Search results

What do you care, you don't even live in the city. I am a better fan than you.

The discussion would not have happened as it was seen as an opportunity to attack ACL. I assume G man won't be interested in the outrage now he knows it is the clubs fault for selling on the parking for a lump sum

You were saying they made the decision before SISU started reneging on their contract. You were wrong. I am saying maybe they would like to lower the parking prices and if they didn't have bad debtors maybe they could. You encourage the bad debtor so maybe you shouldn't complain...

I think SISU should do right by you Grendel. Get SISU to pay 20 quid of their debt so you can park.

After 10 months attempting to find a resolution, it is clear that Sisu are not prepared to work to that end and the company must protect itself. This support does not mean that the charity takes pleasure in the plight of Coventry City Football Club."

So you say SISU should pay only 170k a year. You say that ACL should write off 1 million pounds worth if legally binding debt. Then you bleat when they can't drop their car parking prices.

When did SISU last pay their legal debt?

Problem is I think they have an outstanding creditor. They are probably trying to recoup an outstanding debt from the fans. Maybe a fair way would be charge those who agree with SISU not paying their debt. So they can chip in for the outstanding debt. However those who think SISU are...

Coventry needs a football club. The Council has to promote Coventry. The Council wants Coventry to have a football club The fans want the same.

Nah sod that. If it is a council funded quango. It had to be one because of the actions of our owners. It needs to succeed so our club stays safe. The council wants coventry to have a football club. Let them run it as they see fit. We know they do care about us.

Or crew.......

Is it more than the 1.3 million they are legally owed? If not I guess they are not making that much profit.

It's not always the case you do get the odd exception. The usual trend is 'you get what you pay for' 21 Sc-unithorpe 28 -19 26 22 Bury 28 -15 23 23 Portsmouth 27 -17 21 24 Hartlepool. 28 -27 16

Personally I think last season blame wise. Owners 80% Thorn 10% Players 10%. Last season they even took responsibility for it themselves. This season owners 70% Thorn 10% Shaw 20% The owners should never have allowed him to sign players through the summer if they were that...

Yes very straight speaking :)

Yes I have a feeling a certain shock decision has led to a panicked silence and a restructuring of a battle plan. The good thing is they will need a lot of success in the pitch before they unleash it. To get us fans backing them.

TF was part of the leadership last year as well.

Ah sorry wrong end of the stick you are praising them .

Are you saying you expect changes in the board SBT? Do you mean for letting a manager who they didn't trust sign 9/10 players then sack him after three games. Then we have 5 defeats on the trot. Then finally they sign the right man. However it is a tight thing if he will be able to pull...

ONE of football’s most enduring adages is that attack is the best form of defence – but Mark Robins insists that’s not necessarily the case when you’re coping with set-piece pressure. The Coventry City boss habitually packs his penalty area for free-kicks and corners and he’s certainly not...