new statement (13 Viewers)

shmmeee said:

Let’s be blunt here. It’s picking up on a couple of woolly statements from Councillors. It’s not a smoking gun. It’s not any different to any other politician blather.

What matters isn’t comments from individuals if they are to prove a conspiracy, it’s the meetings of and reports to the council as a whole. And that left a loophole big enough to drive a bus through. Because no sane person would sign a lease that forces them to have a tenant at any cost.

I know you desperately want it to be a smoking gun, I get it, a quick Sisu win and this whole thing is behind us. But this ain’t it. Just like it wasn’t it the last ten times either.

This is just an attempt to get pressure on the council, without any actual action they want the council to take. It’s just screaming into the void, the Sisu version of the tiny sky blue coffin.

It’s not enough of a vote winner to impact the council and it’s not solid enough to be legally useful.

What it is is a sign that we likely won’t be playing in Cov next year.

Click to expand...

In what way was the council commitment 'woolly'? It's there in black and white, a promise that the deal wouldn't hurt the club.

There is nothing vague in that promise, it clearly was not time limited, and if the Council couldn't deliver it then they shouldn't have promised it when voting on the deal.

They could have insisted on a clause that the club should always be offered a deal on commercial terms, perhaps based on some kind of formula. If for whatever reason Wasps wouldn't take it on that basis, then the council could have declined to sell.

The council should not get a free pass here, they are guilty as both individuals and as an organisation of serial deception. That should never be accepted or tolerated imho.

duffer said:

If that wasn't really an option then why did the council say that it was at the point we returned?

In the politest way that I can frame it, you shoot down your own argument here - the fact that you say the Ricoh needs the club shows that there was always a deal to be made... if it wasn't for the shady double dealing with Wasps who knows where we would be now.

The legals would have finished with JR1, and the club (having lost) still wouldn't have built a new ground. A deal would have suited both sides, regardless of their mutual antipathy.

Click to expand...

I don't shoot down my argument at all, to put it bluntly the council by this time had decided to wash it's hands of both the Ricoh, and ccfc, despite any public statements they made, the reality is that they got rid of a potential massive problem at the very first oppertunity by selling to wasps. The council have far better things to do than worry about than our football club and it's intransigent owners. Im sure they had no will whatsoever to be flexible with a buisiness that had wilfully broken legaly binding contracts to deliberately try and distress ACL Ltd and the council.
I'd go as far as to say it looked like the council's attitude was fuck sisu

Nick said:

Might be easier in a new thread as it is on a couple of threads at the minute.

They do make a couple of decent points, Duggins does hide behind the "blame SISU" time and time again.

Click to expand...

He’s a politician, he’s not stupid and knows the ‘blame Sisu’ line is one that is willingly accepted by the majority of our fans.

The situation is far more nuanced that you cannot possibly blame one party.

Mucca Mad Boys said:

He’s a politician, he’s not stupid and knows the ‘blame Sisu’ line is one that is willingly accepted by the majority of our fans.

The situation is far more nuanced that you cannot possibly blame one party.

Click to expand...

SISU hard tactics got us into this mess however the council and now wasps are adding to the mess. Sisu have to try and win the final case if not just think of the money they have lost. Interestingly enough I think each party has been responsible for their own costs to date which suggests the case isn't without some merit. I think we are in a situation where there are no winners. The best result would be for wasps to sell us a half share in acl and the Ricoh and us to be responsible for half the costs. This cannot happen whilst there is legal action as you cannot have one party suing a partner. In the interim wasps need to make an offer which they can make unprejudiced to give the club a years extension so when the legal battles are over we can reach an agreement that suits all parties

fatso said:

The loss of what football club?
When the announcement was made to sell the Ricoh to wasps, the club was going to have a new ground within the city!
So no loss of revenue, no impact to the local economy, just an empty Ricoh.

You can’t use hindsite, to slate the decision to sell.

Click to expand...

People seem to really enjoy using this about the non-stadium. As if it will make them feel better when the clubs gone.

fatso said:

I'd go as far as to say it looked like the council's attitude was fuck sisu

Click to expand...

Which is fine if the council were a corporate body, but part of the argument is can a public body like the council carry such prejudices when dealing with public assets?

Monty said:

SISU hard tactics got us into this mess however the council and now wasps are adding to the mess. Sisu have to try and win the final case if not just think of the money they have lost. Interestingly enough I think each party has been responsible for their own costs to date which suggests the case isn't without some merit. I think we are in a situation where there are no winners. The best result would be for wasps to sell us a half share in acl and the Ricoh and us to be responsible for half the costs. This cannot happen whilst there is legal action as you cannot have one party suing a partner. In the interim wasps need to make an offer which they can make unprejudiced to give the club a years extension so when the legal battles are over we can reach an agreement that suits all parties

Click to expand...

I agree that SISU has themselves to blame for a lot of the mess they find themselves in. However, the CCC and the Wasps are gambling on our future by trying to blackmail our owners, rightly or wrongly is irrelevant at this point. I'll reiterate that I don't know what SISU hope to gain from legal action, but, their right to take legal action shouldn't be infringed upon and the legal system will sort it out -- and it has, as it's sided with CCC/Wasps at every level so far.

Personally, I would be happy if the CCFC and Wasps worked cooperatively and one day the football club are able to acquire half of the RICOH. I don't have a problem with Wasps per se, but the Council and Wasps have to be held to account on their assurances that Coventry City (and the CRFC) would be protected by Wasps' purchase of the RICOH. Frankly, most of our fans seem blissfully ignorant of what the Council and Wasps have said and only seem to want to protest SISU over and over and the situation is far more nuanced to blame one party or the other.

It is disappointing seeing the Council be more than willing to sell the club down the river, I'm genuinely in disbelief that they valued our 'future' at four years.

Mucca Mad Boys said:

I agree that SISU has themselves to blame for a lot of the mess they find themselves in. However, the CCC and the Wasps are gambling on our future by trying to blackmail our owners, rightly or wrongly is irrelevant at this point. I'll reiterate that I don't know what SISU hope to gain from legal action, but, their right to take legal action shouldn't be infringed upon and the legal system will sort it out -- and it has, as it's sided with CCC/Wasps at every level so far.

Personally, I would be happy if the CCFC and Wasps worked cooperatively and one day the football club are able to acquire half of the RICOH. I don't have a problem with Wasps per se, but the Council and Wasps have to be held to account on their assurances that Coventry City (and the CRFC) would be protected by Wasps' purchase of the RICOH. Frankly, most of our fans seem blissfully ignorant of what the Council and Wasps have said and only seem to want to protest SISU over and over and the situation is far more nuanced to blame one party or the other.

It is disappointing seeing the Council be more than willing to sell the club down the river, I'm genuinely in disbelief that they valued our 'future' at four years.

Click to expand...

The problem is in that sense that the Sky Blue Trust and other protests groups like TJHW don't do anything to scrutinise against the other parties that have created this situation, maybe it's not within their remit to do so or they choose not to.

Personally I think all sides should be made to account for their actions, but SISU seem to be getting the brunt, probably due to their lack of transparency they're an easy target to push blame onto.

RoboCCFC90 said:

The problem is in that sense that the Sky Blue Trust and other protests groups like TJHW don't do anything to scrutinise against the other parties that have created this situation, maybe it's not within their remit to do so or they choose not to.

Personally I think all sides should be made to account for their actions, but SISU seem to be getting the brunt, probably due to their lack of transparency they're an easy target to push blame onto.

Click to expand...

The others have a lack of transparency also.

Why wouldn't it be in their remit? They just choose not to, so the other sides get an easy ride to take the piss and do what they want.

It's been the same for years.

Nick said:

The others have a lack of transparency also.

Why wouldn't it be in their remit? They just choose not to, so the other sides get an easy ride to take the piss and do what they want.

It's been the same for years.

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.

SISU are invisible, it's an easy target to attack them, whereas protesting against CCC/Wasps will have affects on their "relationships" with the Trust.

kg82 said:

People seem to really enjoy using this about the non-stadium. As if it will make them feel better when the clubs gone.

Click to expand...

Ffs, some people just don't get it.
No fucker wants the club gone, but people need to understand why decisions were made, any idiot can come on here and say the council are a bunch of tossers, but how many understand the political situation behind the matter AT THE TIME!.
understand this, (if nothing else) although mistakes have been made by ALL sides, if the club folds, the ultimate responsibility will be SISU's and No one else's.
Just remember that when people on here start kicking off at the council house.

fatso said:

Ffs, some people just don't get it.
No fucker wants the club gone, but people need to understand why decisions were made, any idiot can come on here and say the council are a bunch of tossers, but how many understand the political situation behind the matter AT THE TIME!.
understand this, (if nothing else) although mistakes have been made by ALL sides, if the club folds, the ultimate responsibility will be SISU's and No one else's.
Just remember that when people on here start kicking off at the council house.

Click to expand...

Plenty understand it, it looks as if it is you who doesn't seem to be grasping it.

As I said, it's looking a bit desperate

SBAndy said:

Which is fine if the council were a corporate body, but part of the argument is can a public body like the council carry such prejudices when dealing with public assets?

Click to expand...

I hear your point. But the public asset was about to become a massive drain on public finances.
(Once sisu made public their intention to build their own stadium)
In hindsight of course it was all Bull shit, but the council couldn't sit around and do nothing.

fatso said:

I hear your point. But the public asset was about to become a massive drain on public finances.
(Once sisu made public their intention to build their own stadium)
In hindsight of course it was all Bull shit, but the council couldn't sit around and do nothing.

Click to expand...

It wasn't though, using your logic it was washing it's face so wasn't a drain on anything?

Nick said:

Plenty understand it, it looks as if it is you who doesn't seem to be grasping it.

As I said, it's looking a bit desperate

Click to expand...

Nick, I think your just he'll bent on winding me up.
I'll respectfully ignore your posts in future, please feel free to do the same to mine. As you obviously have nothing to add.

fatso said:

Ffs, some people just don't get it.
No fucker wants the club gone, but people need to understand why decisions were made, any idiot can come on here and say the council are a bunch of tossers, but how many understand the political situation behind the matter AT THE TIME!.
understand this, (if nothing else) although mistakes have been made by ALL sides, if the club folds, the ultimate responsibility will be SISU's and No one else's.
Just remember that when people on here start kicking off at the council house.

Click to expand...

Not really because let’s say SISU drop the legal tomorrow, what’s stopping Wasps from refusing to negotiate? If Wasps would say, we’ll negotiate, and agree in principle a long-term lease but we won’t sign the deal until legal action is dropped, that would be a lot more reasonable in my view.

We already know that the commitment made by the CCC and Wasps to protect CCFC was, at best, an empty promise and at worst, a cynical lie. The CCC have essentially valued our ‘future’ at 4 years, we’d be up in arms if SISU placed our future at 4 years, I know I’d be livid.

The bottom line is this: it’s naive to solely blame Sisu. The past is the past, and what’s happened can’t be undone, I’m not going to go over old ground as it is not worth anyone’s energy. This is about keeping Coventry City a) in the EFL and b) in Coventry!

If none of us fans care about holding both sides to account, no one else will.

fatso said:

I hear your point. But the public asset was about to become a massive drain on public finances.
(Once sisu made public their intention to build their own stadium)
In hindsight of course it was all Bull shit, but the council couldn't sit around and do nothing.

Click to expand...

You can't just throw in hindsight. What you're basically saying here is the council got themselves into a mess by repeatedly lying about the status of ACL.

The 4 years stuff is made up. He knows full well what Lucas was saying and that she made it up to soften the blow about Wasps moving to stop people kicking off.

People seem to be worried about the council and wasps being held to account. What's the issue? Call every single person out on any bullshit they come out with.

The aim is to get a deal isn't it? Pressure them all!

duffer said:

In what way was the council commitment 'woolly'? It's there in black and white, a promise that the deal wouldn't hurt the club.

There is nothing vague in that promise, it clearly was not time limited, and if the Council couldn't deliver it then they shouldn't have promised it when voting on the deal.

They could have insisted on a clause that the club should always be offered a deal on commercial terms, perhaps based on some kind of formula. If for whatever reason Wasps wouldn't take it on that basis, then the council could have declined to sell.

The council should not get a free pass here, they are guilty as both individuals and as an organisation of serial deception. That should never be accepted or tolerated imho.

Click to expand...

A question: did the CCC or people from local government play a part in our previous owner’s decision to sell of the land around Highfield Road before we knew we could actually fully finance the RICOH?

It’s really worth noting that CCFC’s decline and our current problems did not start when SISU came into town, unfortunately. They certainly aren’t fautless and can be blamed on several levels, but I think our finances at the time meant we’d probably have went through a bad period regardless of who took us over back in 2007. That’s hypothetical so a moot point really.

chiefdave said:

You can't just throw in hindsight. What you're basically saying here is the council got themselves into a mess by repeatedly lying about the status of ACL.

Click to expand...

They certainly didn't help themselves, all sides told lies, not just to each other, but to the public.
But I doubt whether that will be of much concern to the courts.
My concern now is not just for the immediate future of ccfc, but for what sisu plan to do when they ultimately loose the next round of the legal fight (which they absolutely will do) if ccfc arnt shafted now, I cant see sisu doing us any favours in the long term, and I can't see wasps or cov rugby wanting anything to do with them.

Mucca Mad Boys said:

Not really because let’s say SISU drop the legal tomorrow, what’s stopping Wasps from refusing to negotiate? If Wasps would say, we’ll negotiate, and agree in principle a long-term lease but we won’t sign the deal until legal action is dropped, that would be a lot more reasonable in my view.

We already know that the commitment made by the CCC and Wasps to protect CCFC was, at best, an empty promise and at worst, a cynical lie. The CCC have essentially valued our ‘future’ at 4 years, we’d be up in arms if SISU placed our future at 4 years, I know I’d be livid.

The bottom line is this: it’s naive to solely blame Sisu. The past is the past, and what’s happened can’t be undone, I’m not going to go over old ground as it is not worth anyone’s energy. This is about keeping Coventry City a) in the EFL and b) in Coventry!

If none of us fans care about holding both sides to account, no one else will.

Click to expand...

If Sisu drop the legals now (please god) wasps have said they will talk about a deal/joint ownership agreement. If they go back on that, then there would be absolute uproar.
Wasps know they depend on the goodwill of the local community, (and you can argue that theyve been lucky so far) so I can't see them not talking to sisu/ccfc.

fatso said:

If Sisu drop the legals now (please god) wasps have said they will talk about a deal/joint ownership agreement. If they go back on that, then there would be absolute uproar.
Wasps know they depend on the goodwill of the local community, (and you can argue that theyve been lucky so far) so I can't see them not talking to sisu/ccfc.

Click to expand...

You mean like the council went back on one of the conditions they said was there about the sale that you are defending?

fatso said:

They certainly didn't help themselves, all sides told lies, not just to each other, but to the public.
But I doubt whether that will be of much concern to the courts.
My concern now is not just for the immediate future of ccfc, but for what sisu plan to do when they ultimately loose the next round of the legal fight (which they absolutely will do) if ccfc arnt shafted now, I cant see sisu doing us any favours in the long term, and I can't see wasps or cov rugby wanting anything to do with them.

Click to expand...

In fairness, they’ve started to provide Robins with the tools to build a good squad up and the intention seems to be getting us back up to the Championship. Which suggests there’s something of a plan from them.

I don’t really take Hoffman and his consortium seriously, yet. So I imagine promotion back to the Championship May attract investors? Who knows but SISU stand to lose a lot of money or losing the chance to cut their losses by selling up in League 1.

fatso said:

They certainly didn't help themselves, all sides told lies, not just to each other, but to the public.
But I doubt whether that will be of much concern to the courts.
My concern now is not just for the immediate future of ccfc, but for what sisu plan to do when they ultimately loose the next round of the legal fight (which they absolutely will do) if ccfc arnt shafted now, I cant see sisu doing us any favours in the long term, and I can't see wasps or cov rugby wanting anything to do with them.

Click to expand...

Hypothetically if SISU lose again in Court then they could appeal again, while this isn't what the fans or even the Club wants, it's what will happen and the reality of it is that SISU are well within their lawful rights to do so - despite what you think of their case.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but to any fan that believes SISU will do any favours for the Club in the short/long term or even have the Club's best interest at heart, are deluded at best.

On the point of CCFC being shafted, this was the case long before SISU, this was the case when Richardson chose to sell Highfield Road and build a stadium which in reality we did not need.

fatso said:

If Sisu drop the legals now (please god) wasps have said they will talk about a deal/joint ownership agreement. If they go back on that, then there would be absolute uproar.
Wasps know they depend on the goodwill of the local community, (and you can argue that theyve been lucky so far) so I can't see them not talking to sisu/ccfc.

Click to expand...

They and the council have also said the sale of the RICOH would not jeopardise CCFC. Yet, here we are and still the blame is almost completely on SISU by our fans and no uproar as of yet. So we would’ve been wrong to trust them then, so why would it be right to trust them now?

Their words don’t guarantee a good value, long term lease. Sure, it may alleviate the current crisis, but dropping legal action for a 1-2yr lease is a bad deal and doesn’t stop the cycle of an existential crisis every season or two.

The bargaining chip of legal action is worth having in negotiations, in my view.

Mucca Mad Boys said:

In fairness, they’ve started to provide Robins with the tools to build a good squad up and the intention seems to be getting us back up to the Championship. Which suggests there’s something of a plan from them.

I don’t really take Hoffman and his consortium seriously, yet. So I imagine promotion back to the Championship May attract investors? Who knows but SISU stand to lose a lot of money or losing the chance to cut their losses by selling up in League 1.

Click to expand...

Is that SISU though Mucca or just the day-to-day management of the Club managing the finances better?

Financially we appear to be in the best place we have been for some time.

fatso said:

If Sisu drop the legals now (please god) wasps have said they will talk about a deal/joint ownership agreement. If they go back on that, then there would be absolute uproar.
Wasps know they depend on the goodwill of the local community, (and you can argue that theyve been lucky so far) so I can't see them not talking to sisu/ccfc.

Click to expand...

I’m not convinced that they do rely on the goodwill of the local community.
I suspect most wasps fans don’t give a shit about us, cov fans are not their target audience, and everyone else appear to be fairly indifferent...my guess is wasps plan is to tap into this indifferent group. It would be interesting to see how the people of cov would react if wasps won something. How many would come out for an open top bus celebration?

RoboCCFC90 said:

Is that SISU though Mucca or just the day-to-day management of the Club managing the finances better?

Financially we appear to be in the best place we have been for some time.

Click to expand...

Good question, I don’t really know as I try my best to just enjoy the product on the field.

Stadium crisis aside, the club seems to be in a decent place, good young talented team and hopefully when this mess is sorted we can try to push on and try for promotion to the Championship!

Mucca Mad Boys said:

In fairness, they’ve started to provide Robins with the tools to build a good squad up and the intention seems to be getting us back up to the Championship. Which suggests there’s something of a plan from them.

I don’t really take Hoffman and his consortium seriously, yet. So I imagine promotion back to the Championship May attract investors? Who knows but SISU stand to lose a lot of money or losing the chance to cut their losses by selling up in League 1.

Click to expand...

The idea that SISU will sell up or move on during or due to all this seems absolutely ridiculous to me.

We were essentially in free fall for years, we've stabilised and made some pretty stunning progression in 2 years (forget the "we're a big club" shit).

We are so close to being a serious contender in League 1, plus there's the potential for funds to come through from Wilson. If that money comes through, we have no excuse not to get promoted next season.

The club is then valued far higher than it currently is. That's when SISU would consider moving on, and I'd guess they'd look to have a stable season in the Championship prior to selling.

"Don't sell at the bottom of the cycle"

fatso said:

Ffs, some people just don't get it.
No fucker wants the club gone, but people need to understand why decisions were made, any idiot can come on here and say the council are a bunch of tossers, but how many understand the political situation behind the matter AT THE TIME!.
understand this, (if nothing else) although mistakes have been made by ALL sides, if the club folds, the ultimate responsibility will be SISU's and No one else's.
Just remember that when people on here start kicking off at the council house.

Click to expand...

Ok, think you missed my point a bit, but fair enough. So, understanding the political situation at the time is fine for the new stadium. I get that. What everyone is talking about is the situation now though. All sides are to blame, right? Not just one.

fatso said:

I don't shoot down my argument at all, to put it bluntly the council by this time had decided to wash it's hands of both the Ricoh, and ccfc, despite any public statements they made, the reality is that they got rid of a potential massive problem at the very first oppertunity by selling to wasps. The council have far better things to do than worry about than our football club and it's intransigent owners. Im sure they had no will whatsoever to be flexible with a buisiness that had wilfully broken legaly binding contracts to deliberately try and distress ACL Ltd and the council.
I'd go as far as to say it looked like the council's attitude was fuck sisu

Click to expand...

So in fact it was an option, but the council decided it was better to lie to everyone and screw the club over to 'fuck SISU'. And you're ok with that because it means that SISU lose and that's all that really matters.

I'm glad we could draw the truth of it out and you no longer need to hide behind some made up 'options' that somehow tied the Council's hands.

just to flesh out the ACL financial performance prior to 2012, when this dispute began. When the Ricoh was originally opened, the casino tenant was Isle of Capri Casinos, which took a long lease on anticipation of being granted permission for a “super casino”, being promoted by the then Government. When the “super casino” concept was abandoned by the Government,, Isle of Capri surrendered its lease, paid up the balance of rents due in one payment. Instead as showing it as a “one-off” payment on one annual account, ACL, quite legally, fed the proceeds into its profit & loss account for many years after. The decision masked the true financial performance of ACL by painting a much generous account of its viability. The only way out of this was to borrow money to cover annual cash deficits, in the hope that CCFC could be persuaded to cover the deficit or forced through the proposed rental agreement to meet the defect. Wasps may well have overlooked ACL’s actions or were persuaded that CCFC would cover the deficit via a rental agreement.

More from mr byng.

shmmeee said:

Let’s be blunt here. It’s picking up on a couple of woolly statements from Councillors. It’s not a smoking gun. It’s not any different to any other politician blather.

What matters isn’t comments from individuals if they are to prove a conspiracy, it’s the meetings of and reports to the council as a whole. And that left a loophole big enough to drive a bus through. Because no sane person would sign a lease that forces them to have a tenant at any cost.

I know you desperately want it to be a smoking gun, I get it, a quick Sisu win and this whole thing is behind us. But this ain’t it. Just like it wasn’t it the last ten times either.

This is just an attempt to get pressure on the council, without any actual action they want the council to take. It’s just screaming into the void, the Sisu version of the tiny sky blue coffin.

It’s not enough of a vote winner to impact the council and it’s not solid enough to be legally useful.

What it is is a sign that we likely won’t be playing in Cov next year.

Click to expand...

Woolly? Can you tell me what is woolly about the following statement. Tell me how it can misinterpreted or miscontrued?

Ann Lucas: “Let me be clear, any deal around the future of the Ricoh Arena must not happen if it threatens the future of the Sky Blues or Coventry Rugby Club.”

Seems like there's a lot of huff and puff about statements made by councillors etc about safeguards for the club(s), but quotes like that from individuals are not enforceable just as when MP's say daft shit it can't be taken as being the policy of their party. Otherwise CCFC could sue Tim Fisher because we've not got a new stadium built yet. They're intentions, not obligations.

There are a few things that could potentially be used, like the council minutes, but again if you read those there is no part of which which sets in stone that they HAVE to let CCFC play at the Ricoh or even ensure they don't go out of businesses. For example:

2.5.11 The City Council remains committed to try to ensure that CCFC is able to continue to play its home matches at the Ricoh Arena. It will include a requirement in agreements underpinning the sale that this option must exist for CCFC subject to it reaching a commercial agreement with ACL. The terms of this transaction do not impact in any way on the terms of the August 2014 licence agreement with CCFC which will be fully honoured.

All of this states intentions, caveats regarding commercial agreements and the 2014 licence agreement has been honoured. There's nothing in there that can legally said to have been reneged on.

The four year time limit thing is clearly bollocks, and from a legal perspective totally unnecessary. Why on earth it was said is stupid.

The other thing I will point out is this:

“The commitment that any deal relating to the Ricoh Arena would not be approved unless the following three tests were satisfied:


(1) A good deal for the City


(2) The security and future of Coventry City Football Club


(3) The security and future of Coventry Rugby Club

This has to be taken from AT THE TIME IT WAS WRITTEN AND THE DEAL DONE, not retrospectively now with hindsight. Given that at the time Tim Fisher, the chairman and director of CCFC, was stating the club would be building a new stadium for the club so it could access all revenues. He said land was weeks from being acquired, architects had been employed and he showed off a few stadium renders for good measure. Given that, the sale could be safely made at that time without fear of impact to CCFC as they would have a stadium to play in, greater access to revenues from it as well as the capital asset itself and Wasps would not be a direct competitor to CCFC.

Iif anything point 3 would be far more pertinent because Wasps would be a direct competitor to CRFC and potentially affect their security and future.

Now, I thought this stadium was bullshit, most people on here would have thought it was bullshit and I daresay the councillors and even TF himself thought it was bullshit. But it was a statement made by a director and chairman of the football club through official as well as unofficial channels so has to be taken seriously. Ironically, if Fisher hadn't come out with all this new stadium stuff the club would be in a much stronger position to argue this point on the future and security because there would have been much greater uncertainty at the time of the sale to Wasps.

For clarity I will once again say that the sale to Wasps was short-sighted, naive and an act of desperation by the council to wash their hands of this pain in the arse stadium issue, and their conduct and favouritism towards Wasps since the sale is terrible. I am looking at this from a legally enforceable standpoint, and quite frankly I don't see there being one (which is a shame as I really want that four year argument to be torn to bits by legal representation)