Search results

Yes... that will be right too...especially as he has been right under our noses so to speak!

We can't "officially" talk to OHare until after Jun 24th!

Wasps aren't a key player? Nick Eastwood isn't a key player? (Although I do like what you have said about the owners of the two hedge funds!)....

They remain misguided then. Which is obviously a problem.... or a worry.... or both.... Especially if they are or might be being misguided by somebody who may be a key player in this whole saga!!!.... remember, they are in dialogue with wasps too!!!

The trust still think it can!!!!!! Who is feeding them that!!????

Why do wasps keep trotting out the line about dropping the legals when the EU Complaint can not be dropped, forgotten about or removed?

I've pulled them up about that on there too... and specifically named Eastwood and his "drop the (legals that is a complaint that can't be dropped!) legals" rubbish!!

But they do! The words "drop the legals" (and we'll talk) have misleadingly come out of Nick Eastwoods mouth in an interview that was aired on CWR. (5 year Wasps anniversary at the Ricoh) BBC Midlands today edited that bit out of their coverage after many tweets stated correctly that there was...

That is one of the problems isn't it!

As has been documented, dialogue has been ongoing. From what I have heard, wasps are wanting an unreasonable deal that heavily benefits them and does not really benefit us other than we are in Coventry. What this means and whether it is just regarding the indemnity, I don't know, but have...

The wording in that, is again so one sided it has wound me up on birthday morning. Especially after my early present yesterday.

The trust will have a "statement " ready to go... guarantee it will be along the lines of, "We now on behalf of the supporters of CCFC call on all parties to come together and drop all legal action so a return to the Ricoh arena can be made possible...." Obviously the complaint can't be...

Wasps would!!!!!

Starship... nothings gonna stop us. Number 1 in may 1987, played out the some of the fa Cup coverage (might have been charity shield!)... also, sky cleverly played out the checkatrade win with it too!!

Somebody mentioned driving around the ring road beeping horns, with scarves etc.... Got a couple of sky blue flares ready... Will be a bit of an anti climax if I just let them off in the garden and cracked open a can on my own!!.... don't want to waste them on that option!!

Could be due to the fact that the match day squad will be bigger when the championship resumes with 5 subs allowed and bigger numbers on bench... has obviously played his way into the reckoning of the manager. Thinking outside the box, depending on the wage agreement between the clubs, he may...

The option means he doesn't sign...it is the clubs choice... they extend (trigger) the extra year if they want to or if contractual aspects do it anyway.... automatically rolls into the next year. If we want him... we pay a fee for him. Providing BC will let him go.

Magwitch, "they" are Peterborough. Pasty, yes, I do think thet had it in them!... provided Toney stayed in their side. Their recent little blip, which was in between a long streak of wins, coincided with Toney missing two/three games with injury/suspension. As soon as he was back, they won...

The club have the option. It is the clubs choice generally but sometimes other factors might be written into contracts that automatically trigger an option. Eg, after 20 appearances....

...."if either of the three protagonists "win" the current round of legals" "Face palm!" Surely only two... CCC and SISU.... and we know that it is, at this stage a complaint. Doesn't read that well to be honest, digs at owners (about meeting) and to play devils advocate, could they be...