Andy Goode

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
111,495
34,783
1,063
Coventry
Good to see this massive city fan is out in force with some amazing replies like "you are wrong" to people who say anything about Wasps.

Having a look at his track record he doesn't seem to have got many things right.


April 2018

If you believe a certain newspaper this week, Wasps are in “financial turmoil” and there could be an “exodus” of their leading stars but nothing could be further from the truth.

There have been unforeseen delays with the training ground that aren’t ideal because they had a site earmarked and there were issues with the full planning consent for what they wanted to do but new locations have been found and I understand that’s very close to being signed off.


As for financial turmoil, I don’t think so. The rugby is only a small part of the business at Wasps nowadays and it’s an important part but the hotel and the casino and everything else that goes with it are providing very healthy incomes for the club.

By the time the summer’s here and I’m sat on a beach with a beer in my hand, the accounts will have been published, more information will be available regarding the training ground and the article in question will look a bit daft then. Who knows…Wasps might even be Premiership champions as well!
May 2018

PwC resigned as registered auditors for Wasps in May 2018, saying it was doing so due to the “seriousness of the events” regarding the 2016/17 accounts.

PwC said following the completion of its audit, it did not consider it appropriate to continue in its role.

PwC had also cast doubt on the future of the club after its accounts revealed it was relying on shareholder cash to stay afloat.
Then there's this


You would think for somebody employed by Wasps in a commercial role he would actually have half a clue, or maybe he is just spouting shit for them and playing on being "a massive city fan".

Desperate times for the people like him who used to have everybody believing every word.

Reminds me of this bloke going on TV bullshitting


The former Black and Golds' captain appeared on The Rugby Pod, co-presented by another former Wasp Andy Goode, and addressed former Saracens and Leicester Tigers' lock Jim Hamilton's question regarding issues off the pitch.
Shock, some Wasps staff on a podcast bullshitting people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kneeza

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
111,495
34,783
1,063
Coventry
People like that have been so used to shouting "it's all sisu" while whichever organisation they are with fucks the club over as well.
 

superskyblue

Well-Known Member
Nov 28, 2011
1,082
470
83
He's absolutely clueless. He's trying to carve a niche in the media as some sort of outspoken right-wing rugby pundit. He'll say anything for controversy and to increase his Twitter reach. His rugby podcast partner Jim Hamilton (also from Coventry) has called him the Katie Hopkins of Rugby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rodders1 and Kneeza

Terry_dactyl

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2017
1,793
1,365
163
He's absolutely clueless. He's trying to carve a niche in the media as some sort of outspoken right-wing rugby pundit. He'll say anything for controversy and to increase his Twitter reach. His rugby podcast partner Jim Hamilton (also from Coventry) has called him the Katie Hopkins of Rugby.
I can’t say I’d ever heard of him. He certainly appears to be an arsehole. Preaches right - wing stuff does he?
 

Moff

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2011
5,431
2,363
163
Deepest Warwickshire
He is Rugby’s very own Jon Gaunt.

One eyed viewpoint, and pretty clueless when it comes to the issues between CCFC and the Wasps.
 

Evo1883

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2013
6,984
5,470
263
Isn't he employed by wasps on match day? So no shock or impartiality
 

jordan210

Well-Known Member
Sep 10, 2010
3,113
2,241
213
Whats the bet his twitter goes to private or stops replying in the coming day
 

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
111,495
34,783
1,063
Coventry
Whats the bet his twitter goes to private or stops replying in the coming day
That is what usually happens.

It's interesting at how people start flapping when a little bit of pressure is applied, he was that desperate to say "it was all CCFC" that he slipped up. Same as what Duggins kept doing every time.

Imagine if pressure was applied years ago.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2011
24,995
15,204
263
Coventry, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
Sorry. Don’t get this. People seem to have got the wrong end of the stick IMO.

He’s saying what Wasps have been saying which is any attempts to reverse the Ricoh sale (not just the state aid, they specifically say they’ll put the state aid complaint aside) are the issue.

Knowl going on about “it can’t be dropped” and others talking about “it’s not legal action” have missed the point entirely.

The sticking point is a wide ranging indemnity basically ensuring Wasps can stay at the Ricoh come what may from what I can tell. There’s never been any idea other than from fans assumptions that it’s only the state aid case that’s the problem. The club have been very careful to give that impression but if you read what they say they aren’t saying that either.

Just like everyone on here got excited about “the third party” when it was obvious it wasn’t just Wasps last year it was any action, against anyone, in the future, that would lead to the reverse of the sale.

Why is this so hard to grasp?
 

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
111,495
34,783
1,063
Coventry
Sorry. Don’t get this. People seem to have got the wrong end of the stick IMO.

He’s saying what Wasps have been saying which is any attempts to reverse the Ricoh sale (not just the state aid, they specifically say they’ll put the state aid complaint aside) are the issue.

Knowl going on about “it can’t be dropped” and others talking about “it’s not legal action” have missed the point entirely.

The sticking point is a wide ranging indemnity basically ensuring Wasps can stay at the Ricoh come what may from what I can tell. There’s never been any idea other than from fans assumptions that it’s only the state aid case that’s the problem. The club have been very careful to give that impression but if you read what they say they aren’t saying that either.

Just like everyone on here got excited about “the third party” when it was obvious it wasn’t just Wasps last year it was any action, against anyone, in the future, that would lead to the reverse of the sale.

Why is this so hard to grasp?
He is saying Wasps were being sued. They aren't.

He said Wasps wanted a deal with CCFC, he then said they didn't because of the legal and justifying it.

It isn't missing the point at all, he's having a shocker and contradicting things he said himself. People are only going off his own comments which keep changing the more people question him.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2011
24,995
15,204
263
Coventry, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
He is saying Wasps were being sued. They aren't.

He said Wasps wanted a deal with CCFC, he then said they didn't because of the legal and justifying it.

It isn't missing the point at all, he's having a shocker and contradicting things he said himself. People are only going off his own comments which keep changing the more people question him.
But the responses you’ve posted are inaccurate. I understand what he’s saying, and it’s consistent with the info we have from all parties. The bloke isn’t a lawyer so wouldn’t expect him to get the exact terms right but the general thrust of his argument is correct and people like Knowl are the ones spouting nonsense.
 

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
111,495
34,783
1,063
Coventry
But the responses you’ve posted are inaccurate. I understand what he’s saying, and it’s consistent with the info we have from all parties. The bloke isn’t a lawyer so wouldn’t expect him to get the exact terms right but the general thrust of his argument is correct and people like Knowl are the ones spouting nonsense.
The bloke works for wasps in a commercial capacity, we would expect Tynan Scope to have half a clue wouldn't we?

Which part of his argument is correct as he has 2 different aspects that contradict?

Nobody is suing Wasps, it is as simple as that.

Please point out what I have said that is inaccurate?
 

joemercersaces

Well-Known Member
Sep 14, 2011
406
581
143
Warwickshire
Have I missed it before, or is this a new suggestion, ie that the indemnity is just to allow Wasps to stay at the Ricoh, and not to compensate them financially for any losses that result from an adverse EU finding. Why would SISU agree to either when their argument has been consistently that they were shafted by the Council in order that the Council could do Wasps a huge financial favour?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2011
24,995
15,204
263
Coventry, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
The bloke works for wasps in a commercial capacity, we would expect Tynan Scope to have half a clue wouldn't we?

Which part of his argument is correct as he has 2 different aspects that contradict?

Nobody is suing Wasps, it is as simple as that.

Please point out what I have said that is inaccurate?
This is what I mean about not using the right legal terms. No one is suing wasps right now but the point of the state aid claim is to open up the chance to sue in future.

Put aside pedantry about terms for a minute, the overarching issue here is Sisu want to try and reverse the sale of the lease to Wasps and Wasps don’t want that, can we agree on that?

Whether that is done by suing Wasps directly, complaining about the council, or some other route, is irrelevant. It’s the general principle. You can’t just say “I won’t do anything against Wasps” and leave a massive loophole where you can achieve the same thing by attacking someone else. That’s the issue. The club don’t want to relinquish those rights and Wasps do.

So when you say “aha! It’s not a legal process iamverysmart!” You’re missing the point entirely. When you say “aha!The state aid complaint can’t be withdrawn iamverysmart!” You’re missing the point entirely.

What Wasps are asking for (and again I should make it clear I’m not making a value judgement about that request just tying to get the facts clear) is a wide ranging promise that Sisu won’t try anything, legal or not, directly against Wasps or not, that would result in the Ricoh sale being reversed. Then Wasps can go to lenders and say “That whole thing is cool guys, I’m not a risk”.

Ive got to say, this whole conversation would go a lot smoother if you could stop trying to be clever and snarky and just state clearly what you think the situation is and your reasoning for it.
 

Hadji's_Goatee

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2016
359
305
113
But the responses you’ve posted are inaccurate. I understand what he’s saying, and it’s consistent with the info we have from all parties. The bloke isn’t a lawyer so wouldn’t expect him to get the exact terms right but the general thrust of his argument is correct and people like Knowl are the ones spouting nonsense.
Shmmeee propaganda strikes again – yawn