Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
Funny thing that, he never won a popular majority in a "Democratic" election.
43.91% was his lot in '33, and that was helped by bullying, threats and violence.
Last edited:
Of course, the problem is that Adolf Hitler was voted in by quite a large majority democratically.
I've never argued from a pro-Sisu point of view of view though, just don't think that anybody really needs to have any more anti-Sisu arguments as such now, there are, as yet, undiscovered tribes in the depths of the Amazon jungle who know that Sisu are a bunch of twats, so that's an argument that doesn't really need exploring anymore for me.
There are however other parties involved, over many years, who also need looking at.
Some just blame Sisu, some ACL/CC, others blame previous boards, I blame them all, so I'm far from a minority view, I'm a one man majority!
council started admin proceedings, forced sisu to preempt them, then rejected CVA
sounds like 'club having had 10pts deducted for failing to achieve CVA due to former landlord's actions". is spot on?
thats a fact, they cant make statements like "sisu are bad owners and tim fisher is a nob"
I wasn't online at the time, but from people I know, the mood was cautious but hopeful. That they made a positive impression by making signings helped their PR battle. You have to appreciate that things have changed, because a lot of people "gave them a chance", which is only reasonable. Since then, they have behaved terribly. Maybe you and I were right all along, leopards and spots etc, but to the average person they had to make their litany of errors and insults before they gave up &/or turned on them. You can't expect everyone to be as (correctly) judgmental of their nature-their very ideology-so (wisely) soon! It's the difference between Churchill in '38 and Churchill in '40. Now there's an analogy to warm the cocklesIn Greek mythology, Cassandra was destined to foretell terrible futures, but never be believed.
One day I might do something on a larger sample, just for the craic, like.
Wonder if the results would be accepted here and elsewhere unless the results tallied with the rules of the game
You just got me thinking. What about some kind of Political Compass tool that asked how much you agree to statements like "SISU are entirely to blame" "Coventry should play in Coventry whatever the cost" etc. and spat out some kind of graph of popular opinion.
I'll have a play with Google Forms later and see if I can knock anything up.
Of course the way to tackle this is to take the largest areas of agreement first. As such I feel everything should be KCIC until that's achieved. It may be that when we move home the majority still want Sisu Out, but that bridge can be crossed when we come to it.
Here's the latest standard reply I've had from the FL - it would seem that they are Coventry's saviours and we should be thanking them!! I've asked them to stop replying - their smugness and arrogance easily matches SISU's. No wonder they get on so well.
Thank you for your email (to the FL).
We have received numerous emails from Coventry City fans in relation to the official statement released by The Football League on Friday 2nd August (http://www.football-league.co.uk/fo...ue-statement-on-coventry-city_2293334_3335621). We can assure you that your email has been read, however given the volume of emails, I hope you can appreciate, it’s not always possible for us to provide an individual response.
As you will be aware, on the morning of Friday 2nd August creditors of Coventry City Football Club Limited, rejected the proposals for a CVA. The administrators had previously sold the assets that were under their control to Otium Entertainment Group. This included the right and title in the one ordinary share in The Football League that constitutes membership of The League. With the rejection of the CVA, this meant that there was no company eligible to compete as Coventry City Football Club for the 2013/14 season.
In order for Coventry City Football Club to compete in League 1 this season, the Board agreed to transfer the club’s share to Otium under its ‘exceptional circumstances’ provision. This effectively sought to ensure the club continued to operate as a member of The League. As a condition Otium had to accept a ten point deduction, due to the fact that the club had been unable to agree a CVA as ordinarily required under The League’s insolvency policy. If The League had not taken this decision, there would be no Coventry City Football Club for season 2013/14.
The assets of Coventry City were sold to Otium by the administrator through a legal process. The Football League plays no part in this and ultimately has to work with the administrator’s nominated purchaser. The Football League’s role is to administer and regulate the competition that its members play in and only has the power to do so within its regulations. The owners and directors of Otium, through owning the club’s assets, have to comply with the requirements of The League Owners and Directors’ Test. Should you require it, further information about the Owners and Directors’ Test can be located here http://www.football-aleague.co.uk/page/FAQ/FAQsDetail/0,,10794~2428071,00.html.
In terms of stadium relocation, whilst The League has publically urged Otium and ACL to resolve the dispute, The League has no jurisdiction to force any Club (or landlord for that matter) to come to an arrangement over land or rental agreement. With no agreement in place to play at the Ricoh Arena, reluctantly, the Board of Directors approved the application to relocate on a temporary basis only. There are a number of stringent conditions in place regarding the temporary relocation. Failure to abide by these conditions and return to Coventry will result in cessation of the club’s membership of The Football League.
We acknowledge that it has been a difficult period for Coventry City supporters. However we have primarily ensured that the club remains a member of The Football League, and furthermore we will continue in our efforts to ensure that the club returns to the Coventry area at the earliest possible opportunity.
Thank you for contacting The Football League.
Online can be manipulated though.
I could do one here and... elsewhere after all. But it wouldn't give a full picture. It'd give a picture for these particular boards of course...
These boards of course not necessarily a cross-section of opinion either, those who show a bit more interest in the club other than just match-days obviously, those who wish to sway opinion(either way), those who just like a good argument, and some who are all three!
Agree with all of that.
However somewhat surprisingly (to me at any rate) the poll on this site about going (or not going) to Sixfields seems to have been a pretty good indicator.
As I recall, it was always running at about 8 to 10% who said that they would go. Given the home attendance last Saturday that was pretty accurate as against last year.
Maybe the board is a more accurate indicator than either of us thought?
Agree with all of that.
However somewhat surprisingly (to me at any rate) the poll on this site about going (or not going) to Sixfields seems to have been a pretty good indicator.
As I recall, it was always running at about 8 to 10% who said that they would go. Given the home attendance last Saturday that was pretty accurate as against last year.
Maybe the board is a more accurate indicator than either of us thought?
It would be accurate if you believed the attendance figures for the respective games suggested here on SBT, yes. If you take the attendance figures reported elsewhere, erm, no. (Just over 5000 @ Ricoh, 1200 @ Sixfields = 24%, not that many on here would agree with those numbers, oh no). There's a confirmation bias thing going on whereby everyone grabs at info that confirms their stance and ignores or mocks info that does not.
I love Brass Eye but didn't pick up on the heroin quote being from there seeing as it had no context. Brass Eye's great, but it's not like quoting Python where everyone knows every line!
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?