bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Why do you care if Sisu own the Freehold?
Its not going to make any difference to the club long term.
sadly you're not the first poster to say they'd rather see liquidation before sisu get the arena, tbh if they got it for free I couldn't care less as long as Coventry are playing back at home. Blinded by sisu hate, you aren't the first and won't be the last.
all I care about is having the team in Coventry, don't care about the why's and how's. Freehold, lease, rent, couldn't give a toss. I'm afraid my morals come 2nd to having city back home. If this makes me some kind of heathen, so be it.Why do you care if Sisu own the Freehold?
Its not going to make any difference to the club long term.
Why do you care if Sisu own the Freehold?
Its not going to make any difference to the club long term.
Wouldn't that make the club more attractive to future purchasers?
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
I hold no allegiance to Otium, Fisher or Seppala. I strongly believe that should she liquidate then the FL will be forced to let a phoenix club in with minimal penalty as it was their doing. If not I'm happy to start in the lower leagues.
Or they could continue with the raised Middle finger approach and sell some players in January and make money that way!!
As a sort of neutral I went to the match v Sheff United last sunday....
I risk being slated here but I actually sort of enjoyed it. But then a)I'm not a Coventry fan and b) I just enjoyed watching the football.
I am tempted to go to Walsall away mind you..
If they get the Ricoh through these means, they are no longer my club. I disagree on a fundamental moral and philosophical level with their tactics and I don't want to see them prevail. Like I say, each to their own.
OF course, to take your argument that the legal construct that represents CCFC is "the club" then the club disappeared in the summer when Otium picked the bones. I don't think the FL would let us disappear, and the fact that you do is what Seppala is counting on.
I hold no allegiance to Otium, Fisher or Seppala. I strongly believe that should she liquidate then the FL will be forced to let a phoenix club in with minimal penalty as it was their doing. If not I'm happy to start in the lower leagues.
The FL won't have a say in it, they only have jurisdiction over the Championship, league one and league two.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
I think he means if Sisu liquidate then a Phoenix CCFC should be allowed straight back into the league as the FL would have contributed to the situation.
given the only reason a club bearing the name CCFC is in the league, is because the league have already bent over backwards to have that happen, it won't happen again.
given the only reason a club bearing the name CCFC is in the league, is because the league have already bent over backwards to have that happen, it won't happen again.
Aldershot and Maidstone didn't even get the chances we did.
They also said we had nowhere else to play but Northampton. We also know this is false.
So they hand the golden share over to a company which then liquidates the club a few months later and they deny any responsibility you mean?
Don't you mean allegedly?
They also said we had nowhere else to play but Northampton. We also know this is false.
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.
Constructive vagrants....?
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.
Well technically no (also technically the club was never in admin and CCFC Ltd wasn't liquidated at that point).
But your answer begs the question: should the league have any power at all over moving a club? I thought after MK Dons the answer was yes, but if you make the argument that the league can't ever tell a club where they have to play, then what is to stop that situation happening again?
(note, I am not comparing our situation and theirs, just asking where the league's powers should extend to in your opinion)
You also have to ask if the league cant stop something like that, what exactly is its purpose?
Well... we don't.
Of course we did, we had (have)the Ricoh.
Well technically no (also technically the club was never in admin and CCFC Ltd wasn't liquidated at that point).
But your answer begs the question: should the league have any power at all over moving a club? I thought after MK Dons the answer was yes, but if you make the argument that the league can't ever tell a club where they have to play, then what is to stop that situation happening again?
(note, I am not comparing our situation and theirs, just asking where the league's powers should extend to in your opinion)
I can't see the FL or FA sanctioning another permanent relocation and refranchising, so can't see another MK Dons scenario happening again.
CCFC was being run by CCFC LTD and CCFC HOLDINGS, as only one went into liquidation the club itself did not.They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.
So what is your allegiance to the council / ACL?
I can't see the FL or FA sanctioning another permanent relocation and refranchising, so can't see another MK Dons scenario happening again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Let's play hypotheticals for a second.
If a situation arose whereby a club could neither gain planning permission for a ground in the conurbation nor agree a rental deal for the stadium that's there, what would the FL do? They can't over turn planning law and apparently they can't force the club to accept the rental deal...
Edit: beaten like Ben Turner in the 100m
it's worth pointing out as it stands, it's very unlikely.
It is however the best reason not to close off the idea of a new ground altogether!
I don't believe they'll build one, but I'm certainly not welded to the Ricoh at all costs. Time moves on, and all that.
Let's play hypotheticals for a second.
If a situation arose whereby a club could neither gain planning permission for a ground in the conurbation nor agree a rental deal for the stadium that's there, what would the FL do? They can't over turn planning law and apparently they can't force the club to accept the rental deal...
Edit: beaten like Ben Turner in the 100m
surely this is a pressing issue for football governance as a whole?
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?