Search results

When the inevitable restructure of academy borders takes place to suit Wasps I wouldn't be in the slightest bit surprised to see those impacted take legal action. They will have invested time and money into their setup and won't be happy to let Wasps walk in and just take over.

You'd be looking at more than 3 or 4 a season. How many did we offer contracts this year, 6 wasn't it? So paying fees similar to Jones for 6 players is a big chunk of money to come from somewhere.

We're looking to sign Saul Goodman ;)

So no need for SISU to stop any legal action then.

Presumably then you believe SISU have a very strong case with JR2.

Apologies for the Daily Mail link, was the only one I could find: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3625925/England-s-Euro-2016-football-shirts-Indonesian-factories-workers-just-95p-hour.html

The point at which we moved back was the point at which the status was going to be removed and the club had concluded there was nowhere else possible to base a Cat 2 academy.

Also I'm not sure I'm comfortable with saying action against public bodies and their use of taxpayers money should be called to a halt if a company, not involved in the legal action, but who are in a better position financially say so.

A lot of the kits for the Euro's, including England's Nike kit, are template kits. Do we really think they're going to bother with a bespoke one for us if they can't be bothered to do one for the national side?

But lets say you overheard one of your tenants on the phone to their parents saying they hoped to one day buy the own house. Would then assume they are leaving imminently and get someone else in without asking your existing tenant what their plans are?

From the same Q&A Really needed a follow up question at that point. If they've stopped talks because of a legal action going on but dropping that legal action isn't a requirement to restart talks then what do they want to happen for talks to restart?

Wasps are only allowing the hall to be used and then, judging by the limited offer to CCFC, only for very few hours. However other community facilities would be lost, overall there will now be less facilities available for the public. How many jobs are you expecting there to be? Pretty sure...

Might have been better if you'd just given a yes or no option! In yes you've linked it to securing the future of the club. That's not an establish link. SISU could drop the legal action and then have Wasps turn round and say we want £5m a year.

If the CRFC supporters aren't happy with the owners or management of the club are they taking any action against them?

Thats not what anyone is suggesting. Any action that is taken involving CRFC would be cleared with them first.

The point you continually ignore is that people have bothered, its been mentioned regularly since Wasps first appeared.

Depends on the reality of how much money, via rent and matchday income, CCFC generates for Wasps. If it is a worthwhile amount they could wait for SISU to walk away, where given the situation we are in will likely mean administration, and pick the club up for nothing with the debt removed. Then...

Because there's nothing strange about a non CCFC supporter signing up to a CCFC to post complaints that the club they do support may get an increased attendance, and therefore more revenue, at one of their games.

Have you forgotten the banking crisis? Except it was the taxpayer rather than another company that had to bail them out!

You make it known, through social media, local press etc, that CCFC fans are attending to show unity with CRFC so in that sense it is a protest. But once at the game there would be no disruption of any sort.