Poll: Who to target (1 Viewer)

Would like to target wasps & council but if I had to choose one wasps as I think it gets us home quicker.

Target council to get club back to cov...land and permission for new ground. I believe Ricoh has gone as long as sisu and wasps here




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd go for Council. Identify land, move back.

Can’t vote on this one.

It needs an All option.

CCC.
They can influence wasps
They can deal with new ground issues (yes, I know)
If wasps want an indemnity, let them give it.

I voted for Wasps. Living outside of Coventry, I don’t think there is much I can personally do that affects the Council (cannot withhold Council Tax for example, and not would I encourage anyone to do so), however I do intend to spend more money on Coventry RFC this year to hopefully contribute towards building a strong side that will win many games and maybe encourage some new rugby fans away from Wasps and to Cov, thus denying Wasps important revenue.

Saying that, with the threat of a No Deal Brexit now looming large, and the implications that will have on the manufacturing industry and subsequently this city, I don’t think many in this region will have the disposable income to be spending £40 on a Wasps match anyway

Nick said:

It needs an All option.

Click to expand...

It is the problem with a one and one only as I can see merits with all approaches if just one. I've put SISU as much because they're the owners and have ultimate control, but certainly have sympathy to the fact that SISU don't care a jot what we do, so targeting them is all a bit pointless. There are pros and minuses for the others too if it's a one and one only shot.

And tbh, I thought we were trying to move away from the one-shot effort?

Grendel said:

Why out of interest?

Click to expand...

It’s too specific. And picking one wouldn’t mean anything.

Wasps 100%
It is WASPS who "own" the ground.*
It is WASPS who said they would do a deal if no legals vs them.*
It is WASPS who moved the goalposts when a deal was signed to say there would be no more legals vs them.*
It is WASPS who are putting crippling demands on an apparent deal that could allow CCFC back home into it's own city.*
It is WASPS who got into bed with our council who are looking more and more crooked by the day.

* all backed/leaned on by our own council who again, as time goes by seem to be panicking about something in the background.
*Council are effectively a 3rd party who should not be getting involved in a deal or even making statements...but obviously are making statements and are worried about something...
But as WASPS are the stakeholders and are looking like fronting the the whole shebang at the whim of the council,
IT HAS TO BE WASPS!!!!!!
(They have the power to do any deal they want... the council do not)

The other option is make it multi choice, so people can select more than one if not adding an all option?

This is a bloody difficult one. I've selected Wasps as i think they are the entity with the ultimate say on the issue.

Nick said:

The other option is make it multi choice, so people can select more than one if not adding an all option?

Click to expand...

The question is specific however, as to which one. It's a bit like if you had to sleep with Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn, which would you choose!

NorthernWisdom said:

The question is specific however, as to which one. It's a bit like if you had to sleep with Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn, which would you choose!

Click to expand...

Johnson would be more fun about the encounter and make better noises when he came.

That's a different thread though.

Grendel, are you fucking bored today or what?

Nick said:

Johnson would be more fun about the encounter and make better noises when he came.

Click to expand...

how the heck do you know that???

I voted Wasps as they are most directly able to instantly influence our move back, but in reality it should be all parties

The question is a bit too open, if it is to get Coventry back at the Ricoh it is Wasps.

If it is to get Coventry back to Coventry at another location it is SISU and then the Council.

Short term it has to be Wasps. They are the ones who can get us playing back in Coventry.

fatso said:

Grendel, are you fucking bored today or what?

Click to expand...

I think that I have a feeling I know where this is all leading to.

Could be any of them equally, suitable land needs identifying where a new ground could be built, not easy, but that would put ccc and sisu on the spot, doesn’t have to be Council owned land.

Has to be Wasps. A new ground is fiction so targeting either SISU or the Council of the back of that fairytale is just a waste of time and energy. There’s only one route to playing back in Coventry and like it or not it’s at the Ricoh.

fatso said:

Grendel, are you fucking bored today or what?

Click to expand...

Do a Poll m8.

skybluetony176 said:

Has to be Wasps. A new ground is fiction so targeting either SISU or the Council of the back of that fairytale is just a waste of time and energy. There’s only one route to playing back in Coventry and like it or not it’s at the Ricoh.

Click to expand...

If the only thing stopping a return to the Ricoh is the indemnity that Wasps want should the EC find against them, then shouldn't the council be challenged? They sold the stadium to Wasps, it would be them that failed to meet EU criteria, so, given that JR1 & 2 went for them, they should be confident that any indemnity would be just a paper exercise shouldn't they?

Wasps probably have asked for this, with clearly no success, so putting the focus on CCC could be the best way to achieve us playing at the Ricoh?

Maybe... :emoji_smile:

olderskyblue said:

If the only thing stopping a return to the Ricoh is the indemnity that Wasps want should the EC find against them, then shouldn't the council be challenged? They sold the stadium to Wasps, it would be them that failed to meet EU criteria, so, given that JR1 & 2 went for them, they should be confident that any indemnity would be just a paper exercise shouldn't they?

Wasps probably have asked for this, with clearly no success, so putting the focus on CCC could be the best way to achieve us playing at the Ricoh?

Maybe... :emoji_smile:

Click to expand...

It's true that the everyday approach would see the indemnity given from the seller...

CCFC pointless - they want to return
SISU - pointless, they wont buckle that's why we moved out

Can only be Wasps or Council and we need to target whoever we think we can get a response from and who is more likely to cave in. From that perspective I guess it has to be Wasps ad they're the one losing revenue and in most desperate need.

Eyes first went to Wasps - act with violence!!

But I think council - we get they hate SISU, they’ve made it abundantly clear. But they could pull more strings I feel. This is one of those most/least things isn’t it.

I'd say wasps but reality is that the council are controlling them in respect of the ground

I’d say wasps and sisu , but wasps mainly - there’s a deal to be made but it requires them to drop their ridiculous claim for us to cover their potential losses.

That being said - SISU can’t take the piss. After all- rightly or wrongly the insects own the Ricoh.

Wasps seem the only people who currently hold the power over who uses the Ricoh.

Council hold the power over land for building a new site assuming we're going to do that.

Initially Wasps to get back to the Ricoh. Also the council to say show us where a new stadium can be built if only to prove the point of whether Sisu would/wouldn't invest.

CCC because it’s them that shafted is all the way.

Not just in selling the ground but employing underhand PR merchants to try and force their way into CCFC ownership.

They have the keys to building a new ground. Planning, available land and the goodwill for it to smoothly go through.

The Ricoh is the Wasps now and City needs to own its own ground!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro