Search results

For example, Kastaneer...

Agreed. Its been a stitch up since the council took all the money from the Tesco deal for the land. The club cannot continue to be ‘enslaved’ by the RICOH indefinitely. Regardless of tactics, SISU were right that it was totally broken and unsustainable relationship between the RICOH and CCFC...

What happens when two hedge funds are pitted against one another?

Regarding the sale of the RICOH. What legal action could SISU even take against Wasps alone? Obviously all action against the CCC impacts Wasps either directly or indirectly. But, I can’t think of what we take Wasps to court over.

Totally agree that we need to be on the owners case for getting this stadium built. However, I totally disagree that we shouldn’t be asking questions of Wasps and CCC. Everything needs to be done to ensure that we can get playing back in Coventry ASAP. If Wasps not the CCC are not asked...

I don’t disagree. Again, the Brighton example. One local authority agreed with the planned work, the other didn’t. The link I provided to NW outlined a few things. The main contention is a disagreement over interpretation of policy. Which clearly demonstrates that some of this is open to...

What other city that is similarly sized to Coventry in the UK would have 3 sports stadiums?

That’s simply not true. Key differences: 1) Developed land had intersecting council jurisdictions. Brighton Hove CC and Lewes District Council (LDC). 2) The planning permission for the stadium was submitted too, and approved by Brighton Hove CC and NOT to LDC. 3) The issue, therefore, was...

That sounds like a deflection. Either way, are these areas the size of Coventry? I get it it, from the council’s view, the RICOH is readymade for CCFC. It would be a waste with Wasps and Coventry can’t co-exist. Or, in a scenario where Wasps bail from Coventry, and a new CCFC stadium built...

The example NW and myself discussed was Brighton. Where the planning permission was submitted to a council supportive of their plans. It was an adjacent local authority that opposed the stadium. In that scenario, had the planning permission been made to Lewes Council, there wouldn’t be a Falmer...

Implosion impending...

Whether this true or not, the first of our statements made the claim that the NDA was signed ‘at the insistence of Wasps’. Presumably, as a precondition of entering negotiations. Maybe I’ve misread, but I can’t recall Wasps challenging that specific claim.

You’ve got a point. This wouldn’t stop Wasps also turning around and saying ‘we’ll drop the the NDA too if all parties agree’. Then you’re in a position where each third party has to agree. Since it’s not clear how many third parties there actually are, like Sepalla, Wasps could also be...

Double speak is the perfect expression. SISU are bad for calling for the NDA to be dropped, yet we will not drop it because there’s other parties involved... SISU’s track record is cause for scepticism, yet they seem to be the only party here who is willing to back up their bullshit.

It’s also worth noting that we switched to 3-4-2-1, with ‘the box’ after all of our wingers were out injured. As well as the option of dropping a defender, the opportunity to switch 1 of, if not both, central attacking midfielders in favour of two, quicker, more direct wingers adds another...

Everyone loses out. It’s a game of mutually assured destruction.

There’s only one Squeaky Robins!

Hang on, the reason Lewes objected to the planned work was because some of the land being developed fell under their jurisdiction. That’s a big difference to what you’re claiming. Hypothetical situation where we decide a plot of land: a part of it falls under CCC jurisdiction is a completely...

You missed out that the planning permission was submitted to Brighton & Hove City council NOT Lewes Council. If Brighton & Hove CC were opposed to the stadium as Lewes Council were, do you think that stadium would be built? Probably not. Only a part of some of the land which was being built on...

Every project has to start somewhere. The promise of a partnership with UoW means that they can supply the land and so on. It’s also outside CCC jurisdiction so potentially a local authority who can help the club crack on with the project. If in 12 months time no progress has been made, we need...