Search results

Absolutely 100% correct.

No, no, no! If you need clarification around my points, you ask for that clarification. You don't reply based on what you 'think' I was trying to say. That's just not how conversation either online or face-to-face work. You appear (in my opinion, I'd would state it as fact!) that you...

And my post was about how the broken promise by SISU have impacted on CCFC so also in the correct forum and 100% relevant.

Nick, however you try and dress this up your are 100% incorrect. My posts aren't trying to insinuate anything - please don't try and make out you know more about my intentions that I do. Try actually reading my comments in future and replying to the points I've made rather than what you...

The question has to be asked why you made a post about Wasps in the CCFC forum.

What you mean is that you can't because I didn't say it. However, yet again you're able to demonstrate your fantastic ability to actually know what people mean better than they do! My posts contain all of the information I want to get across - just because you take more from them or try and...

What have SISU achieved as a positive for the club, fans or city in the last two years?

OK, you'll have to help me out on this one - where have I said SISU shouldn't pursue this through the courts? I think it's utter ridiculous but again, where have I said they shouldn't?

The matters at court were coming to ahead during the timeframe it would appear the negotiations were ongoing between SISU/Wasps and again CCC were not found to be at fault. However SISU have decided to continue with the matters and progress to a further appeal. They had the option to draw a...

Why was it only being pointed out about Wasps? That's the point you're blissfully ignoring. All sides should be hammered, but let's only point out the failures of one side to stick to their word. Really! You also tried to make out the suggestion that SISU would build a stadium was said years...

Right - you're saying that all sides need to be hammered, but when it's highlighted that promises haven't been kept to on both sides this is suddenly a huge issue. Honestly, you couldn't make this stuff up!

That doesn't take away from the fact you don't read my comments before jumping on them - it's embarrassing.

Honestly Nick it would really help if you actually bothered reading my replies before jumping on them. I said ">>>some<<< on here". Next time I'll also drop it on my Twitter feed if that would help?

Yes, that seems to be the long and short of it for some on here. Plus by even dare raising the question it automatically means you're not a 'real' or 'actual' fan apparently.

Not particularly no. Unless you're trying to imply that decisions made in one set of circumstances should be exactly replicated in all circumstances which have some similarities? Differing variables must equal the same result?

Again you're going to have to point out where I said it "only occurred because". Also whilst you're at it where have I said it all would have gone swimmingly if things had been progressed before this point. However, back to the point I was actually making, have the other parties moved on...

No, that's really not how it works. You can try and twist what I've said all you like, but such a ridiculous interpretation is nothing more than laughable. 3/10 must try harder.

Right, you're going to have to point out where I've said 'things would have been fine'.

And last March in a minuted meeting - you seem to keep forgetting about that (maybe I should post a Tweet about it on my Twitter feed for your reference?). Also in the same meeting that the Academy would be part of the venture.

You said - "Seems that way. Before nobody has really pushed to sort things. Anderson appears to have come in decided what needs to be done and tried to get on with it. The problems have occurred because when push came to shove nobody would commit to anything that would benefit the club." You're...