Not quite sure what that reply is trying to get across.
Christ almighty
did they criticise or question the council in anyway? Even if done constructively there's no way they'll allow them.Who moderates the CT? Neither of my comments have been published - they weren't abusing or slanderous and didn't contain any swearing.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
did they criticise or question the council in anyway? Even if done constructively there's no way they'll allow them.
If by naming them all with sisu and others as to blame for where we are, then I suppose yes, I must have criticised them.did they criticise or question the council in anyway? Even if done constructively there's no way they'll allow them.
Dunno, but I said nothing libellous, inciteful, abusive, i blamed all parties, I submitted it, got the green waiting for it to be moderated and it never got published.Why wouldn't they?
It's about time that the club shut off all media avenues with the CET.
No more interviews, exclusives or even invites to pre-match press conferences.
They are not remotely interested in saying anything positive about CCFC whatsoever.
The positives being?
It's about time that the club shut off all media avenues with the CET.
No more interviews, exclusives or even invites to pre-match press conferences.
They are not remotely interested in saying anything positive about CCFC whatsoever.
The negatives being?
I'd say potentially nowhere to play and the Academy being binned off are good starting points.
Not quite sure how that relates to CET?
The club is struggling as it is with getting their message out - the last thing they need is the CET taking every sound bite out of context, spinning it in favour of their overlords.
It wasn't about the Telegraph.
What have they taken out of context?
You're trying to suggest people shouldn't be made aware of certain aspects?
It been mentioned on numerous occasions about the suppression of information by CT regarding especially CCC (which apparently Les Reid is going to do a big expose regarding, but that's still not surfaced), then when they do offer information they're still in the wrong!?
I think some facts reported fairly would be a start.
Only just picked up on this thread, I don’t have time to read everything.
For what it’s worth, the various commitments Nick listed in the OP are exactly the reason I didn’t oppose the Wasps move in the first place – benefits for the city without damaging CCFC. I still don’t think the sale of the Ricoh in itself necessarily put CCFC in a worse position than before, given our inept failure to buy the stadium over a period of many years. But the events over the last few days regarding the Academy are a different matter, and I’m furious. Makes me a bit of a dope I guess.
Surely more is going on than meets the eye?
It wasn't about the Telegraph.
What have they taken out of context?
You're trying to suggest people shouldn't be made aware of certain aspects?
It been mentioned on numerous occasions about the suppression of information by CT regarding especially CCC (which apparently Les Reid is going to do a big expose regarding, but that's still not surfaced), then when they do offer information they're still in the wrong!?
Are these two points you are making against Wasps?I'd say potentially nowhere to play and the Academy being binned off are good starting points.
How many of the things Fisher has said have come to fruition?
Les Reid won his employment tribunal related to the CT suppressing information. There was obviously no merit in his story.
You've done it again! Everything is turned into an anti Fisher/SISU/Seppala message. Let it go a bit. We know they're not the best. how many things that shouldn't have come to fruition have done behind peoples backs is a more pertinent question. And I'm referring to the underhand dealings of the council, Higgs,CSF and Wasps if you needed a bit of a clue.
You've done it again! Everything is turned into an anti Fisher/SISU/Seppala message. Let it go a bit. We know they're not the best. how many things that shouldn't have come to fruition have done behind peoples backs is a more pertinent question. And I'm referring to the underhand dealings of the council, Higgs,CSF and Wasps if you needed a bit of a clue.
Tim Fisher made a bland statement in an interview. It wasn't a direct statement to the owners of the AHC. I want to move house from where I live currently and have made that known to my friends. It doesn't mean my house is up for sale.
Tim Fisher made a bland statement in an interview. It wasn't a direct statement to the owners of the AHC. I want to move house from where I live currently and have made that known to my friends. It doesn't mean my house is up for sale.
Coventry City Council's 3 tests were the basis on which the deal with Wasps was made, something completely different and something that is open to absolute scrutiny, apart from with Mike Bray, the local sycophant for the Labour administration.
The 5 Point Plan from CCFC in Jan 2015 saying the academy/first team would be moved into a single facility was a bland statement in an interview?
Fisher meeting with Rugby Council in March 2015 during which he clarified this was the intention was a bland statement in an interview?
How are the council's three tests open to scrutiny? They didn't have any parameters or checking/auditing requirements. They were at the point of the decision being made requirements only, as the wording makes clear.
Who moderates the CT? Neither of my comments have been published - they weren't abusing or slanderous and didn't contain any swearing.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
None of those were actually handing in notice were they? If Cov United put out a statement saying that they wanted their own stadium, does that mean the place where they play can just boot them out?
IF CCFC had sent in written notice to confirm they wanted to cancel, I can totally understand.
If Cov United such a statement, held meetings with councils and continued to moot their intentions to do that, then yes from a business perspective it would be deemed reasonable for their contract not to be renewed.
The 5 Point Plan from CCFC in Jan 2015 saying the academy/first team would be moved into a single facility was a bland statement in an interview?
Fisher meeting with Rugby Council in March 2015 during which he clarified this was the intention was a bland statement in an interview?
How are the council's three tests open to scrutiny? They didn't have any parameters or checking/auditing requirements. They were at the point of the decision being made requirements only, as the wording makes clear.
How are the council's three tests open to scrutiny? They didn't have any parameters or checking/auditing requirements. They were at the point of the decision being made requirements only, as the wording makes clear.
So if they are requirements why are they not being met? Were they agreed to and reneged on or was it a box ticking exercise to appease the unwashed?
You've answered your own question.
The 5 Point Plan from CCFC in Jan 2015 saying the academy/first team would be moved into a single facility was a bland statement in an interview?
Fisher meeting with Rugby Council in March 2015 during which he clarified this was the intention was a bland statement in an interview?
How are the council's three tests open to scrutiny? They didn't have any parameters or checking/auditing requirements. They were at the point of the decision being made requirements only, as the wording makes clear.
If I can see it and you can see it and you can see it and I can see it, can anyone else see it?
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?