Blaze offer for City fans

[bigfatronssba]

The Trust, I guess. Who are promoting going to watch a franchise team? Mad really, where does it end, eh?

So you are claiming then that the Trust supports the franchising of sports teams? Yes or No?

 

[Nick]

So you are claiming then that the Trust supports the franchising of sports teams? Yes or No?

Obviously if they are trying to get people to go to watch a franchise team....

 

[bigfatronssba]

Obviously if they are trying to get people to go to watch a franchise team....

So, as you've been to Sixfields, does that mean you support franchising?

 

[lordsummerisle]

So, as you've been to Sixfields, does that mean you support franchising?

Going to MK Dons and the Blaze would surely show tacit approval for it.

 

[lewys33]

slightly differing circumstances as to why it has been "franchised" but I will let people argue all of this out while I sit and eat popcorn

 

[bigfatronssba]

Going to MK Dons and the Blaze would surely show tacit approval for it.

Must be wonderful to be so full of moral superiority.

Have you ever been to Arsenal?

 

[bigfatronssba]

slightly differing circumstances as to why it has been "franchised" but I will let people argue all of this out while I sit and eat popcorn

Different circumstances seem to get ignored.

Classic case of people having an opinion on something without knowing the facts.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Must be wonderful to be so full of moral superiority.

Have you ever been to Arsenal?

Yes I have, though it was before they moved out of London to Wakefield to take advantage of the huge catchment area there.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Yes I have, though it was before they moved out of London to Wakefield to take advantage of the huge catchment area there.

But after they left their loyal fanbase in Woolwich presumably?

 

[Moff]

Perhaps ... isn't it funny how Sisue lovers don't contribute to the thread.

Its also ironic that some posters who are habitually accused of being Sisu lovers have posted. I don't really get why you have said otherwise.

I just find it unbefuckingbelievably ironic that this post is supporting a currently Coventry based franchise, something that we rightly froth at the mouth about when discussing our football clubs move to Northampton.

I suppose unlike others I am just no hypocrite, as I would never set foot in Sixfields as I would never watch the franchise blaze.

 

[lordsummerisle]

But after they left their loyal fanbase in Woolwich presumably?

Would that be Woolwich in London?

Would be like complaining about the club leaving our loyal fanbase in Hillfields to go to a place on the northern outskirts of the City wouldn't it?

 

[Moff]

Would that be Woolwich in London?

Perhaps there was confusion between Woolwich and the Woolpack, Emmerdales resident Yorkshire pub which is based not t'far from Wakefield I believe

 

[lewys33]

Would that be Woolwich in London?

Would be like complaining about the club leaving our loyal fanbase in Hillfields to go to a place on the northern outskirts of the City wouldn't it?

Build a bridge mate ...... this is getting boring as fuck!

How can a thread which started as an offer for blaze be lowered like this?!

 

[bigfatronssba]

Would that be Woolwich in London?

Would be like complaining about the club leaving our loyal fanbase in Hillfields to go to a place on the northern outskirts of the City wouldn't it?

Not really no.

London is made up of a number of Boroughs, each of which have their own identity and many were once their own town.

Coventry is one city.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Not really no.

London is made up of a number of Boroughs, each of which have their own identity and many were once their own town.

Coventry is one city.

Does Coventry not have boroughs with their own identity then?

Earlsdon, Cheylesmore, Willenhall, Stoke etc?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I suppose unlike others I am just no hypocrite, as I would never set foot in Sixfields as I would never watch the franchise blaze.

Well I've watched both, and tbh didn't like either as they both seemed artificial and superficial, a commodified facade lumbering across what sport should be. Done each once, won't do either again.

Just my opinion

 

[lordsummerisle]

Well I've watched both, and tbh didn't like either as they both seemed artificial and superficial, a commodified facade lumbering across what sport should be. Done each once, won't do either again.

Just my opinion

I'm all out of foam hands, so wouldn't be able to go anyway.

 

[ajsccfc]

This thread is why we can't have nice things. The first reply had already doomed it, mind you.

 

[Moff]

Well I've watched both, and tbh didn't like either as they both seemed artificial and superficial, a commodified facade lumbering across what sport should be. Done each once, won't do either again.

Just my opinion

Hey NW it did seem a little harsh and I didn't mean it quite like that. I apologise to you as I try to respect everyone's personal opinion and decisions and just because I haven't been to Sixfields doesn't mean I cant see or understand why others have.

The hypocritical part I find is the supporting of the Blaze in this scenario who are a franchise team something we don't want at the football club, but it just seems some of those so vocal against it seem to think its ok with the ice hockey team but not their football club.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Does Coventry not have boroughs with their own identity then?

Earlsdon, Cheylesmore, Willenhall, Stoke etc?

No. Coventry is a city and a metropolitan borough in its own right. The authority of Coventry is a single tier government where no other authority is recognised.

London has a two tier system of government where the Greater London Authority represents the city as a whole, whilst the London boroughs represent each area and have their own recognised legal status.

 

[Moff]

Does Coventry not have boroughs with their own identity then?

Earlsdon, Cheylesmore, Willenhall, Stoke etc?

Styvechale or is it Stivichall.

Well if the people there cant agree were dooooomed all of us dooomed

 

[ccfc_Tom]

will be there. went last time there was the sbt deal (vs hull) after not going for about 10 years - was good fun.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Hey NW it did seem a little harsh and I didn't mean it quite like that. I apologise to you as I try to respect everyone's personal opinion and decisions and just because I haven't been to Sixfields doesn't mean I cant see or understand why others have.

The hypocritical part I find is the supporting of the Blaze in this scenario who are a franchise team something we don't want at the football club, but it just seems some of those so vocal against it seem to think its ok with the ice hockey team but not their football club.

But your saying those that go to the Blaze are supportive of franchising sports teams.

Surely then you are saying those that go to Sixfields also are? You cant have it both ways.

I have no issue with going to the Blaze, they are a Coventry team now (one that has brought more trophies to our city in 10 years than the football club has in 130) and deserve our support

I also acknowledge that going to Sixfields doesn't mean that you support franchise football, as for one thing, that isn't an official aim of the club (yet).

 

[CJ_covblaze]

Question for CJ - I'm a trust member but don't have a wristband, does the offer still extend to me?

Always good to see a Coventry team play in front of a loud, full Arena.

I can meet you there with one mate.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Hey NW it did seem a little harsh and I didn't mean it quite like that. I apologise to you as I try to respect everyone's personal opinion and decisions and just because I haven't been to Sixfields doesn't mean I cant see or understand why others have.

The hypocritical part I find is the supporting of the Blaze in this scenario who are a franchise team something we don't want at the football club, but it just seems some of those so vocal against it seem to think its ok with the ice hockey team but not their football club.

tbh my post was kind of agreeing with you

Tried both, as how can you say for certain you don't like it until you try?

But both suffer from being patently such false, commodified, artificial constructions that I personally can't understand how you can go along to one quite happily but not the other. My feelings for watching both were pretty similar really that for all the 'excitement' of the games, it was a bit like going to a cheap whore high on crack and riddled with STDs, all a bit dirty... although tbf I do remember a similar conversation with Noggin (apologies for the name check!), where it was the distance rather than the franchising which he objected to, as I recall? Couldn't really argue with that as he was very upfront it wasn't the franchising he objected to in itself. I may disagree with that... but he was consistent.

Does seem a highly bizarre thing for the Trust to publicise though; almost like they're encouraging them to fill out the Skydome so they sod off to a bigger venue in another city!

 

[lordsummerisle]

No. Coventry is a city and a metropolitan borough in its own right. The authority of Coventry is a single tier government where no other authority is recognised.

London has a two tier system of government where the Greater London Authority represents the city as a whole, whilst the London boroughs represent each area and have their own recognised legal status.

Each area has it's own "Wards" though, where councillors get elected to represent their local area.

They are voted to represent their area on the City Council, not the City Council itself.

Each has their own distinct history and characteristics, which make up the whole.

As I said, like London, but on a smaller scale.

Would much prefer it be back in Warwickshire, as it was historically, than part of an artificial construct such as the West Midlands, or even worse the CoventryBedworth Urban area.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I can meet you there with one mate.

Have you not got any more than one mate?

 

[Moff]

But your saying those that go to the Blaze are supportive of franchising sports teams.

Surely then you are saying those that go to Sixfields also are? You cant have it both ways.

I am not having it both ways.

I can understand why people go to both...BUT I cant and if I did I would be hypocritical.

The point I am making is that there are some who are slavishly going mad at those going to Sixfields as it makes us a franchise team (which we are not yet) but yet would consider going to watch a team brought to our fair city as a franchise, removed to another town from its former home just like our football club currently is. That's the hypocritical part I am pointing out.

 

[wingy]

tbh my post was kind of agreeing with you

Tried both, as how can you say for certain you don't like it until you try?

But both suffer from being patently such false, commodified, artificial constructions that I personally can't understand how you can go along to one quite happily but not the other. My feelings for watching both were pretty similar really that for all the 'excitement' of the games, it was a bit like going to a cheap whore high on crack and riddled with STDs, all a bit dirty... although tbf I do remember a similar conversation with Noggin (apologies for the name check!), where it was the distance rather than the franchising which he objected to, as I recall? Couldn't really argue with that as he was very upfront it wasn't the franchising he objected to in itself. I may disagree with that... but he was consistent.

Does seem a highly bizarre thing for the Trust to publicise though; almost like they're encouraging them to fill out the Skydome so they sod off to a bigger venue in another city!

Why another City ?

There is a vacant stadium looking to utilise Its facility.

I believe there is a cavernous level below the Pitch/Casino requiring some purpose.

 

[bigfatronssba]

I am not having it both ways.

I can understand why people go to both...BUT I cant and if I did I would be hypocritical.

The point I am making is that there are some who are slavishly going mad at those going to Sixfields as it makes us a franchise team (which we are not yet) but yet would consider going to watch a team brought to our fair city as a franchise, removed to another town from its former home just like our football club currently is. That's the hypocritical part I am pointing out.

The only bit I disagree with you on is the final bit.

I would say the vast majority of those calling for an empty sixfields are not doing so out of some anti-franchise thing, more just to highlight that we as fans are not prepared to support the idea of our team playing in Northampton. That's different to saying we don't support the franchising of our team.

Its very rare that the term franchise is even used (except when talking in a hypothetical way).

 

[bigfatronssba]

Each area has it's own "Wards" though, where councillors get elected to represent their local area.

They are voted to represent their area on the City Council, not the City Council itself.

Each has their own distinct history and characteristics, which make up the whole.

As I said, like London, but on a smaller scale.

Would much prefer it be back in Warwickshire, as it was historically, than part of an artificial construct such as the West Midlands, or even worse the CoventryBedworth Urban area.

Well I certainly agree with the Warwickshire thing. In practical terms Coventry is in Warwickshire anyway as far as I'm concerned, the West Midlands only really exists for the Police and Fire nowadays.

With the wards, the councillors are still representatives of the city as a whole. For which I mean a councillors title is Coventry City Councillor, they take part in votes and the running of all areas of the city, not just their own ward, whereas a Councillor in Hackney would be Hackney Borough Councillor, no authority what so ever outside their borough.

I suppose your right in some of our wards have an identity, but some are just cobbled together. I live in Bablake ward, which incorporates half of Coundon, half of Keresley, bits of Radford and Whitmore Park, Allesley and all the countryside up to Corley. A proper mismatch!

 

[oscillatewildly]

I just don't 'do' American sports. How many home grown players have they got, out of interest?

 

[CJ_covblaze]

The Trust, I guess. Who are promoting going to watch a franchise team? Mad really, where does it end, eh?

I've explained in the past about the move to Coventry. It was an entirely different situation to those at CCFC, Wimbledon, ect. You're more than welcome to go through my posts to see why.

 

[bigfatronssba]

I just don't 'do' American sports. How many home grown players have they got, out of interest?

Its not American, it was invented by us!

I'm not sure now, but I used to go regularly and then around half the squad would be home grown. It is limited by the league as to how many "imports" you can have.

 

[CJ_covblaze]

tbh my post was kind of agreeing with you

Tried both, as how can you say for certain you don't like it until you try?

But both suffer from being patently such false, commodified, artificial constructions that I personally can't understand how you can go along to one quite happily but not the other. My feelings for watching both were pretty similar really that for all the 'excitement' of the games, it was a bit like going to a cheap whore high on crack and riddled with STDs, all a bit dirty... although tbf I do remember a similar conversation with Noggin (apologies for the name check!), where it was the distance rather than the franchising which he objected to, as I recall? Couldn't really argue with that as he was very upfront it wasn't the franchising he objected to in itself. I may disagree with that... but he was consistent.

Does seem a highly bizarre thing for the Trust to publicise though; almost like they're encouraging them to fill out the Skydome so they sod off to a bigger venue in another city!

I can safely say we wouldn't even entertain moving out of the ring road let alone leaving the city itself.