TheOldFive
New Member
On August 15th 2013 Shane O’Connor of BBC C&W interviewed Greg Clarke, Chair of the Football League. By the time of the Interview we had opened our Season at Sixfields, but Clarke sought to offer some hope for the future: -
“My dearest hope is that… As things calm down a bit, and as the commercial realities of an empty stadium, both in Coventry and potentially in Northampton (sic) people sit down and say ‘actually the long term interest is to have football, in Coventry, at the Ricoh with Coventry City Football Club. Let’s both give a bit and find a way to do something that’s in the long term interests of the Club, the City and the Fans’. And that will take time, reason and the emotion to be drawn out of the situation which is why I am not going to take sides between the Club and the Council because we will need them both to be reasonable.”
For the avoidance of doubt, this hasn’t happened.
Greg Clarke was asked what he wanted to say to Coventry City supporters, this on reflection of the big Gosford Green to Broadgate March and the well attended Ricoh FPA Match day played during the Skyblue’s opening Sixfields fixture: -
“They (The Fans) have my assurance that the Football League Board, Executive and Clubs want Coventry City. It took us a long time to get Brighton back in Brighton. It took us four years to get Rotherham back in Rotherham. But we worked really hard to try and make sure that the club is alive so that one day whether it’s a day from now or three years from now Coventry City can be playing in Coventry. The fan’s pain is real to me, and we are doing our best to serve their long term interests.”
“If the Football League stays on good terms with the Football Club Owners and the Owners of the Stadium, and consistently tries to broker a compromise, that brings Coventry City back to the people of Coventry and plays football in Coventry sooner, we’ll all be happier. And that is what we will focus on.”
For the avoidance of doubt, this hasn’t happened.
Greg Clarke was then asked outright this Killer Question:
“Could you have said to both the Football Club and the Stadium Owners: “We will award the Golden Share.. the right to play in the Football League… only if you can reach an agreement, therefore and thereby forcing them to come to some kind of amicable arrangement and continue to keep the club in the City. Was that ever a possibility?”
Now then. Read carefully Greg Clarke’s reply: -
“We could have done that I suspect, I don’t know, because before I ever opine firmly on a situation I sit down with the experts on the rules and regs (sic) and law, and say ‘what can we do and what can’t we do’. But hypothetically, if I was asked that question, I would be very wary of putting that scenario together. Because if I’d have said, for example, (having taken legal advice and consulted with the board because they would have to make this decision not me and I am a member of the board) do we want to make this a condition? What if they hadn’t reached agreement, and it was the day before the football season, (which is what happened), and the choice was to say ‘Right, we’ve actually made this commitment unless they’ve reached agreement we won’t transfer the share. This season we are going to have 71 members, Coventry City are history and we’ll promote an extra member from the conference next year. I think that would have been worse. And the problem is that you have to think 3 steps ahead, because I never get in a situation where you think ‘crumbs, there’s nothing we can do now, except let the club die.’ I will move heaven and earth to avoid that happening.”
A season of virtually no support for the relocation and a battering in Judicial a Review might inform the FL's view with 6 weeks before the season starts. Easily time for the next 3 steps...
I wonder if Greg has been thinking about the start of the 2014-2015 season? Perhaps with appropriate notice he can issue the same ultimatum and demand that the Golden Share will only be allocated to a Coventry City FC that can play its games in Coventry forthwith. Any organisation that professes to be “Coventry City Football Club” that can’t do that is by definition not the CCFC that should hold the Golden Share. Ownership of the club entity as it currently exists is by the League rules no qualification in its own self to be the holder of the Golden Share, the right to play in the Football League. Neither is the holding of player registrations, as has been proved in all of the Administration shenanigans.
Could someone build and organise an entity that could put a team out in the Football League playing as Coventry City holding the Golden Share as its right to do so playing its fixtures at the Ricoh Stadium from the start of the 2014-2015 season? I think we should get behind this idea and apply as a “rival bidder” for the Golden Share allocation. The “Other” Coventry City owned by Otium is welcome to carry on as a going concern but not playing in the Football League. Well, to be honest, id expect that it would probably fold in that case wouldn’t it? In which case, we should consider recruiting the appropriate staff from that defunct entity into our “mirror” Football Club.
Let's be ready to say to the Football League “You have options” when allocating that Golden Share. If they know they can make a choice about who to issue that Golden Share to rather than choosing between the Sixfields option and "expunging the record" of Coventry City then wouldn't that be helpful for them?
Greg Clarke and the Football League’s biggest concern in all of this is to see Coventry City surviving in the English Football League. The Football League can secure that priority and bring the Club back to the fans, playing in Coventry. That the proposition may remove Otium from involvement in the Football League is a by-product of only their inability to fulfil the requirements of the issue of the Golden Share in contrast to another alternative “least worst option” that would be available from our mirror club.
To quote Greg Clarke himself: -
“One of the interesting things, when you have to make big decisions like the Football League Board does on occasion, or big companies have to make, or Councils have to make or Governments have to make is sometimes you are left with the choice of ‘which is the least worst option’. And am I happy that the people of Coventry are having to go 35 miles to see their game? Am I happy that people that can’t afford to travel 35 miles or have mobility issues and can’t get there? Of course I’m unhappy about that. But I would be more unhappy if we had made a different decision on the day before the season and said ‘right we are not going to transfer the share, Coventry City are no longer eligible, their fixtures will be expunged from the record and it will cease to exist. That would have been worse, that’s what we always try to avoid.”
There is definitely a "least worst option" beyond playing at Northampton surely?
“My dearest hope is that… As things calm down a bit, and as the commercial realities of an empty stadium, both in Coventry and potentially in Northampton (sic) people sit down and say ‘actually the long term interest is to have football, in Coventry, at the Ricoh with Coventry City Football Club. Let’s both give a bit and find a way to do something that’s in the long term interests of the Club, the City and the Fans’. And that will take time, reason and the emotion to be drawn out of the situation which is why I am not going to take sides between the Club and the Council because we will need them both to be reasonable.”
For the avoidance of doubt, this hasn’t happened.
Greg Clarke was asked what he wanted to say to Coventry City supporters, this on reflection of the big Gosford Green to Broadgate March and the well attended Ricoh FPA Match day played during the Skyblue’s opening Sixfields fixture: -
“They (The Fans) have my assurance that the Football League Board, Executive and Clubs want Coventry City. It took us a long time to get Brighton back in Brighton. It took us four years to get Rotherham back in Rotherham. But we worked really hard to try and make sure that the club is alive so that one day whether it’s a day from now or three years from now Coventry City can be playing in Coventry. The fan’s pain is real to me, and we are doing our best to serve their long term interests.”
“If the Football League stays on good terms with the Football Club Owners and the Owners of the Stadium, and consistently tries to broker a compromise, that brings Coventry City back to the people of Coventry and plays football in Coventry sooner, we’ll all be happier. And that is what we will focus on.”
For the avoidance of doubt, this hasn’t happened.
Greg Clarke was then asked outright this Killer Question:
“Could you have said to both the Football Club and the Stadium Owners: “We will award the Golden Share.. the right to play in the Football League… only if you can reach an agreement, therefore and thereby forcing them to come to some kind of amicable arrangement and continue to keep the club in the City. Was that ever a possibility?”
Now then. Read carefully Greg Clarke’s reply: -
“We could have done that I suspect, I don’t know, because before I ever opine firmly on a situation I sit down with the experts on the rules and regs (sic) and law, and say ‘what can we do and what can’t we do’. But hypothetically, if I was asked that question, I would be very wary of putting that scenario together. Because if I’d have said, for example, (having taken legal advice and consulted with the board because they would have to make this decision not me and I am a member of the board) do we want to make this a condition? What if they hadn’t reached agreement, and it was the day before the football season, (which is what happened), and the choice was to say ‘Right, we’ve actually made this commitment unless they’ve reached agreement we won’t transfer the share. This season we are going to have 71 members, Coventry City are history and we’ll promote an extra member from the conference next year. I think that would have been worse. And the problem is that you have to think 3 steps ahead, because I never get in a situation where you think ‘crumbs, there’s nothing we can do now, except let the club die.’ I will move heaven and earth to avoid that happening.”
A season of virtually no support for the relocation and a battering in Judicial a Review might inform the FL's view with 6 weeks before the season starts. Easily time for the next 3 steps...
I wonder if Greg has been thinking about the start of the 2014-2015 season? Perhaps with appropriate notice he can issue the same ultimatum and demand that the Golden Share will only be allocated to a Coventry City FC that can play its games in Coventry forthwith. Any organisation that professes to be “Coventry City Football Club” that can’t do that is by definition not the CCFC that should hold the Golden Share. Ownership of the club entity as it currently exists is by the League rules no qualification in its own self to be the holder of the Golden Share, the right to play in the Football League. Neither is the holding of player registrations, as has been proved in all of the Administration shenanigans.
Could someone build and organise an entity that could put a team out in the Football League playing as Coventry City holding the Golden Share as its right to do so playing its fixtures at the Ricoh Stadium from the start of the 2014-2015 season? I think we should get behind this idea and apply as a “rival bidder” for the Golden Share allocation. The “Other” Coventry City owned by Otium is welcome to carry on as a going concern but not playing in the Football League. Well, to be honest, id expect that it would probably fold in that case wouldn’t it? In which case, we should consider recruiting the appropriate staff from that defunct entity into our “mirror” Football Club.
Let's be ready to say to the Football League “You have options” when allocating that Golden Share. If they know they can make a choice about who to issue that Golden Share to rather than choosing between the Sixfields option and "expunging the record" of Coventry City then wouldn't that be helpful for them?
Greg Clarke and the Football League’s biggest concern in all of this is to see Coventry City surviving in the English Football League. The Football League can secure that priority and bring the Club back to the fans, playing in Coventry. That the proposition may remove Otium from involvement in the Football League is a by-product of only their inability to fulfil the requirements of the issue of the Golden Share in contrast to another alternative “least worst option” that would be available from our mirror club.
To quote Greg Clarke himself: -
“One of the interesting things, when you have to make big decisions like the Football League Board does on occasion, or big companies have to make, or Councils have to make or Governments have to make is sometimes you are left with the choice of ‘which is the least worst option’. And am I happy that the people of Coventry are having to go 35 miles to see their game? Am I happy that people that can’t afford to travel 35 miles or have mobility issues and can’t get there? Of course I’m unhappy about that. But I would be more unhappy if we had made a different decision on the day before the season and said ‘right we are not going to transfer the share, Coventry City are no longer eligible, their fixtures will be expunged from the record and it will cease to exist. That would have been worse, that’s what we always try to avoid.”
There is definitely a "least worst option" beyond playing at Northampton surely?
