J
Dear Sir
In Eye 1364, your Rotten Boroughs section gleefully reported the alleged "mishandling" by Coventry City Council of the Ricoh Arena saga. "More embarrassing revelations are expected when SISU goes back to the High Court for a judicial review of the Council's secret decision to loan ACL £14.4m" you wrote, no doubt rubbing your hands at the prospect of a Labour council being humiliated in court.
Unfortunately for you, but fortunately for fans of Coventry City FC and indeed the wider English football community, the only ones embarrassed by the judicial review, the result of which was made public on 30th June, were our owners SISU. Whilst the judge found that the Council had acted entirely legally and "well within the ambit extended to public authorities", and that any accusations of secrecy were "unfounded", he accused SISU of conducting a rent strike in order to "distress ACL’s financial position, with a view to driving down the value of ACL and thus the price of a share in it, which they coveted.” No surprise to those of us who have followed the sorry tale from day one, but obviously news to Private Eye and its sources.
I assume you will be publishing a correction and apology, or at least a follow-up story, in a forthcoming issue?
Yours sincerely
I thought Les Reid wrote the articles in Private Eye?
If he wrote that one he has done a U-turn just like Fisher has.
I would say that was a readers letter that they published rather than an article Jack. Probably as near as an acknowledgement that they got it wrong as they'll print. If LR did write the original article I would think it hasn't been good for his wider reputation given the battering the council didn't receive in court.
I thought Les Reid wrote the articles in Private Eye?
Sure, that much is obvious. It would be interesting to find the thread on here where the eye article was originally brought up & have a chuckle at the views expressed back then, I tried searching but no luck.
What the Private Eye said article did was nothing new(apart from what was suspected about the CET). The reason i suspect so many on here a shifting uncomfortably is that it very succinctly summarises a narrative of what has happened that doesnt really get much airtime in the coherent way it is presented here. Now, we all know SISU are no saints and its all dog eat dog but does highlight the Council seemed very happy to play this hardball game with just as much disregard for the supporters as SISU.
You can only base your opinion on the facts you know so far as presented in the skeleton argument. It is you who is assuming that there is evidence on the other side that refutes those facts.
Your assumption is that the council cannot possibly be complete bastards determined to stitch the club up, but that SISU are complete bastards out to stitch everybody up.
Sorry Schmeee in the trolling stakes you outdo me every time. Your pro-council anti CCFC stance is now reaching fever pitch
Its not your fault - you have no doing had local political dogma all your life in the same way a religious bible bashing fanatic would. It makes you incapable of rational and independent thought. You are riddled in bias.
Les Reid is an established journalist who writes for the guardian amongst other journals. The notion his views are dismissed as they are thoughts and facts that your closed mind is incapable of opening up tells us what we all know. The very fact you don't consider the lookout a plant or a troll means I suggest you need a long hard look in the mirror before you start to throw stones.
What you proving Jack? Was I not just stating what i knew prior to the JR? Sorry if I hurt your feelings.Some of the views expressed before the judges verdict. All with the heady whiff of agendas.
What you proving Jack? Was I not just stating what i knew prior to the JR? Sorry if I hurt your feelings.
What you proving Jack? Was I not just stating what i knew prior to the JR? Sorry if I hurt your feelings.
I'm big enough to hold my hands up on the JR to be honest. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.Steady on FP, there are more from you he could have quoted...I should leave it alone mate
The argument wasn't fiction (it's an argument based on presentation of the facts). The counter argument was stronger and it was found that the council bailing out a company was legitimate. The end.how much of that skeleton arguement ended up being fact? as sisu lost the JR i assume most, if not all was deemed fiction?
The argument wasn't fiction (it's an argument based on presentation of the facts). The counter argument was stronger and it was found that the council bailing out a company was legitimate. The end.
I'm big enough to hold my hands up on the JR to be honest. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.
You're not a politician are you. You are happy to hold your hands up to the council presenting a 'better' argument than SISU in the JR (and hence that SISUs case was valid but not sufficiently strong enough) but not to berating anyone on here who held the opinion that SISU were wrong and have thus been proved right.
I dared to have my own opinion on the case. So what? I was wrong.Nobody banded the phrase "illegal state aid" around in the direction of CCC like FP before the JR. Despite certain posters requesting caution over the complex legislation. Despite Chris West always being adamant it did not constituent illegal state aid.
I dared to have my own opinion on the case. So what? I was wrong.
There is always the appeal.....
Has this letter actually been printed in Private Eye, as I have looked through the last four editions (eight weeks worth) and cant find it anywhere.
To say it has been posted on social media doesnt mean it has been printed in Private Eye. I would be happy if anyone could say which one it was in.
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?