Well the only thing I can offer in defence for Torch here is that as the fans were chanting 'We want Sisu out, we want Sisu out' yesterday, I felt like chanting 'We need someone in, we need someone in.'
Think that is his general stance. Kick them out to be replaced by who exactly? Been interest, but anyone could show interest.
Isn't that what Jo Dhinsa did?
Oh, I don't know. There's a few.
Well firstly, I don't believe they are worse than previous regimes as SISU haven't sold our home. Secondly, I tolerate SISU as to all intents and purposes they are the football club. I would say I'm Anti-ACL rather than Pro-SISU as in my opinion ACL have inflicted more damage to Coventry City than SISU ever will with their anti-competitive business model.
I have never been in any anti Sisu brigade or anti ACL brigade, so don't think I am speaking from a biased perspective, but do have to say that Linnell has been guilty of a lack of balance.
I don't mind him having his own opinion, that's fine, but as an employee and commentator working for the BBC it is his duty to show balance and that he has simply not done. He has shouted down many a fan who has failed to agree personally with him.
He did the same thing with the Andy Thorn situation. That became very, very embarrassing.
It is not acceptable. The BBC are supposed to show impartiality. Linnell is failing to do that.
Clive Eakin is so much better and I think it is time for Mr. Linnell to take a back seat, otherwise there will be complaints and the Beeb will have to act upon them and he will end up being removed from his seat forcibly I feel.
The programme has become so BBC-like.
I'm pretty sure the post-match phone in is for fans to air their views isn't it? Clive Eakin always allows this to happen with much interruption. Linnell has shot callers down and talked over them. No devil's advocate here, just him keeping banging out the same rhetoric week after week.
Sacked? No. But him taking a back seat would be a very wise move in my opinion.
It's SISU who have cause this situation by not paying the rent! What bit of that can't you get your head round? ACL offered us a new deal and they rejected it! That's it in a nutshell
Linell has always has his head up his own arse, SISU must pay his wages.
Well firstly, I don't believe they are worse than previous regimes as SISU haven't sold our home. Secondly, I tolerate SISU as to all intents and purposes they are the football club. I would say I'm Anti-ACL rather than Pro-SISU as in my opinion ACL have inflicted more damage to Coventry City than SISU ever will with their anti-competitive business model.
Yes, after EIGHT FUCKING YEARS! If SISU hadn't taken a stand then ACL would continue quite happily to bleed our club dry. What bit of that can't you get your head around?
Well firstly, I don't believe they are worse than previous regimes as SISU haven't sold our home. Secondly, I tolerate SISU as to all intents and purposes they are the football club. I would say I'm Anti-ACL rather than Pro-SISU as in my opinion ACL have inflicted more damage to Coventry City than SISU ever will with their anti-competitive business model.
I defend the club I support who happen to be owned by SISU. I'm against ACL who in my opinion have hamstrung CCFC. That's the crux of it for me.
On your first point, to sell something, you first have to own it!
Secondly, you're right to a point, they are CCFC on paper.
Thirdly, lack of investment will eventually see CCFC plummet down the leagues.
If (As I said yesterday) SISU sell a player on £6k per week, and bring in three players on £5k per week between them, looks good on paper, but the quality will let us down.
People actually fall for this and say like you did earlier in the season, "SISU have brought in "X" amount of players" not realising they firstly had to get rid of fairly decent quality, to bring in average players for this league at best.
This post presumes that SISU are putting their own money in (or their investors' money) - in fact, as we saw with the court ruling this week, all this money is not being "given" to CCFC, it is just being added to the pile of debt and will have to be accounted for at some point.
I think you're misreading the post mate. What I'm saying is, If SISU sell a player on £6k per week, and bring in 3 players on a combined wage of £5k per week, they are saving £1k per week without having to spend any money.
Maybe psgm1 needs to adjust his way of putting points across but i think it is a bit out of order taking the piss out of someone who has served in our forces.
Its quite simple, its okay Linnell saying SISU aren't going anywhere with some element of triumph but if they don't I'm pretty sure thousands of people will join my stance and withdraw their support and money. It would be with great reluctance but after these 2 games are done on my ST until these shits have gone then I won't put in another penny and I reckon with tickets for the wife and 3 kids and merchandise etc I've spent £1,000 on CCFC 2012/2013. The only way of removing them really is to deny them revenue, its the only thing they understand !
Genuine question with no agenda Torchy...realistically, what else would SISU have to do for you to start actively campaigning for their removal?
Yes, after EIGHT FUCKING YEARS! If SISU hadn't taken a stand then ACL would continue quite happily to bleed our club dry. What bit of that can't you get your head around?
You are right, but unfortunately that's the way the club has to be run at the moment. We lose a staggering amount of money. The vast majority of that is on player wages. I'm struggling to see another way to cut costs.
OK I think I am starting to understand, thanks.
Problem is, most fans do make a distinction between CCFC and SISU - I certainly do. And presumably, you did when you campaigning to get BR out, so what has changed?
It's a bit like loving your country whilst not necessarily liking the monarchy or the government of the day. In your logic, Blackburn fans would all loyally defend and support Venky's. Clearly, there is a distinction to be made.
I know that too many of the exchanges on here have been heated - in fairness, that all shows how passionately we are about this. Personally, all my views are based on the assumption that our best interest is served by SISU leaving ASAP - others make the assumption that we are dead without SISU's backing. Both are valid in that they are based on assumptions - none of us know the true facts.
Believe it or not, I do not care at all about ACL as such. But they do have my sympathy as it looks like SISU are riding roughshot over them to get what they want. I work in a private busienss with many debtors, and we would react with far less patience and generosity if any of our debtors behave the way SISU have - I really don't know what you expect ACL to do, they hadve had no choice to take the legal route after being continually messed around by SISU. I don't defend them, I just defend the idea that we should be acting reasonably as a responsible organisation, not trying to wangle a ground for free and blaming the landlord who baled us out for our current predicament. IMO, ACL have been ridiculously lenient with SISU.
According to SISU players wages have been slashed by up to 2 thirds since they took charge...Approx £11-12m, now around £3.5-4m. Unfortunately the quality of players have also been heavily slashed. The only other way to cut costs is to buy ACL's share in the Stadium. ACL/CCC will never sell to them. 3 seperate ocassions they had the opportunity to buy, and said they had the money to buy, the share, and 3 times they reneged on it. Sorry mate, but only themselves to blame.
- Virtually no one agrees the rent was pitched correctly, I sure didn't.
- What no one can get their head round is why SISU did not try to renegotiate the rent agreement much earlier, in fact why didn't they make the takeover conditional on a suitable agreement?
- Is there any evidence they approached ACL and were totally rebuffed before going on rent strike, if that happened I'd have some sympathy for the move.
- Virtually no one agrees the rent was pitched correctly, I sure didn't.
- What no one can get their head round is why SISU did not try to renegotiate the rent agreement much earlier, in fact why didn't they make the takeover conditional on a suitable agreement?
- Is there any evidence they approached ACL and were totally rebuffed before going on rent strike, if that happened I'd have some sympathy for the move.
Well we were talking about this on the Q&A thread and saying for matchdays only apart from parking what other revenue streams are there? The stadium naming isn't going to be included as it isn't just for matchdays and advertising is already included*. That leaves as we said Parking and anything else anyone can think of - any ideas anyone?Not defending SISU but on a point of clarity SISU wanted access to revenues beyond just F&B, to include also such things as parking, advertising, and stadium sponsorship, all of which the football club arguably adds value to.
Yeah, about sums it up. SISU could go tomorrow for all I care. However, someone needs to be there to step up to the plate. And, more importantly, that someone needs to stand up to ACL.
The comments yesterday from the Councillor make me despair and worry for my club's future even more.
Yep agree with that. Just how thick must he be to realise the club will just die a slow death unless it owns the stadium?
Yep agree with that. Just how thick must he be to realise the club will just die a slow death unless it owns the stadium?
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?