Search results

I never said you did say any information was falsified. What you did seem to say was that there were ways of getting around answering the question. What I am saying is in this instance they have given an answer that can't be interpreted in any other way. So its either true or it isn't.

The second it was pointed out a grovelling apology come out and it was explained as a mistake. Due to reacting quickly it seemed to be interpreted as a genuine mistake. I suspect had they not reacted so quickly it would have began to look suspicious and there would have been consequences for CCC.

Q. Are you in discussions with any party about building a sports stadium within your borough. A. No That is a pretty clear response and if that isn't true then that would be illegal.

Of course it is illegal. RBC were asked a straightforward question and gave a straightforward reply. If they have falsified an FOI reply then maximum punishment is a custodial sentence. Why exactly would a council employee risk going to jail in order to help Sisu?

But that would be illegal, and unless we want to start throwing those kinds of accusations around, we have no choice but to accept RBC's reply to the FOI's. TF has nothing to back up his version of events.

I think most of us agree that a successful long term future is only possible with Sisu out of the picture. Therefore the long term aim of a city fans group has to be one that encourages new ownership. That is what is best for CCFC. That doesn't however mean that the trust and Sisu can't work...

Everyone but Mr Fisher understands this it seems. Any chance of a comment from RBC on this?

Shite footballers living this sort of life shows everything that's wrong with the modern game.

So TF seems to be accusing RBC of falsifying a FOI request again. He wants to be careful about those types of accusations. What's interesting though is despite all evidence suggesting that no discussions have taken place, some fans still seem to think they have based on nothing more than TF's...

Yep, we will most probably cling on to league 1 safety and finish in one of our lowest ever positions. Can't imagine why that's creating doom and gloom.

Crowds increased every season between 1994 & 2000.

By fundamentalists do you mean people that hate sisu? Surely we are all fundamentalists in that case as everyone says they hate them.

Last time we mounted a promotion challenge in this division crowds went up by 16k, what is there to suggest that wouldn't happen again?

Population of an area is a very poor way to gauge support. Using that theory Leeds United are one of the worst supported clubs in the country.

There is a difference though between what SP deserves and what he is legally entitled too. I don't think any of us on here would argue that he deserves this money, but if (and I do stress if) that is what his contract says then the club should just pay it. No more messing about in court cases...

How would I know?

Surely its a good thing then? We all want to know the truth don't we? And if the club is in the right then they have nothing to worry about.

Record for each club (whilst in the top division) between 1970 & 1990: Coventry City Seasons in Div One 21 Average final Position 14th Top 6 finishes 1 Major Trophy Wins 1 Finalists 0 Seasons in Europe 1 Norwich Seasons in Div One 15 Average final Position 14th Top 6 finishes 2 Major...

You made the league 1 play offs as recently as 2007, what you complaining about ;) Such a thing is just a pipe dream to us.

The main issue here is whether a new stadium is going to generate sufficient income to repay its build costs, and fund the operating losses of the club. I very much doubt that is possible.