Match Thread Polite Notice (AKA Grendel, Nick & Orca's Argument Thread) (2 Viewers)

Orca · Aug 15, 2019

Nick said:
You can also see I used the word "else" as in nobody else falls for it like you 2.

You have said I keep repeating it, please quote the others.

I am glad you 2 have kissed and made up.

A comma would have probably helped in your sentence. I'm entitled to my opinion of the situation we find ourselves in and if you believe that there's still a coordinated campaign by the Council to spin this and get people on their 'side' by tweeting from random accounts, that's up to you. As I've said before, I follow lots of people with an opposing view to those you think are Council led. You're just choosing to focus on the thing that fits your bias. Which fundamentally is exactly what you're accusing me of.

Nick · Aug 15, 2019

Orca said:
A comma would have probably helped in your sentence. I'm entitled to my opinion of the situation we find ourselves in and if you believe that there's still a coordinated campaign by the Council to spin this and get people on their 'side' by tweeting from random accounts, that's up to you. As I've said before, I follow lots of people with an opposing view to those you think are Council led. You're just choosing to focus on the thing that fits your bias. Which fundamentally is exactly what you're accusing me of.

For the 184th time, it isn't about who you follow.

It is you who is ignoring things, there's written proof about campaigns from the council also with lists of threads they tried it with on here!

Orca · Aug 15, 2019

Nick said:
For the 184th time, it isn't about who you follow.

It is you who is ignoring things, there's written proof about campaigns from the council also with lists of threads they tried it with on here!

Written proof. Yes, Webber Shandwick or whatever they were called. It's also fair to assume that the statements and interviews in a short space of time from Scope, Robins, Richardson and Seppala, plus the release of the redacted emails were designed to paint a picture just around the time the EU submission.

I'm sure there were plenty of people on here who were using that set of information to validate their view.

I'm well aware there is a lot of spin on both sides of the argument. I'm entitled to make my assessment of all of it and have an opinion. Sorry that you don't like it.

duffer · Aug 15, 2019

Orca said:
Written proof. Yes, Webber Shandwick or whatever they were called. It's also fair to assume that the statements and interviews in a short space of time from Scope, Robins, Richardson and Seppala, plus the release of the redacted emails were designed to paint a picture just around the time the EU submission.

I'm sure there were plenty of people on here who were using that set of information to validate their view.

I'm well aware there is a lot of spin on both sides of the argument. I'm entitled to make my assessment of all of it and have an opinion. Sorry that you don't like it.

In fairness mate, I think at least some if not all of those emails were in response to the PR battle that the Council/Wasps had started around the time that they'd pulled the plug on negotiations.

I wouldn't swear to it, as I haven't got the timeline to hand, but I think there were more than a few here who sensed that there was some groundwork going on prior to Wasps indemnity demand shutting the door on the discussions. Totally agree that all sides play the PR game though, it would be daft to see it differently.

oucho · Aug 15, 2019

Otis said:
Why hasn't anyone tried to rape an owl yet?

WTF have I walked into????

Orca · Aug 16, 2019

duffer said:
In fairness mate, I think at least some if not all of those emails were in response to the PR battle that the Council/Wasps had started around the time that they'd pulled the plug on negotiations.

I wouldn't swear to it, as I haven't got the timeline to hand, but I think there were more than a few here who sensed that there was some groundwork going on prior to Wasps indemnity demand shutting the door on the discussions. Totally agree that all sides play the PR game though, it would be daft to see it differently.

My personal view is that the "groundwork", as you call it, was Joy and co. being wheeled out in front of the media. Why would she stick her head above the parapet otherwise? The EU complaint being submitted and the subterfuge around it even existing shows for me, that there was a plan and a set of reasoning around painting their actions in the best light possible. Clearly, the Council's response was amatuerish by putting up Duggins, but it surely isn't under dispute that the media presence of Joy, Richardson, Scope and Robins in the the timeframe of the EU submission coming to light was anything other than a coordinated campaign?

I can't say for certain, but I'd suggest the Wasps indemnity clause was a direct action to the EU submission. As far as I know, the indemnity clause didn't exist until this came to light as discussions were well underway about new rental deal, with the caveat of the end of legal action. The EU action was deliberately hidden and regardless of personal opinion as to whether is constitutes legal action or not, it was clearly viewed by the Wasps hierarchy as something that could impact them.

My view, as stated on my pinned twitter post, is that every action taken by the non-SISU parties in this saga is either retaliatory or defensive, based on something that SISU did first. There are no doubts that some will argue otherwise. If your interpretation of the known facts leads you to a different conclusion to what I've stated, I'll respect that, but cheerfully disagree.

rob9872 · Aug 16, 2019

Nick said:
I saw him at Leamington, he walked in with Oggy.

Married to Oggys daughter

usskyblue · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
My personal view is that the "groundwork", as you call it, was Joy and co. being wheeled out in front of the media. Why would she stick her head above the parapet otherwise? The EU complaint being submitted and the subterfuge around it even existing shows for me, that there was a plan and a set of reasoning around painting their actions in the best light possible. Clearly, the Council's response was amatuerish by putting up Duggins, but it surely isn't under dispute that the media presence of Joy, Richardson, Scope and Robins in the the timeframe of the EU submission coming to light was anything other than a coordinated campaign?

I can't say for certain, but I'd suggest the Wasps indemnity clause was a direct action to the EU submission. As far as I know, the indemnity clause didn't exist until this came to light as discussions were well underway about new rental deal, with the caveat of the end of legal action. The EU action was deliberately hidden and regardless of personal opinion as to whether is constitutes legal action or not, it was clearly viewed by the Wasps hierarchy as something that could impact them.

My view, as stated on my pinned twitter post, is that every action taken by the non-SISU parties in this saga is either retaliatory or defensive, based on something that SISU did first. There are no doubts that some will argue otherwise. If your interpretation of the known facts leads you to a different conclusion to what I've stated, I'll respect that, but cheerfully disagree.

I read all that and can’t help thinking....WHO FUCKIN CARES ? ALL sides are guilty of shithousery.

If you sympathise with, or blame any one side - it smacks of personal interest.

Astute · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
My view, as stated on my pinned twitter post, is that every action taken by the non-SISU parties in this saga is either retaliatory or defensive, based on something that SISU did first. There are no doubts that some will argue otherwise. If your interpretation of the known facts leads you to a different conclusion to what I've stated, I'll respect that, but cheerfully disagree.

So was Wasps taking over our stadium retaliatory or defensive?

Orca · Aug 16, 2019

Astute said:
So was Wasps taking over our stadium retaliatory or defensive?

Defensive

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
Defensive

Ok I'll bite. I'm sympathetic to the view that SISU have manipulated the current situation but, how was Wasps' action of buying a stadium in Coventry a defensive action?

mark82 · Aug 16, 2019

I'm not sure it was retaliatory from the council's side, it was planned out before the rent strike's (yes, there was communication with Wasps prior to the rent strike, let's not pretend this wasn't all planned out). Seems like a cold calculated plan to me. The relationship had clearly soured long before that time but the council seemed to be looking to engineer a way to bring Wasps in. Sisu's actions just covered their arse

For what it's worth, Sisu did the right thing getting the rent reduced - it was unsustainable. They clearly went the wrong way about it and it played into the council's hands and opened the door to allow them to sell to Wasps, which is what they'd already wanted to engineer.

Sky Blue Pete · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
My personal view is that the "groundwork", as you call it, was Joy and co. being wheeled out in front of the media. Why would she stick her head above the parapet otherwise? The EU complaint being submitted and the subterfuge around it even existing shows for me, that there was a plan and a set of reasoning around painting their actions in the best light possible. Clearly, the Council's response was amatuerish by putting up Duggins, but it surely isn't under dispute that the media presence of Joy, Richardson, Scope and Robins in the the timeframe of the EU submission coming to light was anything other than a coordinated campaign?

I can't say for certain, but I'd suggest the Wasps indemnity clause was a direct action to the EU submission. As far as I know, the indemnity clause didn't exist until this came to light as discussions were well underway about new rental deal, with the caveat of the end of legal action. The EU action was deliberately hidden and regardless of personal opinion as to whether is constitutes legal action or not, it was clearly viewed by the Wasps hierarchy as something that could impact them.

My view, as stated on my pinned twitter post, is that every action taken by the non-SISU parties in this saga is either retaliatory or defensive, based on something that SISU did first. There are no doubts that some will argue otherwise. If your interpretation of the known facts leads you to a different conclusion to what I've stated, I'll respect that, but cheerfully disagree.

Do you accept that the biggest impact on ccfc competing in Coventry as s successful football club has been the council selling, with a 250 year lease, the Ricoh to a London based professional rugby club? Retaliatory or not that’s fact

Sky Blue Pete · Aug 16, 2019

mark82 said:
I'm not sure it was retaliatory from the council's side, it was planned out before the rent strike's (yes, there was communication with Wasps prior to the rent strike, let's not pretend this wasn't all planned out). Seems like a cold calculated plan to me. The relationship had clearly soured long before that time but the council seemed to be looking to engineer a way to bring Wasps in. Sisu's actions just covered their arse

For what it's worth, Sisu did the right thing getting the rent reduced - it was unsustainable. They clearly went the wrong way about it and it played into the council's hands and opened the door to allow them to sell to Wasps, which is what they'd already wanted to engineer.

Looks that way

Orca · Aug 16, 2019

Sky Blue Pete said:
Do you accept that the biggest impact on ccfc competing in Coventry as s successful football club has been the council selling, with a 250 year lease, the Ricoh to a London based professional rugby club? Retaliatory or not that’s fact

No, I don't believe that. If you recall, we'd already been playing outside of Coventry.

Orca · Aug 16, 2019

mark82 said:
I'm not sure it was retaliatory from the council's side, it was planned out before the rent strike's (yes, there was communication with Wasps prior to the rent strike, let's not pretend this wasn't all planned out). Seems like a cold calculated plan to me. The relationship had clearly soured long before that time but the council seemed to be looking to engineer a way to bring Wasps in. Sisu's actions just covered their arse

For what it's worth, Sisu did the right thing getting the rent reduced - it was unsustainable. They clearly went the wrong way about it and it played into the council's hands and opened the door to allow them to sell to Wasps, which is what they'd already wanted to engineer.

I guess by 'all planned out', you're talking about the Gidney email, or is it something else?

Sky Blue Pete · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
No, I don't believe that. If you recall, we'd already been playing outside of Coventry.

What was or is then? Was the rental sustainable ?

Orca · Aug 16, 2019

Sky Blue Pete said:
What was or is then? Was the rental sustainable ?

Sustainable, no. Negotiable, yes.

bawtryneal · Aug 16, 2019

You lads still at it ??
I have been to the factory in Poland and back the last 48 hours and you still going strong !!

richnrg · Aug 16, 2019

bawtryneal said:
You lads still at it ??
I have been to the factory in Poland and back the last 48 hours and you still going strong !!

the marmite factory?

chiefdave · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
No, I don't believe that. If you recall, we'd already been playing outside of Coventry.

Where were we playing when the council first approached Wasps?

Where were we playing when the stadium was sold to Wasps?

fatso · Aug 16, 2019

Sky Blue Pete said:
Do you accept that the biggest impact on ccfc competing in Coventry as s successful football club has been the council selling, with a 250 year lease, the Ricoh to a London based professional rugby club? Retaliatory or not that’s fact

Complete nonsense.
Ccfc had broken a legally binding rental agreement, moved out of coventry and made public their intention to build a stadium of their own.
Wtf did you expect the council to do then with an empty stadium?

Nick · Aug 16, 2019

fatso said:
Complete nonsense.
Ccfc had broken a legally binding rental agreement, moved out of coventry and made public their intention to build a stadium of their own.
Wtf did you expect the council to do then with an empty stadium?

It wasn't empty when it was sold.

Sky Blue Pete · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
Sustainable, no. Negotiable, yes.

It was negotiated and hasn’t been sustainable for a league 1 club so what does one do?

chiefdave · Aug 16, 2019

Orca said:
No, I don't believe that. If you recall, we'd already been playing outside of Coventry.

fatso said:
Complete nonsense.
Ccfc had broken a legally binding rental agreement, moved out of coventry and made public their intention to build a stadium of their own.
Wtf did you expect the council to do then with an empty stadium?

Well this thread is thoroughly depressing, we seem to be going backwards.

Maybe its just me but I thought one of the few things everyone agreed on, with the exception of the likes of Salop, was that the council selling the stadium to a London rugby club was detrimental to our clubs future.

Sky Blue Pete · Aug 16, 2019

fatso said:
Complete nonsense.
Ccfc had broken a legally binding rental agreement, moved out of coventry and made public their intention to build a stadium of their own.
Wtf did you expect the council to do then with an empty stadium?

Make a good decision but one can not argue that this decision has negatively impacted on having a successful professional football club in the city can they? And if everyone knows they don’t intend to build one it was a calculated decision to bring ccfc to their knees. Retaliatory based on orcas thoughts

fatso · Aug 16, 2019

Nick said:
It wasn't empty when it was sold.

But ccfc's intention to build their own stadium was still there, and indeed still is.
I have no wish to defend an incompetent council who have made numerous errors in this whole debacle, but faced with the facts as they were at that time I cant in all honesty blame them.
Wasps were just taking advantage of the situation ......that's business.

chiefdave · Aug 16, 2019

fatso said:
Wasps were just taking advantage of the situation ......that's business.

Out of interest if Bolton or Bury were to cease to exist and SISU just took advantage of the situation to move us there would you be saying that's business?

Nick · Aug 16, 2019

fatso said:
But ccfc's intention to build their own stadium was still there, and indeed still is.
I have no wish to defend an incompetent council who have made numerous errors in this whole debacle, but faced with the facts as they were at that time I cant in all honesty blame them.
Wasps were just taking advantage of the situation ......that's business.

Your bottom line is very telling.

Skyblueweeman · Aug 16, 2019

chiefdave said:
Well this thread is thoroughly depressing, we seem to be going backwards.

Maybe its just me but I thought one of the few things everyone agreed on, with the exception of the likes of Salop, was that the council selling the stadium to a London rugby club was detrimental to our clubs future.

Yep. I genuinely find it staggering that regardless of who people seek to blame/exonerate for this whole mess, some people are ok with the fact that the council sold the stadium to a franchised rugby club.

Franchised sport in the UK is sacrilegious in my mind. The fact that CCC were party to this was very shortsighted.

Anyone who thinks this is ok or wouldn't affect CCFC in the long run, needs their head examined.

fatso · Aug 16, 2019

chiefdave said:
Out of interest if Bolton or Bury were to cease to exist and SISU just took advantage of the situation to move us there would you be saying that's business?

That cant happen, according to efl rules.
We are more likely to go out of business than to move out of the city permanently

bawtryneal · Aug 16, 2019

richnrg said:
the marmite factory?

Haha I wish !

bawtryneal · Aug 16, 2019

Nick said:
It wasn't empty when it was sold.

And they didn`t offer the sitting tenants the same deal as Wasps !!

Esoterica · Aug 16, 2019

People who hate SISU but then laud Wasps actions as 'it's just business' make my blood boil. I'm not sure whether that's more or less angry than people who justify the council's catastrophic decision to sell to Wasps with 'Well SISU wanted to build their own stadium so what choice did the council have?'

fatso · Aug 16, 2019

Skyblueweeman said:
Yep. I genuinely find it staggering that regardless of who people seek to blame/exonerate for this whole mess, some people are ok with the fact that the council sold the stadium to a franchised rugby club.

Franchised sport in the UK is sacrilegious in my mind. The fact that CCC were party to this was very shortsighted.

Anyone who thinks this is ok or wouldn't affect CCFC in the long run, needs their head examined.

No one is saying it's ok.
The whole sorry saga is a total cluster fuck from start to finish.
But it's amazing how the people who got the club in so much shit that we were on the brink of administration before sisu arrived get away with hardly any criticism at all.

Match Thread Polite Notice (AKA Grendel, Nick & Orca's Argument Thread) (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency