I agree with your last paragraph, I would love to see that bitch Lucas Squirm. Wouldn't get the ground back though
I agree with your last paragraph, I would love to see that bitch Lucas Squirm. Wouldn't get the ground back thoughI believe it's nothing to do with the legals, as it wasn't last year when they pulled out of talks saying they couldn't do anything while they were on (why enter them?).
Either way, it is still at Wasps mercy isn't it? We could have the biggest city fan in the world take over tomorrow but it is still then relying on a "competitor" in the city for sports fans to do a deal with us.
Who would people blame if CCC were cocks even without SISU? The same as they were before SISU. Their PR company would have to do better than drafting in supporters direct and a few social media accounts.
Surely the council should be at least asked a bit more to explain what was meant by it and what it means for the club for the next 200+ years?
Wasps probably already have a proposal lined up, but as they say they won't make it whilst being threatened in court again.So why not let Anderson complete negotiations on the long term deal but say its can't be signed under current ownership with the legals ongoing?
For all we know when Anderson, shortly after leaving CCFC following Wasps walking out of talks, spoke of taking over a club he could have been talking about us "Which club? I can not say. Not a very big and well known team. There you can change little. A modest team for example in League One or League Two in England.".
They could, of course, be waiting for an owner gullbile enough to sign it...Wasps probably already have a proposal lined up, but as they say they won't make it whilst being threatened in court again.
Wasps probably already have a proposal lined up, but as they say they won't make it whilst being threatened in court again.
Basically WASPS and the council have had enough, they are saying to SISU if you don't stop your court actions against us, we won't let your football team play in our stadium. The ball is in SISUs court to stop the legal action.
Basically WASPS and the council have had enough, they are saying to SISU if you don't stop your court actions against us, we won't let your football team play in our stadium. The ball is in SISUs court to stop the legal action.
It probably doesn't matter a jot if they don't to pricks like you anyway.and it does not matter one jot how much anyone on this forum wants or expects Wasps to negotiate...
I thought the council had no say or influence? I can't keep up.
They should sue Lucas then! Now that would be funnyWhat was said by Lucas was misleading, but it is a worry that the "club" place so much reliance on it. I am guessing, but i do not think there is anything in the sale agreement that says any such thing. Which is a problem if it is being relied upon to leverage a new deal.
Both SISU and Wasps are entitled to make their own choice it isnt that one side is more entitled than the other side to do it
Two other thoughts. Is it really down to CCC and wasps to maintain for ever more (or at least 250 years) the well being of CCFC, isnt that the Otium owners duty first and foremost. SISU have kept us alive but as for well being? CCC and Wasps should not go out of their way to hamper or hinder CCFC but that is against a back drop of what is best for Wasps at the Ricoh and what is best for CCC in the city of Coventry. Wonder what would happen if CCC were to back a new stadium build now?
Second thought. Was it reasonable to assume that the club owners in their role at CCFC would show some commitment to the City of Coventry and probably the Ricoh. It wasnt until February that the latest deal was struck and up until that point it was kept open ended, and even after. It wasnt really until it sank in that perhaps Wasps might not offer another deal that you had Fisher at the end of September making his "Plan A has always been to stay at the Ricoh" statement, followed by regular pleas to talk by Boddy. I think if you are going to rely on the lucas statement you had to show evidence of commitment to staying not just a reluctant choice for the time being because the bluff has been called.
Its a complete mess, with no sign of any compromise.
I feel another court action coming on
Well yes, why did she make it then? It's all part of the ongoing misleading narrative from the council isn't it? That money they spent on Weber Shandwick was obviously worthwhile
The minutes of the council meeting had the “conditions of sale” regarding CCFC included in it didn’t it?
Surely no one Council or others could be expected to guarantee a team plays at a ground for any amount of years especially as this team said there were moving on and building their own ground . To do a deal like that everything would have to be drawn up legally and there was no mention at the time of this happening . As for lies Sisu have told more lies to us fans than enough . Although if you were right Grendel this would be their best chance yet.
If they were thinking something why not say that? Bit random to say something differentThey and Wasps were probably thinking for the duration of the contract 4 years? As City were " moving on" perhaps they should have made a clearer statement I don't know . One side lying is no excuse for other side to do the same
I don't know why don't you ask them?
The council said exactly the same about CRFC in the same statement. Did they have a 4 year contract to play at the Ricoh as well?They and Wasps were probably thinking for the duration of the contract 4 years? As City were " moving on" perhaps they should have made a clearer statement I don't know . One side lying is no excuse for other side to do the same
They and Wasps were probably thinking for the duration of the contract 4 years? As City were " moving on" perhaps they should have made a clearer statement I don't know . One side lying is no excuse for other side to do the same
Coventry rugby went on however under fantastic ownership to start challenging in their league and building back up their own fanbase. That culminated in last year being champions and getting promoted to the next level. Crowds have doubled and revenue has increased. They have owners who are ambitious but honourable and have just got on with the job.
The key phrase that you're missing here is 'in spite of'.
I was at the club a few days after the deal went through and CRFC were patently not happy. Similarly it was stated that Wasps would play on Sundays to avoid clashing with CRFC fixtures. More bullshit, it turns out....
CRFC certainly have far more honour that any of the other parties in this though, I definitely wouldn't dispute that!
A secure tenancy. But also a shit tenancy from a CCFC perspective.
Not that I'm advocating what Sisu did next, but it really pisses me off when the council are not held to account for their (massive) role in this shitstorm
But the deal was what the deal was. It was on Sisu to formulate a strategy that brought costs down. They played a massive gamble and it failed. Ultimately only the club owners are responsible for the club.
Anyway, new season, new fight. I’ll say no more. CCC should be making it clear the club needs to stay on the same terms if nothing else. Not sure they actually have any power to enforce that though.
I didn't say that. I would imagine they do have influence as they still own the freehold and they brought wasps in in the first place.
and the council stopped CCFC doing a ground sharing deal with Coventry Rugby did they not!!!!Coventry rugby went on however under fantastic ownership to start challenging in their league and building back up their own fanbase. That culminated in last year being champions and getting promoted to the next level. Crowds have doubled and revenue has increased. They have owners who are ambitious but honourable and have just got on with the job.
If it’s not in the lease I’m not sure what they can do. I rent a house, my landlord can’t tell me what to do outside of legally defined areas.
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?