Chapter 2 Rival fans sneaking on their retro Cov Tops monitoring the Evening Telegraph then sabotaging polls at will. As they know there is no better way to annoy a Cov fan than a poll that suggests SISU should not be allowed to buy the Ricoh. (Good read that one)
Chapter 4 Andy Thorn turning up to training sessions drunk, top conspiracy that one.
Chapter 5 Kieran Westwood asking for contract talks but not really ever intending to sign.
Chapter 6 Selling your top goal scorer whilst facing a relegation battle at Christmas was in fact an attempt to support the manager.
Talk about over exaggeration. You suggested that the poll was conclusive evidence of what cov fans think, I suggested that rival fans and non cov fan Coventry residents could've accessed the post, plus a number of posters on here have admitted to voting multiple times.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Scuppering what - playing in Northampton for 5 years -sounds like you astute etc. want that more than the useless eyesore in Holbrooks having a football team play there.
No he bloody doesn't, all of his tweets support his viewpoint.
I think he's probably shown you up on Twitter & you've took it to heart. He is impartial, but as ever you'll only read it to suit your agenda.
Recent example:"@Lesreidpolitics: @The_Coventry @jockdmj @Westtender 2/2 ..& I think Sisu's been terrible for CCFC. I want @RicohArena return & think campaigning too 1-sided"
Ah you say you're joking, but you may be closer to the truth than you think:thinking about:
I will give you the multiple voting one.
I imagine for both the yes and no camps.
Rival fans = no
Non football fans = very few would read an article that long about Coventry City then vote at the bottom.
It will be mainly Cov fans who voted.
Les headed it with a very leading article along the same lines as the last one.
The Poll that he allowed to be put on his article has now been discredited by him since it went against his viewpoint.
But we're talking about the Ricoh, "a community asset paid for by tax payers, who's be outraged if they sold the Ricoh to ccfc on the cheap" (to quote the anti-sisu fans). Are you sure they wouldn't be interested in an article about the potential future of such a prized asset even if they didn't support ccfc?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
But we're talking about the Ricoh, "a community asset paid for by tax payers, who's be outraged if they sold the Ricoh to ccfc on the cheap" (to quote the anti-sisu fans). Are you sure they wouldn't be interested in an article about the potential future of such a prized asset even if they didn't support ccfc?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
That being the case, shouldn't their opinions be listened to?
Of course they should, dons saying that only cov fans voted because they're not interested in the club or the Ricoh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Yes their opinions count however anyone I know who is not a Coventry fan does not seem that interested in the Ricoh.
They say it us a shame and it is stupid.
However they do not actively go reading about it.
I think the 50 odd people standing on the hill have had quite a bit of publicity out of ratio with their influence wouldnt you say?
Oh and John Fletcher on the radio trying to be impartial but then peddling the Council line fed to him by Old mate Lucas seemed to show EXACTLY where the Trust are - ie a continuation of a naive SISU OUT stance - despite Linnell having the cheek to ask him to be some sort of lead mediator!
if les reid helps rid ccfc of the council and get ricoh we should build a statue of him next to jimmy hill.
I agree 90% of the public have no interest whatsoever in the stadium - the notion its a community asset is a joke.
Its just odd that 70% of Coventry fans want the club at Sixfields for 5 years
if les reid helps rid ccfc of the council and get ricoh we should build a statue of him next to jimmy hill.
Yes, lets build a statue to someone who wants ccfc renting their stadium off a hedge fund for the next 100 years.
No different to paying over the odds to a greedy filthy council is it?
I am saying the MAJORITY of people voting in that poll will be Coventry fans
Not as you have suggested rival fans or non Coventry fans
SISU refuse to pay rent, attempt to distress a charity.
ACL is not a charity.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
ACL is not a charity.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Well my point was the majority of cov fans who voted in the poll disagreed with Les.
You pointed out that that may not be the case as the votes could have been made up from non football fans and rival fans.
No different to paying over the odds to a greedy filthy council is it?
I don't know why you keep banging on about a "majority". A majority of a small number who bothered to vote on a easily manipulated poll. At least you admitted in a previous post (in reply to Stupot) that non-CCFC fans aren't particularly bothered. I think we can blow the "community asset" myth out of the water.
WOW ............ greedy and filthy??
I don't understand why people are against this "community asset" thing? To me it seems like another possible way for us to get CCFC back to the Ricoh.
It's used as emotional blackmail along with the "charity" aspect. Chances are, most people couldn't give a fig about CCFC or the Ricoh. They want low council tax, regular bin collections, care homes, youth centres and libraries to remain open.
Can't honestly say I have read through the whole thread to argue with that 1, but I would have thought people would be supporting the community asset thing!
I think people care about everyday things not football stadiums they may never go to.
You're wrong - some people care about private investment funds and believe they are entitled to a return on their investment. The spirit of the ragged trousered philanthropist still lives on.
So what is ACL made up from?
It's not a charity, it's a commercial private limited company. And the Higgs contribute nothing to the running costs and take nothing out. So how were sisu trying to distress a charity?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
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?