Astute
Well-Known Member
What about the comments against OSB from Rob S?
Judicial review thread - day 2 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter AFCCOVENTRY
- Start date
What about the comments against OSB from Rob S?
Nick
Administrator
Which ones?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Alleged still working for AEHC/ACL. Bit of handbags is all.
Astute
Well-Known Member
So you missed them? Most of us on here didn't as he was pulled up on them enough times. Like trying to make out he had a big involvement in Higgs/ACL.
Astute
Well-Known Member
So doesn't he make your list? :thinking about:
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Oh, OK.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Andy Thorn
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I thought he was a Sisu co-conspirator, that's why he got us relegated don't you know?
I thought he was a Sisu co-conspirator, that's why he got us relegated don't you know?
so a double agent then?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I will give you my view, and risk some more camply below the belt insults
In all the clamour for information on meetings with Labovitch, I was keen to keep a silence for this very reason - if he said anything that would come out in the future then, well, it would come out in the future - I have no desire to be somebody's mouthpiece. I still maintain he didn't say anything worth repeating however so... the fact there's nothing particularly exciting in this JR follows my view and lends credence to it, eh?
You could take out of those meetings whatever you want to really... the same as you could with whoever you meet. My own view is there are clearly some major issues that need to be dealt with on the city council side... that doesn't automatically make SISU an innocent naive victim in all this, however! It's hard, very hard, to believe anybody reaches a position of some authority by being naive and innocent, life experience says you need a certain ruthlessness to climb the greasy pole, so claiming you're passive hard done by victims is hard to believe in such circumstances... When it comes down to it however I have a simple motto of distrust everyone
What surprises me more with this, is the Higgs case did get juicy, did offer some issues of concern (talk of media assaults etc.) and based on that, you start thinking this case will be similar, that SISU would use it to hammer home those particular elements which, if played right, could indeed swing public opinion.
Rationally, and now with the benefit of hindsight, it's daft to think that as this is after all procedural, and little but procedural. As such, the wider conspiracy theories don't really belong in a case like this one, do they?
What would be interesting is why two of SISU's arguments were dropped before they even got there. Could indeed be they were baseless, could be they were dropped as part of a deal to be made after the event, could be they'd prejudice the judge against the more serious arguments etc. etc. but, to me, that's the question I'd like answered.
And of course it's the question that never will be answered!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I thought he was a Sisu co-conspirator, that's why he got us relegated don't you know?
Ken did that bit all by himself to be fair
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It's irrelevant as to whether it's a good investment or not. It's a weak argument really.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Yes. I didn't read a story about £6m cuts to council services in the CT yesterday.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I dunno, I get the impression local government is to The West Wing what Dad's Army is to the SAS.
It certainly attracts some nasty people, but they tend to not be particularly effective, and those that are nasty and effective are also usually doing something else (or Tories)
Edit: @NW
It certainly attracts some nasty people, but they tend to not be particularly effective, and those that are nasty and effective are also usually doing something else (or Tories
)Edit: @NW
I will give you my view, and risk some more camply below the belt insults
In all the clamour for information on meetings with Labovitch, I was keen to keep a silence for this very reason - if he said anything that would come out in the future then, well, it would come out in the future - I have no desire to be somebody's mouthpiece. I still maintain he didn't say anything worth repeating however so... the fact there's nothing particularly exciting in this JR follows my view and lends credence to it, eh?
You could take out of those meetings whatever you want to really... the same as you could with whoever you meet. My own view is there are clearly some major issues that need to be dealt with on the city council side... that doesn't automatically make SISU an innocent naive victim in all this, however! It's hard, very hard, to believe anybody reaches a position of some authority by being naive and innocent, life experience says you need a certain ruthlessness to climb the greasy pole, so claiming you're passive hard done by victims is hard to believe in such circumstances... When it comes down to it however I have a simple motto of distrust everyone
What surprises me more with this, is the Higgs case did get juicy, did offer some issues of concern (talk of media assaults etc.) and based on that, you start thinking this case will be similar, that SISU would use it to hammer home those particular elements which, if played right, could indeed swing public opinion.
Rationally, and now with the benefit of hindsight, it's daft to think that as this is after all procedural, and little but procedural. As such, the wider conspiracy theories don't really belong in a case like this one, do they?
What would be interesting is why two of SISU's arguments were dropped before they even got there. Could indeed be they were baseless, could be they were dropped as part of a deal to be made after the event, could be they'd prejudice the judge against the more serious arguments etc. etc. but, to me, that's the question I'd like answered.
And of course it's the question that never will be answered!
I would have thought that we at least find out which two and then we can start speculating....... and if a deal suddenly appears we may be able to even deduce what happened... but as you say, we will never know for sure.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I dunno, I get the impression local government is to The West Wing what Dad's Army is to the SAS.
It certainly attracts some nasty people, but they tend to not be particularly effective, and those that are nasty and effective are also usually doing something else (or Tories
Edit: @NW
One could of course argue the whole mess we're in suggests nobody has been particularly effective
And yes, the most effective ones tend to end up higher up in politics than discussing the budget for the Art Gallery and roads!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
One could of course argue the whole mess we're in suggests nobody has been particularly effective
True that. Though to be honest, I still think Lucas has done a good job with a shit situation.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
2 chins at least.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
No, I agree. She's certainly done her best to steer the middle ground and not offend either side...
tbh I can well believe at the end of the day this comes down to cultural clashes (not even ideological!) that on the one hand we have a decisive US businesswoman involving herself more, who's used to having the control to make quick, swift decisions (and indeed needs to do that, to make a success of what she does when not distracted by a football club).
On the other hand, she's then dealing with a council who... certainly don't go for the granting power to make decisions in the hands of one person, and who certainly don'tmake decisions quickly!
Put like that, it's not hard to see how relationships would begin to break down, is it? They wouldn't be the first either, it's just a football club's a little more high profile.
And it doesn't make either approach right or wrong just... different.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I think you would get a seat for life.
I am still unsure as to whether you are a council plant.
Every post from you ends up in 15 posts defending the council and they end up coming out with a shining halo.
Just like RFC is a Ricoh Arena Plant
Grendel
Well-Known Member
How were they against OSB?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
It quite possibly makes either approach right or left though
Back to your previous barb
I remember years ago an interview with Teddy Taylor. He effectively said he hung around with the Labour MPs as they were nice people, whereas the Tories were self-centred bastards... it was just unfortunate he believed the Tory policies were the way to help people worse off, much as the Labour MPs wanted.A rare shining light in a cesspit of toss!
And as for right or left... Tory councils don't deal with things any faster or more decisively! I speak from experience there(!)
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Don't know if you missed it, but there were directly to him in a Reply With Quote. Like I said, just handbags.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well he accused him of bias. That's legitimate as his posts are. Has he met PWKH? I think so.
Either way OSB is by a country mile the most skilful poster on this forum and I have huge admiration.
That is not sarcastic by the way.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
This is just my pedantry here, I don't think it was a big deal at all, but the quote was:
RobS said:
But agreed, he handles his superstar status well too, which frankly just adds to it
I also read all his posts in the voice of Morgan Freeman.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
He didn't actually accuse OSB of bias. If he had, he would have left himself open to being asked to provide some evidence for the claim.
Instead he indulged in some rather poor mud slinging.
Not really worthy of RobS who is generally worth reading.
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Jesus christ, with you around that's not likely to happen is it? At what point do you move on, you sound like a bit like Labovitch constantly going back over old ground which will never allow us to move forward? Despite all the bad things that have happened to this club you still feel the need to bring it up regardless of the fact that two far lower offers have been made since.
Samo
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I thought I was your favourite!
You'll never get that clerical role now.
Samo
Well-Known Member
Ah bollocks, I was banking on that!
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I keep bringing it up? We only found out about it today Ffs.
And it directly relates to the JR, which is why it was mentioned in court today.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
I keep bringing it up? We only found out about it today Ffs.
And it directly relates to the JR, which is why it was mentioned in court today.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I am on about the original rent you keep bringing up and that someone else pulled you about it today too.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
What are you on about? 1) That wasn't even today it was nearly 2 weeks ago (30/05/2013, http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/45443-Rent-Money-owed-to-ACL-rumour/page29) and that was only because I was responding to someone else who had mentioned it first, and 2) the £400k was mentioned today because it's relevant to the JR, which is what this thread is about. 3) We didn't know that is was a 3 year only deal. 4) the subsequent rent offers have no relation to the decision of the council to bail out ACL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Last edited:
