Ahh, okayy, may be worth appealing. Shame we wouldn't get in play offs anyway.
If there was no penalty whatsoever in appealing, then it's pointless even asking. Surely everyone would appeal just in case as the worst that could happen would it would stand anyway... There has to be something against appealing.
Cov Telegraph Article
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...ews/2013/04/03/92746-33110727/?#ixzz2PPIW91rh
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...ews/2013/04/03/92746-33110727/?#ixzz2PPIW91rh
COVENTRY City are still pondering whether to contest the ten-point deduction they incurred when they put part of the club into administration last week.
Tomorrow is the deadline for making an appeal and development director Steve Waggott confirmed today: "We’re in the process of taking legal advice about the next steps.
"We’ve got to manage expectations. We would only go ahead if we thought we had a realistic chance of winning and I think it’s fair to say that the chances of overturning the decision are thin because it’s never been done before.
"But this is not your normal sort of administration and there are several aspects to our case which we feel could be worth pursuing."
Tomorrow is the deadline for making an appeal and development director Steve Waggott confirmed today: "We’re in the process of taking legal advice about the next steps.
"We’ve got to manage expectations. We would only go ahead if we thought we had a realistic chance of winning and I think it’s fair to say that the chances of overturning the decision are thin because it’s never been done before.
"But this is not your normal sort of administration and there are several aspects to our case which we feel could be worth pursuing."
No shit its not normal !! there can not be that many clubs that have so many different companies that own them !!!:facepalm::facepalm:
Such a shame because I like Steve Waggott and regardless of what has gone on I hoped that he would be in a neutral position and would remain at the club if new owners arrived. Unfortunately by giving this interview in which he talks about appeals and alike he nails his colours firmly to the SISU mast and so must also go with the rest of them. He sould have left such statements to TF to make.
I feel sorry for Steve Waggott, I think he has done a good job and I hope he stays if we have a regime change. I would rather hear statements from him than Fisher, but think the club have put him in an invidious position.
Be fair - in any business there are roles were absolute loyalty are required. As part of his role he is directed to speak with the media about such matters...& through the loyalty demanded (sacked due to untenable due to lack of loyalty & reputation ruined making him unemployable vs golden handshake & loyalty in the face of extreme circumstance) he spouts his boss' line.
In light of the aforementioned loyalty to the current regime - any new regime would remove him IMO. Tarnished with what has already happened & is currently happening. Any new owner will want to freshen up the structure. No matter how good he is at his job.
Having read the CT piece again, it's a bit harsh to be hammering Waggott; if that was a Fisher interview there would have been a good 4 or 5 nasty digs at ACL along the way. He really is just the messenger in this-although why he's the mouthpiece this time, rather than Fisher, is slightly confusing. I suppose if the majority of the article transpires to be about the budget for next season etc, it might make more sense, although frankly it's a bit premature for anybody in the SISU camp to be talking about that. Hopefully they won't be here!
I think Waggot is one of the few for SISU's cronies who can say has done a half decent job. I cannot see the point of appealing to be honest, as its bound to fail.
Football League rule 82:
'82.1 A party may only appeal against an order of the FDC on the grounds that either:
82.1.1 based on findings of fact made, the order of the FDC is obviously wrong; and/or
82.1.2 there has been a serious irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings before the
FDC; and/or
82.1.3 the order of the FDC is too severe or too lenient having regard to all the circumstances of the case'
http://www.football-league.co.uk/re...missions-disputes-and-appeals_2293633_2125735
Oh, any excuse: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJQdEY82zs0
Still possibly ITV's greatest ever TV moment, still laugh-out-loud hilarious. Although somebody somewhere knew exactly what they were doing, it was no innocent mistake!
I don't see the point, even winning the last four games won't get us in the play offs and the prize money for a higher placing in this division must be negligible. If there is an appeal lodged it can only be on the basis that SISU want to save face and prove that the whole club is not in admin.
That's already proven. All football related agreements rest with CCFC Ltd. CCFC H was trying to argue that they had an interest in the golden share, not legal ownership.
I'm not sure that's 100% proven at this stage, otherwise why is the administrator going to take the best part of 2 months pulling together a report on the club's structure, ownership and debt position?
This is it...the last round & I think the contestant was allowed to come from the protected area before the board had cleared properly - he caught a glimpse of "Chicken" on the board as it changed & as they say...the rest is history
http://www.youtube.com/embed/M2AWKfMvDtw?autoplay=1
http://www.youtube.com/embed/M2AWKfMvDtw?autoplay=1
Because sisu insist that ccfc ltd are seperate to ccfc holdings, so in a way they have to appeal to back that claim up
