italiahorse
Well-Known Member
If it is financially beneficial and saves the club from going out of business then its a great idea.
In that respect it won't happen.
If you support wasps, can you really have an issue with sisu moving us elsewhere?
Given that every word in this thread is pure supposition and the posters just trying to shoehorn what they think or want to happen to the CCFC/Wasps relationship.
Our fan discomfort is not the issue here, it's whether Wasps can stomach working with our owners and keep down the bile enough to share their facilities with us whilst Sisu continue legal against them and are Wasps prepared to take the backdraft if they do bolt the doors?
There is absolutely nowhere for our owners to go IMO, it's the Ricoh or die in our present form.
It might get a few people like you and Gosford Green etc back posting for a bit and bothered but other than that what can they realistically do?
Corrected for youPointless talking to anybody while Sisu are in charge.
Nobody trusts them so nobody will deal with them.
Waste of parliamentary time.
Thats the bit a lot of people miss. Its all well and good saying we want the club to stay in Cov, everyone does, but what can the FL do to make sure that happens. If Wasps won't agree a deal and the Butts is a non-starter where are we supposed to play?Surely they realise the EFL can't assure it as they can't make Wasps give us a deal?
To play in Coventry other than the Ricoh a ground has to be built, so a question to ccc has to be is there a suitable site.
Surely they realise the EFL can't assure it as they can't make Wasps give us a deal?
What's the actual aim of it?
Funny really Jimmy Hill way go on about boycotting home games, away days only, can force admin so the fans get it then start kicking up uproar about where we play in 2 seasons time.
Which other supporters groups of the several were there?
They can't force a deal at the Ricoh, so it means they can't really do much. They can't make assurances they will never allow a move, as it then opens up a whole world of shit.do you not think points 2-4 are valid ?
They can't force a deal at the Ricoh, so it means they can't really do much. They can't make assurances they will never allow a move, as it then opens up a whole world of shit.
It's all well and good fans giving it the efl do something, what exactly do they want to be done?
We have been over this in this thread already.
Just because a couple of fans groups and a few made up ones are demanding mps to talk about things, it's going to do absolutely nothing.
Come on italia you aren't that naive. A supportive council compared to one that wants to make things as difficult as possible are very different propositions.Surely it's up to Sisu to find a site.
CCC can't object other than on planning grounds and that can be appealed.
They need to get into the long term draft plans that councils develop from time to time.
Nuneaton and Bedworth plan is releasing land behind the old Leekes, Coventry must be doing similar, I've seen land at Walsgrave triangle proposed.
The problem is they will need to buy at premium prices if land is available as they are competing directly with housing and industry. (Guess £300K-£500K an acre)
What do you do, apart from your multiple accounts on a football forum where you have no interest in the football and want to push something constantly?Well isn't doing absolutely nothing what you do. Don't see your problem?
Come on italia you aren't that naive. A supportive council compared to one that wants to make things as difficult as possible are very different propositions.
Its another situation where the council can easily call Fishers bluff. Go on the record saying they will support a new stadium and do everything they can to help. If and when sites are coming available the council can push for the club to take ownership under the guise of a regeneration project.
Come on italia you aren't that naive. A supportive council compared to one that wants to make things as difficult as possible are very different propositions.
Its another situation where the council can easily call Fishers bluff. Go on the record saying they will support a new stadium and do everything they can to help. If and when sites are coming available the council can push for the club to take ownership under the guise of a regeneration project.
Not talking about building a relationship I'm talking about the council putting pressure on SISU. Look at it this way, SISU go to the FL and say we have to move out of Coventry again we have no choice.Come on Dave you are not that naive, you have to build a good relationship with anyone you want to work with, taking legal action against them is no way to do that.
Not talking about building a relationship I'm talking about the council putting pressure on SISU. Look at it this way, SISU go to the FL and say we have to move out of Coventry again we have no choice.
What supports that argument best? A council being shown to be uncooperative and working against the club - things like attempting to block the move to the Butts. Or a council that is saying we will do everything we can to support the clubs quest to build a new stadium.
One would mean the FL approving any move without questions, the other would need explanation from SISU.
Personally I'd rather have SISU under pressure rather than just be able to take the club anywhere they please to prove a point.
There is precedence here and it is worrying, Wimbledon under Winkleman had similar issues with their local council and went to Milton Keynes stating they had no choice, the league agreed if certain conditions were met including a name change. If CCFC leaves the city again it will be for good, with the possibility of an MK Dons type scenario.
There is no precedence for an independent FL led party looking into why and how the club has got like this and potential action being taken.
I'd rather they f**k off.Not talking about building a relationship I'm talking about the council putting pressure on SISU. Look at it this way, SISU go to the FL and say we have to move out of Coventry again we have no choice.
What supports that argument best? A council being shown to be uncooperative and working against the club - things like attempting to block the move to the Butts. Or a council that is saying we will do everything we can to support the clubs quest to build a new stadium.
One would mean the FL approving any move without questions, the other would need explanation from SISU.
Personally I'd rather have SISU under pressure rather than just be able to take the club anywhere they please to prove a point.
There is precedence here and it is worrying, Wimbledon under Winkleman had similar issues with their local council and went to Milton Keynes stating they had no choice, the league agreed if certain conditions were met including a name change. If CCFC leaves the city again it will be for good, with the possibility of an MK Dons type scenario.
There is no precedence for an independent FL led party looking into why and how the club has got like this and potential action being taken.
It's simple, the EFL can't force a deal to be done at the Ricoh which is the only option at the minute.
The football league can't say stay at this ground else we will take the club off you and hand it to the fans like people seem to be wishing for.
I don't think Dave believes there is a secret plan to build a stadium for a second, he just means it would be really easy for the council to call their bluff.
The only realistic way is for there to be a rule to say every football club must own it's ground to prevent all this, but there's no way to then fix that for clubs who dont already.
I am not saying the club should be given to fans, maybe fans and other parties could present a business plan with statement of intents from necessary parties if the league decided on a particular course of action.
If an inquiry finds the reason for the clubs complete demise is down to the owners pursuing a particular line of action then like I keep saying the league could set a precedence.
I wish people would grasp the reality that our owner does not give a flying fuck about the club, the supporters, the city etc. All she is after is some financial return on a bad investment - if the best way to achieve that is the closure of the club it wouldn't bother her one iota. If she could prove that the business was affected detrimentaly and this ultimately led to its demise by the actions of Wasps, the council, the EFL, etc then this would simply strengthen her hand in seeking compensation and dragging all parties through yet more years of court actions. Wasps certainly don't want or need it and with the current ongoing court action had to give the club the bare minimum so as to be seen as being cooperative. The EFL is basically financially poor and could not afford to spend huge sums of money on legals brought by SISU so will simply do what it does best and do nothing. Until SISU have exhausted every avenue open to them in trying to get money out of the other parties they will go no where, sell to no one. The club is simply a chew toy for the various parties to squabble about and the fans simply collateral damage - this action in Parliament is just more window dressing and does nothing to change the situation. The only one who can do that is our owner and to date she does not appear to be of a mind to do that and won't be until she is convinced there is no prospect of getting any more money back.
I wish people would grasp the reality that our owner does not give a flying fuck about the club, the supporters, the city etc. All she is after is some financial return on a bad investment - if the best way to achieve that is the closure of the club it wouldn't bother her one iota. If she could prove that the business was affected detrimentaly and this ultimately led to its demise by the actions of Wasps, the council, the EFL, etc then this would simply strengthen her hand in seeking compensation and dragging all parties through yet more years of court actions. Wasps certainly don't want or need it and with the current ongoing court action had to give the club the bare minimum so as to be seen as being cooperative. The EFL is basically financially poor and could not afford to spend huge sums of money on legals brought by SISU so will simply do what it does best and do nothing. Until SISU have exhausted every avenue open to them in trying to get money out of the other parties they will go no where, sell to no one. The club is simply a chew toy for the various parties to squabble about and the fans simply collateral damage - this action in Parliament is just more window dressing and does nothing to change the situation. The only one who can do that is our owner and to date she does not appear to be of a mind to do that and won't be until she is convinced there is no prospect of getting any more money back.
Wasps gain from CCFC being here both financially (slight) and politically. Even with this minimal deal.
They will just tread water with us until change of ownership.
.... and then give the new owners the "already agreed" deal.And then what....?
What's the already agreed deal?.... and then give the new owners the "already agreed" deal.
Who isn't grasping that?
It's all well and good shouting for the EFL to fix it, but realistically what do you want them to do?
You know they only do flexible regulations and rules.Follow their own rules on ownership and stadium sites?
Follow their own rules on ownership and stadium sites?
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?