Search results

Or to look at it another way, we have been a top two divisions club for nearly 80% of our existence, yet we now have no ambition to get back up there.

What's rejection of the CVA got to do with the current state of the clubs finances? What would be different from the clubs point of view if ACL had accepted the CVA?

Don't think we'll ever see good times with the current CCFC ever again to be honest.

I hope your not suggesting Nuneaton & Bedworth are allowing sisu to think they are the only bidders for the land whilst negotiating with other parties????

Slightly? Away numbers are up 50% on last year. I wouldn't call that a slight increase.

Can't see it myself. The only "plan" is to get the Ricoh. If that doesn't happen sisu will be gone. Either liquidation or sold.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20681423

December 2012

According to Fisher he had been looking at a new ground before CCC lent Acl the money. Therefore he was negotiating with the council whilst also considering a new ground. Was he being underhand?

If we're into simplistic arguments like that then Higgs and CCC have played a blinder here. Today Higgs Vs Sisu: Higgs blame CCC, Higgs free from any accusations, no comeback on CCC as their not on trial. JR CCC Vs Sisu: CCC blame Higgs, CCC free from any accusations, no comeback on Higgs as...

Why wouldn't you? Northamptonshire isn't its broadcast area.

Yeah that's up there with the other sisu classic contradiction: Its illegal for two or more parties (CCC, ACL & Higgs) to conspire in distressing the business interests of a third party (Sisu/CCFC/Otium) Its legal for two or more parties (Sisu & CCC) to conspire in distressing the business...

Good report! So her position two years ago was the Ricoh or we're walking away? Yet now we're meant to believe that they will fund millions for a new stadium?

Its all about motives. That statement doesn't say their motive for lending the money was to force a club sale, it just says what might be an outcome of it. For the council to lend the money with the intention of getting rid of sisu is illegal. For the council to lend money that might...

Greenbelt land?

That's where I'm struggling to understand it then, as from what has been said, it sounds as though Sisu's defence is that Higgs knew of the alleged agreement between CCC and Sisu to distress YB. That however is a crucial part of the JR. If that cant be taken into account what other evidence can...

I'm still confused as to how the judge can rule on this without prejudicing the outcome of the JR.

I think he means if CCC suggested a site within the city for Sisu, it would once again expose Sisus real plan when they refused the councils offer.

They couldn't refuse planning permission for a legitimate planning application. The idea that they could is just something put out there by sisu backed lackeys to try and put pressure on the Council.

The trust just needs to come out and say that only it's member's can dictate a change of leadership, not an employee of sisu/otium.