Search results

Do you disagree with him? Wasps won't talk to the club unless a process SISU / CCFC have no control over is stopped. Unless you know of another stadium we can use then surely the only remaining option is to try and build our own stadium?

He wants to raise the threshold to £80,000 and an MPs salary is £79,468. Even if you assume that's just a coincidence did nobody point out to him how that was going to look?

What route does he take to Birmingham?

I've posted one example in this thread "the condition that the club’s owners permanently and unconditionally cease their legal action" taken from a Wasps statement. All you need to do is look at any statement from Wasps / Eastwood prior to the last couple of weeks. They all talk of legal action...

Not at all. If anyone is giving the new stadium credit it is the council. I'm just saying people can't hold up a Fisher statement, use the 'a new ground is plan A' as an example if you like, as 100% factual and a valid reason for other actions to be taken while at the same time ignoring other...

Not sure I would read too much in to that. Could just be a face saving exercise for the EFL and the last time they said we'd put up a bond it turned out that it hadn't actually been paid, was just a promise to pay it in the future if the club didn't return to Cov.

How are the EC going to fine Wasps if they find CCC to be in the wrong? I think the reality is they wouldn't even fine CCC, doesn't any fine go to central government?

We're paid by SISU / Coventry Council* to be on here all day. *delete as appropriate

Can't say I've really seen anyone take everything SISU say at face value. Although we do seem to have gone back to people picking out individual comments made by Fisher to justify the actions of the council and Wasps.

Not really the same is it. Wasps repeated the same requirement over and over again for months on every statement. SISU agreed to those requirements. Every statement from Wasps since SISU agreed to the requirements has contained different requirements. Its not hard to see.

The 'it's not legal action' argument may not wash with you personally but it is factually correct. And that's before you even consider any EC action will be against CCC not Wasps.

Are you not reading what Wasps previously claimed? Here again is their statement from 29th March 2019

The conflict is Wasps with themselves, just go back and read their statements. Originally they were about legal action being halted. Compare what they were saying before to what they are saying now. Here's one example which was as recently as March this year. That condition has been met. There...

Not really. The original requirement of Wasps was that SISU / CCFC stop all legal action against them. That was agreed to and SISU signed the undertaking. Wasps then changed their requirements to no action being taken by anyone against Wasps or third parties regarding the Ricoh. That is a...

Yes. It is hugely unlikely, even if we crash out with no deal, that cases like this will just be dropped.

Council will have, or at least should have, insurance for this kind of thing.

Would depend if the agreement fell away when Wasps wouldn't agree a new deal. If it did then frankly Wasps have only got themselves to blame if legal action is launched against them.

We're not the first club to have to do this and it hasn't led to franchise football so I don't think thats a worry. Its simply doesn't make business sense for clubs to move around the county. Where are all these cities without teams they could move to? You really need to flip it round and look...

Some of their fans genuinely think they lose money by having us play there. Their inability to grasp very basic facts is astounding.