Snozz_is_god
New Member
Yea where is gredel, he hasn't posted any of his pro-sisu shit for at least10 mins.
what odds can we get on the first person to paint that as a sisu victory
No you did not, you said......
"The reason why ACL have to cover their own costs is because they have sufficient funds from themselves/ccc to cover it."
That is not my understanding of the judgment, it's nothing to do with ACL having enough funds to cover it at all.
If you can read, read the bloody thing: http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/inc...rt%20Order.pdf
I'm quite happy to put pressure on all sides in this mess but in the right order.
1) We all come together to put pressure on the FL to make the decision they're are putting of sooner rather than latter.
Once they've done this
2) If ACl are still playing hard ball we all come together to put pressure on ACL/CCC and Higgs if required to drop the tough guy act and open the door for negotiations.
Once they've done this
3) We all come together to put pressure on SISU to stay true to there word and join ACL at the table and get the deal done.
Or is that too simple?
AFAICT he's saying because ACL aren't the defendant, just the interested party they won't get costs as it's normal to not award more costs than the defendants.
No you did not, you said......
"The reason why ACL have to cover their own costs is because they have sufficient funds from themselves/ccc to cover it."
That is not my understanding of the judgment, it's nothing to do with ACL having enough funds to cover it at all.
If you can read, read the bloody thing: http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/inc...rt%20Order.pdf
well at least you can read kok204 can't.
what odds can we get on the first person to paint that as a sisu victory
I did put ccc as well?
When I said ACL themselves and ccc they are basically the same.
So yes you're right and I put what you said.
Basically it is saying the councils defence was also covering ACL. I.e. ACL's legal team wasn't needed at court.
It would have to be the same sort of person who thinks that Elvis is still alive, the earth is flat and that Tim Fisher is an appropriate custodian of a community football club.
Sorry pall you didn't, you're talking about whether they CCC/ACL have funds to cover it, it's nothing to do with who has sufficient funds. read the pdf as see if it mentions anything to do with sufficient funds (IT DOESN't) fukg idiot
The words didn't really need twisting to be fair.
You are just twisting my words. That's what I meant. Sufficient funds or well able to protect the interested party is essentially the same thing.
Sorry to offend you Tim. I know times are hard. You are forgiven.
Huh? Who do you think I am? The closest I've got to the FL is the first KCIC protest down there.
Based on what has been said publicly, the club are trying to get a deal sorted on two potential sites. This isn't a secret.
Still not the same thing at all, I give up, you're obviously thick
I don't have a grudge. I entirely blame them for the total lack of support they gave the club.
They have never seen the benefits a successful football club can bring to the community and never embraced it. The whole business model was doomed to abject failure. To compete in the championship you had to spend 80% of turnover on wages. The "deal" killed the club.
The club has zero future anyway unless it has a stake in the stadium. As a business asset it's worthless. Irony is if we got that sisu would be off.
Ouch, expected but can't help thinking it's just another top up of the debt in CCFC
Totally agree"Grendel"
The club was going backwards at Highfield road, it is why they had £60m of debt then. The ground was falling apart and could only hold 24,000, which ment they could not compete in the prem. That is why they decided to build a new stadium, but their debt forced the council to bail them out to get the stadium built. Then Higgs had to bail them out as well and then the worse owners ever came in, downhill all the way since. There was no way back to highfield road as they had allready sold it and were paying £1.2m in rent on a 24,000 seat stadium.
I suspect you are as wide of the mark as is possible.
In 21 days they will lodge an appeal and failing that will go to the Supreme Court.
When that fails its an appeal to the European Commission.
Its pre-planned trench warfare and its going to be very long and drawn out.
You would do. The two supposed CCFC supporters that seem to want what is best for SISU and not our football club or us. The two of you that seem to love making stupid comments but never use proper reasoning as for why.
What happens when they lose all those appeals?
sorry Rob my mistake as some have said should read it 3 times saw met not meetointlaugh:
Note no mention of SBS&L in that PDF ,dated 18th July so six days old.
Yea where is gredel, he hasn't posted any of his pro-sisu shit for at least10 mins.
Says the man who said Owen Oysten was a good owner of a football club.
I have made no stupid comments on this thread at all. I don't support sisu but I am outlining their strategy.
Totally agree"Grendel"
I assume you mean me. I've never once posted a pro sisu post on this forum.
Owen Oyston? I said their club was run better than ours. A club could be run very badly and still run better than ours. You will disagree with this though.
So what about your stupid comment earlier when I asked you again to do a proper reply....you know where others pointed out that you didn't reply but came out with your normal crap. Then you did your normal of going quiet for a bit until you see some stupid reason to attack the same poster with something not said in the context you make out and not on the subject nobody is talking about.
Have you given up defending the indefensible yet?
What like when you said I'd abused PWKH and couldn't find one post to support your claim you mean?
I did reply. The history will make no difference. I would imagine amongst the actual individuals concerned there is less animosity than you'd think. It's a game and in the end it won't hinder a deal at all. It's very naive to think otherwise.
You did say their owners care about their club by the way. I'd suggest that shows you lack sound judgement.
Just my opinion of course.
Are not SBS&L are at the top as claimants?
I'm quite happy to put pressure on all sides in this mess but in the right order.
1) We all come together to put pressure on the FL to make the decision they're are putting of sooner rather than latter.
Once they've done this
2) If ACl are still playing hard ball we all come together to put pressure on ACL/CCC and Higgs if required to drop the tough guy act and open the door for negotiations.
Once they've done this
3) We all come together to put pressure on SISU to stay true to there word and join ACL at the table and get the deal done.
Or is that too simple?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?