Search results

Let's assume for a minute this is genuine. If you remove all the histrionics doesn't it basically say the club is prepared to maintain dialogue with the trust on the basis that anyone who has every spoken a word against SISU is removed from the trust?

Ainsworth posted a lot of info relating to what he said in parliment on his website, not sure if that is also covered by parliamentary privilege.

What a load of crap, seems once again SISU are using diversion tactics to try and take the spotlight away from the terrible job they are doing running the club and any awkward questions about a business plan everyone knows doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Maybe the club should leave the...

If SISU were to 'win' the JR could it have an impact on other clubs? The Ricoh isn't the only ground that has or has had in the past council funding. Is a JR ruling applied across the board or would a JR have to be pursued on a case by case basis?

For me, and I think the same is probably true of others, the point at which feelings towards NTFC took a turn for the worse was when your trust released a very weak statement. This was followed by Northampton Council welcoming the move and the general impression we got from looking at forums...

Spent my cousins wedding listening to a game against Everton on the radio. Was not happy at being forced to go a wedding when we were playing at home! First time in 28 years for me. Even managed to attend home games the two seasons I was living in Canada.

Only where the football creditors rule is being used as that is what they oppose. Football creditors rule was not involved during our administration. So you're agreeing that there would have been no points deduction if a) SISU had paid the rent it was ruled in court they were legally obliged...

Think that's us just about safe now. God help us if we don't have Murphy and Wilson next season.

The JR has never seemed a good plan to me, needs too many things to go SISU's way. They have to win the JR, then they have to win a case for damages, then get awarded such a high level of damages CCC have to look to offer their share of ACL in payment and then they still only have 50% of ACL as...

I think that's more a comment on the poor standard of this division than a comment on how good / bad we have been!

If your Dad was a football manager wouldn't it be sensible not to have your wedding on a Saturday during the season?

Didn't PWKH mention on here that he had been accused of being MMM by SISU representatives? There's so much mud slinging going on I lose track of who said what!

That's the area that should really have been investigated further, how suddenly all the debt and things such as player contracts were in other companies and CCFC Ltd was left with the lease.

Wasn't the £7m the amount thought they could get back if ACL went bust and couldn't meet their payments? Not sure you could use that as a market figure but of course if SISU can produce evidence they had agreed a deal with YB at that price then it gives some weight to the argument that the...

Worth noting that Labovich has more than once stated it is illegal for two companies to work together to disadvantage a third. In his arguement it's ACL, the council and Higgs but surely the same must then apply to others?

Apologies for falsely accusing you of the terrible crime of whistling! My point stands though, how do you get from individuals on the hill using whistles to the implication in the minutes that the trust are somehow responsible and need to be issuing statements about it?

From what I've seen SISU have not suggested the clause doesn't exist. Therefore if we assume SISU did indeed agree a clause that stated they would pay Higgs costs in the event that the deal was not concluded. In that scenario the conclusion is that SISU are trying to get out of paying a debt...

If there is a clause saying SISU pay Higgs costs if they don't complete the deal that is a one way street isn't it, how do you interpret it otherwise? Unless there is an additional clause saying if, in this certain set of circumstances, the deal isn't concluded Higgs are liable for SISUs costs...

If you mean a judgement in favour of Higgs has no influence on the JR then I would absolutly agree. Not sure you could apply the same to this actual case, from what's already been mentioned there is no agreement for Higgs to pay SISUs costs in any circumstances so IMO SISU shouldn't be going...

What I'm not quite understanding is how we get from Dongo and possibly GPE blowing whistles to it being the fault of the trust and them needing to take action on it.