Nick
Administrator
Had a look at their match pictures from the 26th Jan and the pitch looks in better shape than the one at the Ricoh.
Few boggy bits here and there by the looks of it but like a carpet compared to the Ricoh
Which also begs the question of how the pitch would stand up. Look at the state of the 3G Ricoh pitch with just one rugby team and one football team playing on it. Two football teams and a rugby team playing on the same grass pitch? Doesn’t sound possible.
stay in Coventry. the owners have to sort it out.stop pissing in the wind.you only get all over our shoes.Did you read what I wrote? Would you rather the club be liquidated, or temporarily stay in Nuneaton. Obviously everyone would prefer the club stays in Coventry, but if it’s not an option for next season because of wasps then what else can we do?
I think we have to confirm our ground this month I’m sure that was said at that meeting last week and then again at the AGM which I assume would be in May.Anyone know a realistic timeline here? Is there a date where you have to register with the EFL where you'll be playing next year?
If they were to kick us out of the league, what would happen to league one, would it just be played with 23 teams? Has this happened in the past I cant think of any examples.
No, Nick.Cov Rugby were on the way up before Wasps arrived weren't they?
I am guessing though that the league would allow a small extension to the deadline if you said you were in negotiations.I think we have to confirm our ground this month I’m sure that was said at that meeting last week and then again at the AGM which I assume would be in May.
He is, but if we were homeless and with a bit of goodwill you never know and that might change. Especially if we pursue the line so many have peddled on here, that CCFC are not Sisu.No, Nick.
They were still struggling (in 2014/15 when Wasps shit in their nest) following a disastrous ownership (sound familiar?) by Andrew Green, which resulted in yet another Administration period and almost oblivion, and relegation from the Championship.
Yes, Jon Sharp and several other good men were now in charge, and consolidating things, but the real upturn began in May 2016 following the recruitment of DoR Rowland Winter.
To address a couple of other points mentioned by others: The pitch at the Ricoh most definitely isn't '3g'. It's a hybrid grass/fibre one, which clearly isn't up to the job.
Cov's new one, due to be commenced in April will be a 3g full artifical pitch (3g being the correct nomenclature - 4g doesn't exist yet as a generation, it's merely a manufacturers' marketing tool smoke & mirror thing).
And, to cover the still (oddly) prevalent noise about a move to the Butts. Don't forget that Sharp is on record as saying that he won't deal with Sisu, so forget that one.
He is, but if we were homeless and with a bit of goodwill you never know and that might change. Especially if we pursue the line so many have peddled on here, that CCFC are not Sisu.
The Ricoh legal argument has nowt to do with Cov rugby.
Exactly. Jon's no fool.No, the Ricoh Legal Argument has to do with the Council who have already shown their thoughts on a move to the Butts.
Sharpe has his own plans for going forward, is he going to put those at risk by getting on the wrong side of the council?
He already spoke about wanting SISU and Coventry to sort the mess out, maybe he has contacts at the club, Boddy perhaps?It's almost as if he was preparing for something by buying that ground?
He already spoke about wanting SISU and Coventry to sort the mess out, maybe he has contacts at the club, Boddy perhaps?
No, the Ricoh Legal Argument has to do with the Council who have already shown their thoughts on a move to the Butts.
Sharpe has his own plans for going forward, is he going to put those at risk by getting on the wrong side of the council?
Why would sharpe be getting on the wrong side of the council?
He would be helping the club move away from the Ricoh and giving them another option.
So why would that put him on the wrong side of the council? What could the council do to “punish” him?
They could make life difficult for the plans he has. The same way they jumped to try and block a move to the Butts last time.
Unless we are all suddenly getting a little bit naive?
How can they? You still haven’t answered why they would make life difficult for him.
Don't play dumb, it doesn't wash.How can they? You still haven’t answered why they would make life difficult for him.
Don't play dumb, it doesn't wash.
When there were last talks about us going to the Butts it all seemed positive until CRFC met with the council and then their position changed to not wanting to work with Sisu. The council could not approve the development plans around the BPA if they wanted to.
Because they would be giving CCFC another option other than the Ricoh. They obviously aren't happy about that else they wouldn't have tried to block it.
How can the local council make things difficult for somebody who wants to expand and has their own plans? Is that a serious question? He needs the council fully onside which is perfectly understandable.
Don't play dumb, it doesn't wash.
When there were last talks about us going to the Butts it all seemed positive until CRFC met with the council and then their position changed to not wanting to work with Sisu. The council could not approve the development plans around the BPA if they wanted to.
Tried to block what? There’s a football team playing at the Butts now. The council haven’t blocked anything.
Yes it is a serious question, shame you won’t give it a serious answer. On what grounds could the council block his plans? Does the council have the final say on planning? Are you suggesting that Westminster is in on it with the council?
Not sure why you insist that Sharpe is a liar. He was pretty clear on his reasoning and has never deviated from it. Maybe you know better.
The deadline is February, the extension will be to the football league chairman's meeting / holiday in Portugal which is when this season finishes.I am guessing though that the league would allow a small extension to the deadline if you said you were in negotiations.
As soon as there was talk of us moving to the Butts the council wanted to change the terms of the lease to forbid professional football being played there. Even the Telegraph managed to grasp that so I'm sure you must have noticed.Tried to block what? There’s a football team playing at the Butts now. The council haven’t blocked anything.
It is amazing how people play dumb when it suits.
Love how everyone is talking about Nuneaton without the thought to ask the people of Nuneaton first.
We going to do a Wasps then and swanny on in unwanted?
Which also begs the question of how the pitch would stand up. Look at the state of the 3G Ricoh pitch with just one rugby team and one football team playing on it. Two football teams and a rugby team playing on the same grass pitch? Doesn’t sound possible.
I don't for a minute believe you're as naïve as you're making yourself out to be. It is obvious to anyone that having a council backing a major project is a much easier, not to mention quicker, route than having to battle them every step of the way.The council cannot block planning based on who the person applying for the planning is dealing with. You’re trying to con people by suggesting otherwise. The council don’t have the final say in a planning appeal. That comes from Westminster.
I think you’re problem for you is people won’t play dumb and ignore the facts.
The council owns no part of ACL and all debts have been settled. Why are the council going to waste time and energy on it when they’ve got enough real and tangible problems to deal with in Coventry? You’re trying to con people by suggesting otherwise.
John Sharpe is scared of the council. Please. The council cannot block planning based on who the person applying for the planning is dealing with. You’re trying to con people by suggesting otherwise. The council don’t have the final say in a planning appeal. That comes from Westminster. You’re trying to con people by suggesting otherwise.
Let’s deal in the facts shall we not empty rhetoric for some cheap likes.
Ay? Have you got a short memory about them trying to put a clause into the lease?
The council could make life very difficult for somebody trying to do things within the city.
They are actively harassing a bloke who points out faults with their traffic setup. They got done for harassing a local charity. They are paying 6 figures to keep things quiet.
Let's not pretend otherwise and I don't think anybody blames Sharpe for not wanting to get on the wrong side of them.
I don't for a minute believe you're as naïve as you're making yourself out to be. It is obvious to anyone that having a council backing a major project is a much easier, not to mention quicker, route than having to battle them every step of the way.
So you’re seriously suggesting that Sharpe was wanting to deal with SISU but the council stopped him?
You’re slating the council for doing that why? If what you’re suggesting is true then the council has clearly done CRFC a favour and Sharpe clearly shouldn’t be in control of a city asset like the the Rugby club because he’s incapable of good decision making.
Personally I’ll give him the credit of believing that he is capable of making the right decision in the best interest of CRFC including not getting involved with SISU all by himself.
I’m not naive. Neither is Sharpe. Hence he won’t get involved with SISU, as he’s made abundantly clear.
CRFC are smart enough to withstand pressure from CCC, as the alternative of letting to SISU (would on past experience) surely lead to years of litigation for one reason or another.I don’t think any of what you’ve just suggested happened actually happened. Any talk of the Butts was a passing comment from Tim and an article in the Observer based on those passing comments. Sharpe very quickly put an end to it with his statement. It was clearly a bluff Sharpe didn’t buy or want any part off. Hence his statement.
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?