It draws a line in the negotiation, and shows that they won't accept the boundaries changing, and they have a position that is not worth trying to pull at the edges.Is it? How does forcing ccfc out do that?
L<ogic says that you have to have a red line somewhere, otherwise everyone takes you for a ride. In the wider context, you have to show you're serious.What you're saying isn't logical though it spite. Sisu have started this action so we're going to kick the club out. Logic is objectively analysing the situation and working out what is best. In this case that is to keep the revenue that Boddy reported as being around £2m per year at the Ricoh.
But they haven't drawn that boundary as they already put the EC investigation to one side. Their own words.It draws a line in the negotiation, and shows that they won't accept the boundaries changing, and they have a position that is not worth trying to pull at the edges.
At some stage, every negotiation has to have a red line. This is Wasps'.
It doesn't draw a line because it doesn't stop the EU stuff.It draws a line in the negotiation, and shows that they won't accept the boundaries changing, and they have a position that is not worth trying to pull at the edges.
At some stage, every negotiation has to have a red line. This is Wasps'.
Well... leaving that aside, they're doubtful about what might come next - their own words.But they haven't drawn that boundary as they already put the EC investigation to one side. Their own words.
You can't just leave things aside because they don't fit your argumentWell... leaving that aside, they're doubtful about what might come next - their own words.
Seppala's interview doesn't reassure that they're wrong on that, either.
Again(!) SISU have been shown to have acted in bad faith, SISU have been shown to have sought loopholes wherever possible, and push at the edges, and be somewhat disengenuous.
if you were Wasps... would you sign a deal with such an entity?
Eh?!? I'm continuing the quote! The exact quote is:You can't just leave things aside because they don't fit your argument
Nick Eastwood said:we have unfortunately been unable to reach an agreement with the owners which, putting aside the complaint to the European Commission, would deliver the fundamental principle that there would be no further proceedings about the ownership of the Ricoh Arena.
Hope they put the full video up rather than 30-40 second clips here and there.
Ok, I didn't realise that's what you were doing. That is already a demand that had not been previously put on the club. We all accept sisu are duplicitous bastards. I don't know why you're trying to make out London Wasps aren't following an equally duplicitous path as an excuse to avoid consequences to their actions.Eh?!? I'm continuing the quote! The exact quote is:
Now.. that suggests dispute over said fundamental principal. 'putting aside' could be open to interpretation and should be clarified, too.
I'd personally sign a short term rolling deal with ccfc with the emphasis on whatever sisu signed about the legals.Well... leaving that aside, they're doubtful about what might come next - their own words.
Seppala's interview doesn't reassure that they're wrong on that, either.
Again(!) SISU have been shown to have acted in bad faith, SISU have been shown to have sought loopholes wherever possible, and push at the edges, and be somewhat disengenuous.
if you were Wasps... would you sign a deal with such an entity?
tbh, I'm making what I thought was a remarkably uncontroversial statement, that given SISU are duplicitous bastardfs, is it surprising people won't deal with them?Ok, I didn't realise that's what you were doing. That is already a demand that had not been previously put on the club. We all accept sisu are duplicitous bastards. I don't know why you're trying to make out London Wasps aren't following an equally duplicitous path as an excuse to avoid consequences to their actions.
tbh, I'm making what I thought was a remarkably uncontroversial statement, that given SISU are duplicitous bastardfs, is it surprising people won't deal with them?
It would probably be illegal state aid.That's fine, but I think most would agree that if Wasps are after indemnity, they're asking the wrong party - they should be demanding this from CCC. Why are they not doing this?
Absolutely ! On this occasion the blame for CCFC not playing in Coventry next season lies fairly and squarely with Wasps who ridiculously expect SISU to indemnify them. No business would agree to such a ridiculous demand. I find it strange that some wish to boycott St Andrew's next season when the decision not to play in Coventry was not of SISU'S making. How will boycotting help CCFC address the situation. Our attempts should be to distress Wasps with adverse publicity.No, you’re right about Wasps - but as coventrians, and Coventry City fans we should be disgusted about an out of town entity kicking out a historic city icon in the football club.
And wasps should be shunned... we as a city are Famous for that
What actions mean an indemnity is even discussed?Absolutely ! On this occasion the blame for CCFC not playing in Coventry next season lies fairly and squarely with Wasps who ridiculously expect SISU to indemnify them. No business would agree to such a ridiculous demand. I find it strange that some wish to boycott St Andrew's next season when the decision not to play in Coventry was not of SISU'S making. How will boycotting help CCFC address the situation. Our attempts should be to distress Wasps with adverse publicity.
This is from today's telegraph fucking so annoying.
This is from today's telegraph fucking so annoying.
This is what drives me insane with the Telegraph and also Gilbert. Ask follow up questions!!! When he says they want CCFC at the Ricoh push him on how that can happen.They should just publicly release an offer , rather than releasing this bullshit.
Let's face it, all they can do is copy and paste and rewrite.This is what drives me insane with the Telegraph and also Gilbert. Ask follow up questions!!! When he says they want CCFC at the Ricoh push him on how that can happen.
At the moment it seems the only reason that is not happening is because he has put impossible demands in place. Instead of letting him spout off and printing any old rubbish why can't someone actually act like a journalist.
This is what drives me insane with the Telegraph and also Gilbert. Ask follow up questions!!! When he says they want CCFC at the Ricoh push him on how that can happen.
At the moment it seems the only reason that is not happening is because he has put impossible demands in place. Instead of letting him spout off and printing any old rubbish why can't someone actually act like a journalist.
Let's face it, all they can do is copy and paste and rewrite.
This is what drives me insane with the Telegraph and also Gilbert. Ask follow up questions!!! When he says they want CCFC at the Ricoh push him on how that can happen.
Imagine if you were a young journalist in Cov straight out of college on a piss poor wage. You've got a story on your doorstep that could be national news and make your career. I'd be all over it.Personally, if I was doing that job, I would want to get actual info to get some headline news, not just a load of nothing.
Again, it ties up resources in the meantime, diverts them from other avenues, means potentially money has to be set aside dependent on risk, and also restricts the sponsorship opportunities and therefore income, as people are averse to going all-in until they see if there's fire to go with the smoke.
It's not an uncommon legal tactic.
Good postAbsolutely, and it's unlikely that SISU raised the complaint to benefit the good people of Coventry.
That doesn't alter the point that Wasps have been arguing that the Ricoh deal was absolutely above board, whilst now simultaneously demanding that they are indemnified against the fact that it may not have been.
The interesting thing to me, is that there would seem to be no path for SISU to sue Wasps directly if they agreed to forego further legal action. In which case, who would be able to demand damages from Wasps?
The EC doesn't apply damages even if the complaint against CCC is upheld, as I understand it. So the only action I can see is another bash at the Council, by SISU, in the Civil court (ding-ding, seconds out, round three).
I'd see this a straight claim for damages rather than a JR, in which case no risk to Wasps.
OK, I'm stretching a little here, but is that demand for an indemnity actually designed to protect CCC? And if so, why?
From the very start of all of this the relationship between Wasps and CCC has been deeply suspicious. I'm very happy to see it under the spotlight.
Good post
From the very start of all of this the relationship between Wasps and CCC has been deeply suspicious. I'm very happy to see it under the spotlight.
to be fair 10m of his own money he had invested (he's still owed a lot more) - think I would pay myself some of it back too.To pay himself 10m back too wasnt it as well?
and we have a council who, after yesterday's statements on sky are looking like downright liars! ("ACL independent from Council"!)
CT's journalists are shit! If they had any passion of working for a Coventry newspaper they need to ask some straight questions to the owners of the Ricoh as to why the deal fell through.
this action is the main thing the council were very much against...to be fair 10m of his own money he had invested (he's still owed a lot more) - think I would pay myself some of it back too.
they were against SISU doing it but then down the line let Wasps do it, go figureYeah
this action is the main thing the council were very much against...
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?