seppala but if I was then so be it. It won’t change my belief that there has to be a resolution here somewhere.
I guess, to fragment it more, a healthy understanding of each communicated position would be more apt.Or a healthy understanding of each position.
I guess, to fragment it more, a healthy understanding of each communicated position would be more apt.
My main philosophy in all of this is to trust none of them and, alas, this usually proves the right approach to take more often than not. I wish it wasn't!
Which makes you a vastly more optimistic / good natured person than meI can’t live my life like that
Exactly what’s recorded. If I was able to get a commitment from joy to meet then Derek Richardson and Nick Eastwood would meet. Mark and I have many talents but to be frank it’s those two that need to get in a room and agree how to move forwardTo be clear, what was said to be possible? A meeting between you, Mark and Derek Richardson along with Joy and Dave Boddy?
Indeed. I really thought that sort of meeting would have already taken place.Exactly what’s recorded. If I was able to get a commitment from joy to meet then Derek Richardson and Nick Eastwood would meet. Mark and I have many talents but to be frank it’s those two that need to get in a room and agree how to move forward
Should have doneIndeed. I really thought that sort of meeting would have already taken place.
Brilliant work @mark82 and @Sky Blue Pete.
In 3 months you’ve done what the trust should have been doing for 5 years!
One thing that does my head in is “we have a shortlist of sites” why haven’t we bought a site in the time we’ve been told this?
Ill give you another go. Special Educational Needs differentiation and all that.
Why are you so against Sisu asking for the case to be forgotten *especially* if it can’t be dropped anyway?
Try and answer without playground insults about people who aren’t here. If you need help with the big words just give me a shout.
If you can’t answer this, back onto mute you go as you are clearly a troll.
One of you should definitely go, now that you've managed to get a foot in the door. No need for another vote -the previous vote gives you the mandate to represent the vast majority of the active members of this forum.I am happy for you to put it to the vote nick if people are happy for me to do so then I will willingly go
I don't think anybody would disagree with it anyway?One of you should definitely go, now that you've managed to get a foot in the door. No need for another vote -the previous vote gives you the mandate to represent the vast majority of the active members of this forum.
Interesting. Odd then that he has previously stated that the council would provide the club with assistance if legal action was dropped.Cllr Duggins says there’s nothing the council can do to help other than deal with any planning permission requests that come in in the normal way.
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?