MP asks for CCFC intervention (19 Viewers)

duffer said:

Problem is, that it does hold up. It's a matter of public record...

http://coventryobserver.co.uk/news/...id-b-coventry-city-f-c-butts-groundshare/

... The Council would however wish to raise one issue following recent items in the local press suggesting that professional football was coming to the Butts Arena. I suspect that this is not the case however the Council naturally wants to protect its position as well as the Rugby Club.

It is suggested that we look to add a new clause 12 to the Licence which make a variation or agreement/acknowledgement between the parties that the reference within clause 13.1 of the lease to “any other leisure and sporting activities and uses” shall specifically exclude professional association football or training associated therewith.

Julie Sprayson – Place Team
Resources Directorate – Legal Services

Click to expand...

Yes but that didn't actually stop the football club going to the Butts.
The lease holder did.
Don't get me wrong it seems the council were trying to block it, but they said it was a judgement in error and was trying to see if the butts were in negotiations as oppose to a genuine attempt to block it.
They then said they wouldn't block it and would assess the planning permission like anyone else.
No whether you believe them or not is another mate but the FL need to deal with facts and the council never blocked them the leaseholder did.

Ian1779 said:

Then you've answered your own question.

Have SISU attempted to look at Butts as an option? Yes they have.

Did the leaseholder and/or others at the council look at ways to block the usage of the site by a football club? Yes they did.

You can argue over whether SISU were genuine and would have followed through but the evidence is now there that can be used by them if needed.

Click to expand...

Did the council block SISU, no
Have they explained what they were doing, yes
Did the lease holder actually block them, yes

You can believe them or not unfortunately you cannot actually disprove their explanation and they also said they wouldn't try and block any deal between SISU and the Butts.
The leaseholder said he wasn't interested in dealing with SISU which is his perogative
As I say the FL will need to deal with the facts not supposition

Nick said:

Vested interest = funding it...

Click to expand...

Yes he has a vested interest in promoting Rugby

Deleted member 5849 said:

Again, you're arguing over the 'truth' and in so doing, missing the point entirely.

There is enough evidence to present the case I've outlined. If you were the football league, would you take the side of your member... or some outside influences? Which would you choose *anyway* with *zero* argument to be made? Which would you choose when there most certainly *is* an argument to be made?

You don't have to believe it, I don't have to believe it. We are irrelevant. What's relevant is that it's there.

Click to expand...

I am merely saying what the FL have to deal with

dongonzalos said:

Did the council block SISU, no
Have they explained what they were doing, yes
Did the lease holder actually block them, yes

You can believe them or not unfortunately you cannot actually disprove their explanation and they also said they wouldn't try and block any deal between SISU and the Butts.
The leaseholder said he wasn't interested in dealing with SISU which is his perogative
As I say the FL will need to deal with the facts not supposition

Click to expand...

And the fact is, a letter trying to obstruct and make things difficult will be with them.

Nick said:

And the fact is, a letter trying to obstruct and make things difficult will be with them.

Click to expand...

Separately though I also wonder for SISU what is the point?

If it's not local, like with Northampton it will be a disaster again with 1000-2000 fans at the most.
Unless I really don't understand things which I probably don't. It's seems to me that SISU's only hope of getting money now is the legal action.
Do you still need to own the football club to do the legal action.
If you genuinely are unable to build a new stadium what's the point in moving CCFC to wherever to play Infront of non league crowds.
SISU will still have a policy of the club funds itself. So non league crowds will mean eventually non league football.
Before it made sense to move to starve ACL out.
Now it doesn't really make any sense at all. If moving becomes the only option then I can't see SISU carrying on with CCFC.
Not unless they can get a franchise situation somehow which I think is highly unlikely

dongonzalos said:

I am merely saying what the FL have to deal with

Click to expand...

Actually you're not. The club will have a portfolio of 'evidence' - you can question the legality of it all you want.

The FL will act to support its own member. It will not side with a third party.

Pure guesswork in part.........

We all know that "stories" of events differ. When you go to court the barrister paints a picture of what went on in order to place his clients claim in the best light. It doesn't mean it is the whole truth or even the full picture, it wont be fantasy or untruth though. What SISU could be gathering in is "evidence" that points towards CCFC being forced out of the City. It doesn't mean that there is a plan by others (CCC etc) to do so, but there is a possibility there could be. It would just mean that SISU could paint a picture using selected facts, letters, emails etc. that could be the basis of a court action that their investment has been deliberately sabotaged and they are due compensation.

Pure guess but I can see further legal actions based on the story that can be painted in order to get compensation for loss of investment, deliberate sabotage, mis-representation etc - that doesn't mean they are right or will win but there is a chance however small/minute of arguing a case. That's the thing about English Law isn't it every dog can have its day in court even if the story can be rebutted. Seen it before haven't we. Of course that could go on for years, doesn't mean that SISU have to still own CCFC, and could be very costly in time and legal fees, it could even lead to a payment to make it go away

Similarly with the FL. The club will present to the FL the facts etc that best support the things they are reporting. The FL are not well staffed to go investigate all of the claims and counter claims and in any case are there to support and assist its member clubs. The club is not doing anything wrong in doing that, and it is in the best interests of the club to tell the FL the facts/story from the clubs point of view. There is plenty of "evidence " that could be presented to the FL to argue their case it is not up to the club to argue against itself.

Another alternative is that SISU do not have a clue what they are doing. Frankly I find that to be a bit of a stretch. They might not run the club how we want it to be, they might not employ directors that we believe are up to the job (although each has been a clever intelligent person in their own right) but this isn't really about running a football club for SISU though is it. The people operating at Kensington Rd London are clever and good at what they do - that isn't running a football club though its high risk investment projects/strategies.

The club is just a tool for the purpose of extracting the best return for the investors. Originally that return was a quick promotion to Premiership riches, then it became acquisition at cheapest price of the Ricoh and the cash flow based value that could provide, now it seems to be headed towards compensation by repeated court action

Whilst the club breaks even in cash flow terms, it will cost SISU no more investment. The club will be allowed to float to its own level on its own means. I suspect the investor losses were crystallised several years ago when ownership transferred from the original funds, so the Sconset value of CCFC has always been low from that time and the current situation doesn't alter that too much. SISU will look for ways to extract worth/value, the whole SISU business appears based on high(er) risk investment and gaining return for investors, it isn't about running the business invested in. Court cases are a way of extracting worth. In all that lays much to be worried about for CCFC fans. In that lays the potential for decisions that you would not normally associate with a community based football club and large amount of concern/worry for the future of CCFC

I believe they are looking for a way out but with a return, I suspect they wish they had never been involved. . A return doesn't necessarily mean selling the business for great value (see above)

The thing is, whether it is meant or not. It very much does look like CCFC are being forced away.

Whether it is aimed to damage SISU or not, put all the facts down on paper about the butts, Wasps refusing to talk and the academy and how does it look to an outsider?

There is 1 ground in the city, the other possibility was the Butts.

Nick said:

The thing is, whether it is meant or not. It very much does look like CCFC are being forced away.

Whether it is aimed to damage SISU or not, put all the facts down on paper about the butts, Wasps refusing to talk and the academy and how does it look to an outsider?

There is 1 ground in the city, the other possibility was the Butts.

Click to expand...

That is certainly a picture that can be painted Nick and mainly from one side or slant, the only way a truth comes out is in court however. I think we as fans rely far too readily on mainly media output, assumption and hearsay, there is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes that often means the public picture is nothing like a truth. Assumption becomes a truth and it simply is not.

Could there be an organised plan yes equally I think you could argue (paint a picture of) people having given up and moving in a different direction. We don't know for sure no matter who puts out the PR

oldskyblue58 said:

That is certainly a picture that can be painted Nick and mainly from one side or slant, the only way a truth comes out is in court however. I think we as fans rely far too readily on mainly media output and hearsay, there is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes that often means the public picture is nothing like a truth. Assumption becomes a truth and it simply is not.

Could there be an organised plan yes equally I think you could argue (paint a picture of) people having given up and moving in a different direction. We don't know for sure no matter who puts out the PR

Click to expand...

If people had given up and gone in a different direction, it would be a straight up "no we dont want to work with you, we have moved on" rather than the "we will work with you IF you do this".

My first post, although I've been reading the forum for 18 months or so. I know that this might be contentious, but...

I think anyone new coming to this long running debate will quickly scan the records for the relevant information to get up to speed, whether they be Sport England, the Football League, City councillors, Media outlets etc. and will read the verdict of the legal proceedings which are very critical of Sisu's behaviour in attempting to distress ACL to gain control of the stadium for next to nothing. Whether most people on this forum agree or not, most impartial people are likely to come to the conclusion that Sisu have brought the current situation upon themselves, and continue to behave in an unhelpful, or some would say destructive way. (I'm aware of all the counter arguments).

I also believe that there is a way out of this mess. Good businesses are built on skill and judgement, but thrive through demonstrating the right attitudes and behaviours inside their own business and alongside other businesses..

If Sisu changed their approach - invested in the club and had open honest dialogue with the other interested parties then I believe that there would be a chance that other parties would work with them to improve the situation. If they continue the way they are, then no one has to come to the table to help them. They will drown in isolation.

In the real world, a home for CCFC at the Ricoh and an Academy at The Higgs shouldn't be that difficult to resolve.

They seem to have an 'entitlement' mentality which manifests itself in a belief that irrespective of what they do to others they still feel that everyone has an obligation to help them. Let's hope a change in attitude is coming.

And for some balance - Wasps were ruthless/smart opportunists who probably can't believe their luck, and CCC are a local authority sometimes out of their depth in dealing with complex issues.

And to save anyone asking : i'm a Cov Kid born a stones throw away from the old gas works, I'm a Cov fan, and I also like rugby.

dongonzalos said:

Yes but that didn't actually stop the football club going to the Butts.
The lease holder did.
Don't get me wrong it seems the council were trying to block it, but they said it was a judgement in error and was trying to see if the butts were in negotiations as oppose to a genuine attempt to block it.
They then said they wouldn't block it and would assess the planning permission like anyone else.
No whether you believe them or not is another mate but the FL need to deal with facts and the council never blocked them the leaseholder did.

Click to expand...

Nothing to do with what I or you believe - it's on record. The facts are that the Council took steps that as a matter of public record said that they were seeking to protect their position by locking CCFC out of the Butts. It's absolutely undeniable, it's there in black and white mate.

That is as clear evidence as you like that the Council were prepared to try to stop CCFC moving to the Butts. The leaseholder was involved after the fact, and subsequent retractions carry little weight given what the council are now demanding.

Your faith in the FL is touching, but I think misplaced. CCFC can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that neither the council nor Wasps are willing to help keep the club in Coventry. Wasps have said that they don't want to negotiate, CCC tried to block the move to the Butts, and have subsequently demanded money that they as yet have no legal claim to.

There's probably a stronger case now for moving the club out of the city than there has ever been before. Don't expect the FL to get in the way, when with a much weaker argument they allowed the club to slope off to Northampton.

duffer said:

Nothing to do with what I or you believe - it's on record. The facts are that the Council took steps that as a matter of public record said that they were seeking to protect their position by locking CCFC out of the Butts. It's absolutely undeniable, it's there in black and white mate.

That is as clear evidence as you like that the Council were prepared to try to stop CCFC moving to the Butts. The leaseholder was involved after the fact, and subsequent retractions carry little weight given what the council are now demanding.

Your faith in the FL is touching, but I think misplaced. CCFC can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that neither the council nor Wasps are willing to help keep the club in Coventry. Wasps have said that they don't want to negotiate, CCC tried to block the move to the Butts, and have subsequently demanded money that they as yet have no legal claim to.

There's probably a stronger case now for moving the club out of the city than there has ever been before. Don't expect the FL to get in the way, when with a much weaker argument they allowed the club to slope off to Northampton.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

I have read people demanding that the FL take the Golden Share away and give it to somebody else, how on earth can they do that?

The FL can't really do anything in this, shouting at them is pointless. It is just a way of trying to pressure CCFC rather than Wasps, who openly say they won't talk.

oldskyblue58 said:

I believe they are looking for a way out but with a return, I suspect they wish they had never been involved.

Click to expand...

Completely agree with this. The idea that SISU won't sell or will only sell for £60m is crazy for me. They didn't want to own a football club in the first place, it was simply an investment. They certainly don't want to own a football club that is, at best, breaking even for years to come.

Total guess work but I suspect if someone offered them £15m to sell and write off all the debt they would snap their hand off.

I think Chiefdave is right in that SISU must be looking for an exit strategy and I personally dont think it would take much for them to go.

All the other interested parties are playing them at their own game and 'distressing' them by simply doing nothing and waiting.

Sisu have nowhere to go with this, and in my opinion things would change massively for CCFC's future if Sisu were gone. It is in CCC's, Wasps, and CSFs interests for CCFC (the club and the people of Coventry) to be successful and a good neighbour.

Red Hills Cov Kid said:

I think Chiefdave is right in that SISU must be looking for an exit strategy and I personally dont think it would take much for them to go.

All the other interested parties are playing them at their own game and 'distressing' them by simply doing nothing and waiting.

Sisu have nowhere to go with this, and in my opinion things would change massively for CCFC's future if Sisu were gone. It is in CCC's, Wasps, and CSFs interests for CCFC (the club and the people of Coventry) to be successful and a good neighbour.

Click to expand...

It really isn't in Wasps interest for CCFC to be successful. If CCFC got to the Premier League, they would be far too powerful a force.

Ian1779 said:

Actually you're not. The club will have a portfolio of 'evidence' - you can question the legality of it all you want.

The FL will act to support its own member. It will not side with a third party.

Click to expand...

Not questioning the legality of it. Just that they will deal with the facts not supposition.
The council did not not block the butts deal or any other deal as there never has been any deal to be blocked on any location.

The FL will be far more demanding in requiring proof of both the clubs intention and cabability of building a new stadium, this time round.
They will not want to be seen to be approving franchising if a new stadium can't actually be built.

If that's the case then any club can say we can't build or get a new stadium in our home city so we are off to wherever

dongonzalos said:

Not questioning the legality of it. Just that they will deal with the facts not supposition.
The council did not not block the butts deal or any other deal as there never has been any deal to be blocked on any location.

The FL will be far more demanding in requiring proof of both the clubs intention and cabability of building a new stadium, this time round.
They will not want to be seen to be approving franchising if a new stadium can't actually be built.

If that's the case then any club can say we can't build or get a new stadium in our home city so we are off to wherever

Click to expand...

It isn't supposition though is it? It is fact, it hasn't been made up.

The fact is, as soon as they got wind about it they tried to obstruct it and make it difficult.

If the club are being obstructed, then from their eyes what are they meant to do? They can't be a hostage to the 1 ground in the city, otherwise that gives Wasps the right to do whatever they want.

Haven't the council also publically stated there is no land to build one?

All of these little soundbites will all be in a folder to show the football league.

Even if CCFC have farted and the council said no, that will be written down to show the FL.

dongonzalos said:

Not questioning the legality of it. Just that they will deal with the facts not supposition.
The council did not not block the butts deal or any other deal as there never has been any deal to be blocked on any location.

The FL will be far more demanding in requiring proof of both the clubs intention and cabability of building a new stadium, this time round.
They will not want to be seen to be approving franchising if a new stadium can't actually be built.

If that's the case then any club can say we can't build or get a new stadium in our home city so we are off to wherever

Click to expand...

Yes it is a fact. See Duffers post - it's a matter of public record.

Nick said:

It really isn't in Wasps interest for CCFC to be successful. If CCFC got to the Premier League, they would be far too powerful a force.

Click to expand...

I understand why you would say that, but I think there is room for both to be successful. Obviously a lot would depend upon who ultimately owned the football club, but to dismiss it as a possibility would be very closed minded. I appreciate the revenue stream arguments are important but what are the alternatives? Wasps aren't going anywhere soon.

Red Hills Cov Kid said:

I understand why you would say that, but I think there is room for both to be successful. Obviously a lot would depend upon who ultimately owned the football club, but to dismiss it as a possibility would be very closed minded. I appreciate the revenue stream arguments are important but what are the alternatives? Wasps aren't going anywhere soon.

Click to expand...

Imagine CCFC get to the Premier League, it will be a case of "who are Wasps" if we had Chelsea, Liverpool and Man Utd at home every other week.

It isn't close minded, it is common sense. The same as it wasn't close minded when people said Wasps buying the Ricoh was a disaster for CCFC and got told otherwise.

duffer said:

Nothing to do with what I or you believe - it's on record. The facts are that the Council took steps that as a matter of public record said that they were seeking to protect their position by locking CCFC out of the Butts. It's absolutely undeniable, it's there in black and white mate.

That is as clear evidence as you like that the Council were prepared to try to stop CCFC moving to the Butts. The leaseholder was involved after the fact, and subsequent retractions carry little weight given what the council are now demanding.

Your faith in the FL is touching, but I think misplaced. CCFC can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that neither the council nor Wasps are willing to help keep the club in Coventry. Wasps have said that they don't want to negotiate, CCC tried to block the move to the Butts, and have subsequently demanded money that they as yet have no legal claim to.

There's probably a stronger case now for moving the club out of the city than there has ever been before. Don't expect the FL to get in the way, when with a much weaker argument they allowed the club to slope off to Northampton.

Click to expand...

Also in black and white

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/council-wont-put-obstacles-way-11364578

Grendel said:

Yes it is a fact. See Duffers post - it's a matter of public record.

Click to expand...

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/council-wont-put-obstacles-way-11364578

dongonzalos said:

Also in black and white

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/council-wont-put-obstacles-way-11364578

Click to expand...

You do realise he was saying that after they had been found out? Also after they knew Millerchip wouldn't allow it also?

How naive are you? They had ALREADY tried to obstruct at that point.

Nick said:

Imagine CCFC get to the Premier League, it will be a case of "who are Wasps" if we had Chelsea, Liverpool and Man Utd at home every other week.

It isn't close minded, it is common sense. The same as it wasn't close minded when people said Wasps buying the Ricoh was a disaster for CCFC and got told otherwise.

Click to expand...

I think you are looking at it with your footy goggles on. The demographic for the two sports is completely different and they could co-exist in the same stadium. By the time Cov get back in the Premiership Wasps are likely to be the biggest rugby club in Europe. Anyone with rugby goggles on would be happy with that. Isn't it reported that Wasps have 22 revenue streams? I don't think they would be too worried about fortnightly Premiership football.

Red Hills Cov Kid said:

I think you are looking at it with your footy goggles on. The demographic for the two sports is completely different and they could co-exist in the same stadium. By the time Cov get back in the Premiership Wasps are likely to be the biggest rugby club in Europe. Anyone with rugby goggles on would be happy with that. Isn't it reported that Wasps have 22 revenue streams? I don't think they would be too worried about fortnightly Premiership football.

Click to expand...

It isn't just about the rent coming from CCFC is it and it's nothing to do with Footy Googles. The exposure that CCFC in the Premier League would get would be massive compared to Wasps. The advertising would be all about CCFC, the naming rights would be all about CCFC.

CCFC would get too powerful, they would be able to call the shots. they would have the premier league and FA kissing their arse if anybody like the council ever acted up.

To sit there and say Wasps would want CCFC to be as successful as possible is just swallowing their PR.

Nick said:

You do realise he was saying that after they had been found out? Also after they knew Millerchip wouldn't allow it also?

How naive are you?

Click to expand...

Not naive in the slightest.

You are just joining the dots and deciding you don't believe their explanation and this statement.
I am inclined to agree with you, our opinion counts for didly squat.

The facts do.

Neither of us know for a fact if the council are telling the truth or lying. They have given their explanation.

Before an application of any form has been submitted. They have said on public record, they will not put any obstacles in the way. (You don't believe them again that is your opinion)

No application has been submitted and the lease holder said he doesn't want the business.

I appreciate you can show a link between the lease holder and the council. However he is not employed by them and us not saying his decision is anything to do with the council.

So you can call me naive. Others can keep repeating that the council have "blocked" the football club. However fact of the matter is so far there has never been anything for the council to ever actually block.

Nick said:

It isn't just about the rent coming from CCFC is it and it's nothing to do with Footy Googles. The exposure that CCFC in the Premier League would get would be massive compared to Wasps. The advertising would be all about CCFC, the naming rights would be all about CCFC.

CCFC would get too powerful, they would be able to call the shots. they would have the premier league and FA kissing their arse if anybody like the council ever acted up.

To sit there and say Wasps would want CCFC to be as successful as possible is just swallowing their PR.

Click to expand...

No - it just means that I have a different opinion to you Nick.
Jeese - I've only been a member for 2 hours and you guys are like men in black showing up in record time to shut down any dissenting voices!

At least I got a trophy for joining!

No, whether they were trying to fish or not.

The letter they wrote was clearly trying to obstruct any deal. The letter didn't say "heard a rumour, just wondering what was going on?"

I am not saying the council are the reason it stopped, it is the fact they moved to try and obstruct it when they got wind.

That is a fact... They actually did it.

Just because he puts out a statement saying "no we wont block it" and everybody follows it tells it's own tale, he was safe in the knowledge Millerchip was going to put a condition about their legal action (nothing to do with him) on anyway and block it

Red Hills Cov Kid said:

No - it just means that I have a different opinion to you Nick.
Jeese - I've only been a member for 2 hours and you guys are like men in black showing up in record time to shut down any dissenting voices!

At least I got a trophy for joining!

Click to expand...

I'm not shutting anybody down, it is disagreeing and it was quite constructive as well wasn't it?

Nick said:

I'm not shutting anybody down, it is disagreeing and it was quite constructive as well wasn't it?

Click to expand...

The bit about people like me being gullible and falling for PR, suggesting I haven't got a mind of my own wasn't very constructive. I know PR is your pet thing of the moment, but it doesn't mean you are right and everyone else is off the mark.

The hypothetical bit about what might happen if Cov get to the Premier League was interesting but debatable.

What CCFC desperately needs is a fix now, and not a flowery debate what might possibly happen in 5 - 10 years time if they become a superpower again

Nick said:

It isn't just about the rent coming from CCFC is it and it's nothing to do with Footy Googles. The exposure that CCFC in the Premier League would get would be massive compared to Wasps. The advertising would be all about CCFC, the naming rights would be all about CCFC.

CCFC would get too powerful, they would be able to call the shots. they would have the premier league and FA kissing their arse if anybody like the council ever acted up.

To sit there and say Wasps would want CCFC to be as successful as possible is just swallowing their PR.

Click to expand...

and yet they (CCFC) still might not own any rights to the ground and therefore the various income streams including naming rights - Wasps would, and could happily sit on the back of CCFC being in the Premiership. Wasps do not have to create a deal favourable to CCFC, and any deal will make sure Wasps benefit from CCFC success.

Football will be the bigger PR draw Premiership vs Premiership but it is all about the finance and what you have to do to get it. You could argue that Wasps would definitely benefit from CCFC success

CCFC could build their own stadium of course but take a look at the lower end Premiership teams and how much they spend of their turnover (mainly from media then ticket sales) on wages let alone the amounts paid out in transfer fees just to stay there. To get the income you think then they will have to build and we all know the problems with that

Wasps do not rely solely on their own match day income at the Ricoh let alone a CCFC one Premiership or otherwise

It is not that simple. Plus I doubt I will see CCFC in the premiership for a sustained period ever again in my life time, if they get there at all. Premiership? that's just a fans everlasting (dare I say unrealistic) hope and fantasy for the foreseeable future.

Red Hills Cov Kid said:

The bit about people like me being gullible and falling for PR, suggesting I haven't got a mind of my own wasn't very constructive. I know PR is your pet thing of the moment, but it doesn't mean you are right and everyone else is off the mark.

The hypothetical bit about what might happen if Cov get to the Premier League was interesting but debatable.

What CCFC desperately needs is a fix now, and not a flowery debate what might possibly happen in 5 - 10 years time if they become a superpower again

Click to expand...

PR isn't my pet thing, people have been gulping it down since PWKH was on here years ago whipping up a storm. It is maybe the fact I can see it in action and have seen how people suddenly change after a press statement explains a fair bit.

My point was you saying Wasps want CCFC to be successful, I gave some reasons why they wouldn't, you played it down as hypothetical.

Nick said:

PR isn't my pet thing, people have been gulping it down since PWKH was on here years ago whipping up a storm. It is maybe the fact I can see it in action and have seen how people suddenly change after a press statement explains a fair bit.

My point was you saying Wasps want CCFC to be successful, I gave some reasons why they wouldn't, you played it down as hypothetical.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. If you don't put me in the gullible bracket with 'the others' we will get along fine!

I think it is easy to take a position with the whole Wasps thing, based on a negative perspective, which is understandable. I'm just saying that with all things it doesn't necessarily have to play out how you imagine. It could be a whole lot better.
For Sisu, doing nothing is not a viable option. For the city fans, arguing for immediate change and action for the sake of CCFC is in my opinion essential