Well there's no need for you to be shy.Nick they don't need to say anything.
Funny but the ones that believe Sisu are right are to ashamed to admit it.
Why is that?
I thought the Council were right, and yes I maybe wrong but at least I stand by what I think.
Won't be the first time I have been wrong.
Others just can't stand the thought that they have backed the wrong horse,
Will I feel bad if I am wrong.
Well truthfully NO.
Well the game doesn't kick off until 3. I should just hang around for a few hours if I was you. See if anyone else turns up.It's looking awfully quiet at Vale Park... there's nobody here.......
Nick they don't need to say anything.
Funny but the ones that believe Sisu are right are to ashamed to admit it.
Why is that?
I thought the Council were right, and yes I maybe wrong but at least I stand by what I think.
Won't be the first time I have been wrong.
Others just can't stand the thought that they have backed the wrong horse,
Will I feel bad if I am wrong.
Well truthfully NO.
Well the game doesn't kick off until 3. I should just hang around for a few hours if I was you. See if anyone else turns up.
Backed the wrong horse? I dont think many have ever said sisu are innocent in everything like people have jumped in to say about the council. No threads on here saying how proud they are of sisu.
All the judges are judging is wether it is state aid or not, they aren't judging on whether the council have lied to tax payers and been morally wrong too. If it's just the council were ok to loan the money, it doesn't mean they havent done anything wrong in other aspects morally and ethically. Likewise if it's found they weren't allowed to give the loan, it doesn't mean sisu have never done anything wrong.
You could say that, sisu are full of shit with no morals and ethics. They don't run our city though.sisu are no angels, but a council is supposed to be above that sort of shit and held to higher standards. I want those bastards exposed in the same light as sisu have been. No doubt a majority of people will still be fine with this as Sisu end up screwed, failing to see the bigger picture that it has caused untold damage to the club.... but lets not worry we have wasps in the city now so its all good....:facepalm:
Yeah my phone calendar hasn't been updated take account of the fact we're playing tomorrow - whoops.It's looking awfully quiet at Vale Park... there's nobody here.......
So you don't really give a shit about who is right or wrong... only who pays the compo.
sisu are no angels, but a council is supposed to be above that sort of shit and held to higher standards. I want those bastards exposed in the same light as sisu have been. No doubt a majority of people will still be fine with this as Sisu end up screwed, failing to see the bigger picture that it has caused untold damage to the club.... but lets not worry we have wasps in the city now so its all good....:facepalm:
They _would_ have been in the driving seat if there was a Liquidation/Administration event...there wouldn't have been enough time for Wasps to get their deal together, and even if they did if it was a straight up bidding war between CCFC and Wasps I can't imagine there being ANY support for Wasps either in the city or from their own fans.
Spot on, if ACL went bust then the lease would have to be resold. This would be public knowledge and I can't imagine much support for selling it to Wasps over CCFC.
There's a reason the Wasps deal was done it secret and its not commercial reasons. They even went to the trouble of doing a deal with the CT to keep thing quiet!
In the same way that if CCC lose and have to shell out a load of the local taxpayer's money (although that looks unlikely that it's going to cost the local taxpayer now) it would be CCC's fault for their actions and not SISU's fault for taking them to court. If SISU do get screwed they've brought it upon themselves just like CCC have with their own actions.
There's a lot of double standards here on this one. The truth is whichever party here get screwed they've brought it upon themselves by the course of action and deserve whatever penalty they have to take for that action. Personally I'm OK with that either way. It's called justice and that's what courts are for. Some posters on here are clearly going to have an issue if at the end of all this (and we could be a long way off yet) CCC are found to have acted in the best interests of the local taxpayer and done no wrong they clearly won't accept it. Some have their excuses already out in the open. Some posters clearly don't want justice and truth they just want the council to be blamed for everything.
But they are only being judged on of it is state aid aren't they?In the same way that if CCC lose and have to shell out a load of the local taxpayer's money (although that looks unlikely that it's going to cost the local taxpayer now) it would be CCC's fault for their actions and not SISU's fault for taking them to court. If SISU do get screwed they've brought it upon themselves just like CCC have with their own actions.
There's a lot of double standards here on this one. The truth is whichever party here get screwed they've brought it upon themselves by the course of action and deserve whatever penalty they have to take for that action. Personally I'm OK with that either way. It's called justice and that's what courts are for. Some posters on here are clearly going to have an issue if at the end of all this (and we could be a long way off yet) CCC are found to have acted in the best interests of the local taxpayer and done no wrong they clearly won't accept it. Some have their excuses already out in the open. Some posters clearly don't want justice and truth they just want the council to be blamed for everything.
Exactly, some seem to think it's a judgement of the whole situation. Where if the council aren't found in the wrong for state aid they have done nothing wrong ever.Yes whoever loses has to some extent brought it on themselves but that certainly doesn't mean that whoever wins is absolved from blame.
I think you're making the mistake that the administrator/liquidator would be there to serve CCFC. They're there to serve the creditors and them alone.
If Wasps were waiting in the wings as suggested they would have been ready with a deal surely?
You've fooled yourself into believing that SISU are the only show in town again. Doing the same thing expecting different results. There's a saying about that isn't there?
Exactly, some seem to think it's a judgement of the whole situation. Where if the council aren't found in the wrong for state aid they have done nothing wrong ever.
Does that mean if sisu won they have never done anything wrong?
The judgement is only on whether it was state aid or not.
Not at all. The administrator will need to do exactly what the council should have done with the sale of ACL and achieve the best possible price. The way to achieve that is to properly market the sale to attract as many bids as possible not do a deal in secret working with the local media to keep things quiet.
If it goes against them, all it proves legally is they went against state aid laws to lend the money.And yet Tony seems to think that if it goes in favour of the council they will have 'done no wrong.' Amazing.
But they are only being judged on of it is state aid aren't they?
Who has said they don't want truths?
But they are only being judged on of it is state aid aren't they?
Who has said they don't want truths?
Someone has made out on this very thread that SISU wouldn't win because they've been complicit in putting CCC in the position when they decided to take over the loan. Which is of course bollocks. If it's illegal state aid it's illegal state aid and will be found to be illegal state aid. The journey to the decision of CCC to take over the loan is largely irrelevant and background noise. It may have brought CCC to a crossroads but it's not the journey to the crossroads that's being judged it's the direction (choice) they took once they were there.
What the course cases have done is also bring out other truths. Media wars, links with local media, wasps here a couple of years in advance etc. They will all get ignored.Yes. You're right there. What it will do though or should do is define cause and effect. Both parties have made horrendously bad decisions in this whole saga but ultimately one party is going to carry the majority of the blame when all this is over.
And yet Tony seems to think that if it goes in favour of the council they will have 'done no wrong.' Amazing.
The word illegal is a bit strong. It would mean that a crime has been committed. And If a crime has been committed someone should be at risk of a prison sentence.
What the course cases have done is also bring out other truths. Media wars, links with local media, wasps here a couple of years in advance etc. They will all get ignored.
The council won't be held to account for bullshitting tax payers, not just with ccfc and the ricoh but it seems like other situations too.
But even then it doesn't make sisu innocent of anything because only facts about ccc come out.It hasn't brought out all the truths though and never will as only one parties specific action is being judged here. You should probably try being mindful of that when judging all parties. One party is never going to be held to account in open court. SISU's meetings, memo's and what was said behind closed doors is never going to see the light of day in an open court.
But even then it doesn't make sisu innocent of anything because only facts about ccc come out.
It has quashed the theory about wasps moving here because they had no choice for a start.
It does show that one party is answerable to the tax payer though so you would think they set the example against a shady hedge fund.
Not really, because it isn't judging them about the lies etc is it? It isn't judging to see about if the tax payer covered the bill for a media war, it isn't judging them to see if they were making agreements with local news paper.If the council were found to have done no wrong in taking over the loan and it served in the best interests of the taxpayer doesn't that mean that they have set the example against a "shady hedge fund" (your words)?
Done no wrong in taking over the ACL loan. Unless you think they're in court for more than that?
But that's not what you said is it, you said 'done no wrong'
What's the thread about?
So SISU wouldn't be in the driving seat then. So when you told a poster who said they were spot on for saying so adding that there wouldn't be much support for selling to wasps you were talking bollocks. The administrator as you now say only job is to achieve the best price and considering JS's right hand woman stood up in a court of law and said ACL was worthless but they recognised that Higgs was a charity so were willing to offer £2 for their share it don't sound like SISU would be in any driving seat.
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?