Search results

I'm not trying to - I'm just saying that is becoming the ownership model in the current climate and I very much doubt we'd be any different.

I'm not saying they do. I'm just saying that in the highly unlikely event that the stadium were to become available to buy and our owners bought it it wouldn't be in kept in the name of the club. We'd be renting it from our owners.

Undoubtedly. All about the marketing.

Senokot rather than boycott

Even in the very unlikely event the Ricoh were to end up being available CCFC will NOT be the owners. It'll be owned by SISU in a holding company and the club will be renting it. It'd probably be a better deal than we've had in the past, certainly in terms of access to income. But given that...

It was mentioned in the original statement, but carefully worded saying 'last year'. His later response all but confirms that was what he was alluding to in that first statement.

Just seems a bit of a shit way of naming it and mashing two total opposites. One totally against animal products, one based almost solely on it. Neither of those specifically talk about not eating processed foods etc. It's a normal diet that's low on carbs and cuts out processed food so nothing...

I've never said I don't agree with the refusal to sign any contract with an indemnity clause.

It's a very careful way of mentioning the indemnity without specifically saying it was the problem this year, although this was confirmed in the second statement and thus the intent of it being mentioned is pretty much revealed.

Isn't that just called 'eating'?

But didn't the club then break the NDA first in their initial statement announcing us staying in Birmingham by saying that Wasps required indemnity?

I agree that the club and SISU should be allowed to reserve the right to legal action if fault is found. But on the same lines I also believe CCC/Wasps should be allowed to take legal action against SISU/the club if no fault is found.

But why does Coventry City benefiting from being in Coventry allow pressure to be applied to Wasps to take us back when they'd be doing business with someone who had been proven to be untrustworthy? People know how to cover their trail - they know it's a lot more than shredding documents and...

It was their strategy before with ACL so I see no reason why they wouldn't use the same tactics again against Wasps.

The impression I've always got of Joy is that she's one of those people like Trump, who's mind will alter he memory of events to support her idea of what happened to such an extent it becomes their 'reality' and truly believe that is what actually happened. Even faced with evidence to the...

If it were to prove Wasps were telling the truth (which as I say anything being confirmed as 'truth' from this is unlikely) why would it allow pressure to be applied to take us back? It would be "you want us to deal with people who have been shown to be untrustworthy? Why would we want anything...

I agree we deserve answers. I'm just not convinced this will lead to us getting them. Just more counter claims and muddying of waters. As you say things can be very carefully worded. For example: “We did not require the football club or its owners to sign any indemnity around legal action over...

I wouldn't be surprised at seeing either side falsifying records or claiming the other had done so. Say Boddy produces a draft he says was received from Wasp's lawyers that included something about indemnity. Wasps claim this is a false document and produce their own without any mention of...

I agree that if Wasps don't agree it makes them appear they have something they wish to hide. I hope they do agree and IMO have little option but to do so. However if that happens I imagine what each releases will be contradictory. Their notes, minutes etc may not say the same thing in which...

Do U2 count as British?