Yeah, you hate sisu and are then extremely negative of everything the club do. I can can differentiate between sisu and the club, many can't.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
You sound gleefulWell Tim has failed on this one too according to Simon Gilbert.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/wasps-plan-redevelop-home-coventry-11831656
An agreement to share facilities isn't anything to do with planning.
Let's be careful that opinion doesn't trump facts here. Sport England are a statutory consultee for this kind of development. This means that the council are legally obliged to take into account their comments with regard to awarding planning permission.
https://www.sportengland.org/facili...ent/planning-applications/playing-field-land/
An agreement to share facilities, or evidence that the academy is still viable at the Higgs centre is likely to be key to Sport England's considerations, and therefore has everything to do with planning.
The council can't hide behind the "we don't want to talk to CCFC until they pay us £325k" on this one I'm afraid, they'll need to come up with the further information requested by Sport England.
If anyone but SISU owned CCFC, most people would be outraged that the Council was seemingly trying to subvert due process here by not answering the questions posed by the club and ignoring Sport England. But hey, anything to get one over the owners, eh.
You expected something different from Tim? Can you name anything he's ever done right for this club?You sound gleeful
Ah, the old "you're hatred of wasps....."Oops you clearly didn't read my post on positive things about SISU,
Posted well before this little debate.
I suggest you have a Little read.
I would say my post was probably the most positive post about SISU at that point.
I just say it as it is Stu, as oppose to you, where your biased stops you to seeing anything other than the view that the council and wasps are out to get us.
Ah, the old "you're hatred of wasps....."
SBT bingo, where do I claim my prize. Its your go to, when you know you're wrong
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Sorry struggling to find your answer to could those points in the letter be made without the sarcasm, also would have it been better if it was missing the sarcasm?
Did you have a read of my post praising SISU well before you saying how anti I am about them and extremely negative about them and the club?
I am struggling to find anything remotely positive you have ever posted about Wasps or CCC.
I am sure I am just not looking hard enough with such a balanced unbiased man like yourself
The onkt positive thing i habe to say about wasps is they are masters of spin and PR, the council do lots of good things in the city, doesn't mean helping screw ccfc is one of them.
No I hadn't seen the post, well done, take a bow.
Yes, there was a hint of sarcasm, it doesn't really bother me, and it shouldnt bother the planning officer, unless they have something to hide.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
How exactly are Sport England expected to force the Higgs centre to renew CCFC's preferential booking arrangement (let's not even talk about a tenancy)?
Sport England have to be consulted because playing fields are being removed. They need to decide if usage of the new facilities will be beneficial overall (or at least not negative) compared to current usage. They will consider it from the point of view of the public, and seeing as CCFC are now effectively less than a short term tenant, I doubt the academy will be that big of a consideration. They will not be in CCFC's corner as such.
This letter, and the previous ones, all seem to have a tone that CCFC are a long term sitting tenant, with 10 years left on a contract, or a partial owner in the facility, rather than a group with 9 months or so of getting preferential booking treatment. How are the other groups going to accommodate them etc etc, whereas the current facts are that they will be out of the place at the end of this season. No one can force Higgs or Wasps to accommodate them, and Sport Englands prerogative is about usage for the whole of Coventry (public etc) and not the football club. Yes they have the right to deny it, but I don't see why any communication between Sport England and Wasps should be made public to CCFC? Surely the only significant part that needs to be published with regards to planning is the final decision (which would probably come with backing documents.
As eloquent and reasoned as ever!I've read none of your shite. Fuck off back to London where you belong.
But 'as a cov fan' I am sure you should understand that the negotiations are vital. So 'as a Cov fan' I am surprised you are surprised that any 'Cov Fan' doesn't point out that the tone of the letter could and should have been better. Also that 'any cov fan' would rather we just get on with arranging it rather then writing about it.
But then we always have stu
Oh and I don't need praise for praising SISU. Just pointing it out to highlight to you the bollox you are speaking and the irony.
You expected something different from Tim? Can you name anything he's ever done right for this club?
How is it possible to sound gleeful from these words "Well Tim has failed on this one too according to Simon Gilbert."?
:yawn:
I've read none of your shite. Fuck off back to London where you belong.
Serious question here? Is the new pool facility at the waterpark for public recreation use, and the higgs centre pool intended for serious competition training?
Sent from my Versus TouchPad 9 using Tapatalk
People keep going on about the way forward document, maybe we should just refer to wasps wanting to stay in London every time the academy is mentioned?
It's as if it's a method to divert.
Could refer back to the council conditions of sale too?
Yeah, you hate sisu and are then extremely negative of everything the club do. I can can differentiate between sisu and the club, many can't.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Like we had at Coventry baths when I was growing up an Olympic size pool? It was what I learnt to swim in.I think it is open to the public, but it is going to be an Olympic Pool rather than one you take your kids for a mess about in!
Like
Like we had at Coventry baths when I was growing up an Olympic size pool? It was what I learnt to swim in.
Yeah, I just meant for "social" rather than actually learning to swim or swimming up and down.
Yes you could do that as well.
Wonder if there will be a dedicated diving pool like cov baths used to have, I was taught to dive there as a youngster and achieved many county medalsIt might have just been different since the splashpool has been in town
Not saying they won't let people in to mess about, but if they were going for "fun swimming" they would use the one with slides etc.
Sadly I cant help thinking that the release of these letters is to be able to say to the fans we tried. The retention of the Cat 2 Academy is not so much a planning issue but one of logistics, flexibility and finance in my opinion. Plus commitment
I think the Sports England aspect is being over played. My understanding, and I might be wrong, is that they are concerned that the overall sporting offer of the City of Coventry is not diminished. Not whether a professional club has been negatively affected by a decision of a sports venue supplier (be it CCC or CSF) to go in a different direction. I would not think that it would be that hard to argue that there is a greater diversification of sport on offer. With the development of Warwick Uni is there any less pitches in total for instance?
Now the Secretary of State hasn't called the planning in I suspect Sports England will be onside with the proposal quite soon. Somehow cant see them going contrary to the decisions taken already. Also it is quite normal for CSF and CCC to work closely with Sports England so I wouldn't take no news from that side to necessarily be a problem.
Going back to the TF letters - I cant help thinking that the professional planning advice they would have got would have given them the expected outcomes as far as Sec of State and Sports England were concerned. So the purpose of making such a letter public, especially when they have chosen before to be private on nearly all matters, was?
Then it is pretty much down to the club to do a deal that retains its Cat 2 status or not - but they need to form positive relationships (which must be reciprocated by the other parties) to achieve it if they do. The best they can hope for is that they are not over charged because no one it seems is likely to do them any favours. That is if the Academy is still financially viable for the owners
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?