Recent content by Dude

At least we agree on Bellamy. Dublin only refused to ever wear our shirt again to force his move to Villa. We have a long and proud history involving numerous class players who showed nothing but pride in our club and exited with dignity and respect. Let's keep those names as CCFC legends.

Not even close to the best player to wear Sky Blue. As for forgetting the 'other stuff'; no thanks, it'd be a close run thing with Bellamy as to showing the most disrespect to those who wear Sky Blue.

Unless another show makes him a better offer. Then he'll refuse to play and turn up on another channel.

Having spent many hours on the old Telegraph site, debating the objectives, aspirations and competence of SISU with Torchy and company, it is clear they were misguided and wrong. Don't expect a full admission of that from their direction, even though I'm sure they know it by now. That said, many...

I can't really vote when CCFC is linked to SISU. SISU do not belong at our football club; never have, never will. I'm backing any option that potentially removes them whatever risk that entails.

I've been thinking about some form of new start for a good few seasons now. As far as I'm concerned we are Coventry City Football Club and we therefore can dictate the future. What I mean is, 'where we decide to place our support, therefore gate and merchandise funding, will be the direction...

Opinions will differ on here Michael. Personally, I think SISU may take your grand! Seriously though, SISU would probably jump ship at any offer that would give a route out of this; unfortunately, there is nothing to attract any potential buyer short of a very wealthy city fan.

It's interesting how we've been talking about this in two different tenses. It kind of highlights how I've totally given up on a practical solution involving SISU at the helm.

Maybe so, or perhaps we'd have had to payout part based on the other 50%; either way it would still have been a logical progression move if affordable.

Although I have no idea of what you think I'm mistaken about, I tend to agree with you!

Then we're at a standstill. Short of finance I can't think of any other reason. I'm pretty sure they stated intent on buying in and logically it was the only route to reducing week-to- week costs.

What would you pay for a loss making organisation without assets and ladened with outstanding debt?

And here lies a point; why did they never buy that 50% when pastures were greener. Personally, I don't believe they could afford to therefore, for the same reason, a new stadium is but an empty threat.

Whilst the moral debate is very interesting; I think we can all agree, in the business sense, the stance of 'non-payment' is not looking an intelligent tactic as things stand? Or is anyone out there suggesting it is?

I somehow doubt their reputation, in terms of his particular project, can sink any further to be honest.