They can't stop themselves.. (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Statement on the offal begins:


Despite the recent campaign by ACL to force the football club into a deal that would be completely disadvantageous....

It's on the site. I can't be bothered to link. How do they think this sort of language is received?!?
 
KarmicChris

KarmicChris

Member
It's the usual they're being unfair so we're not gonna cooperate and the same from the other side. Best bit of this statement is the third party getting involved, might be able to bang their heads together so we can get this sorted.
 
ccfcmad1

ccfcmad1

Well-Known Member
More utter dribble disgrace to even have the tittle of a statement nothing more than a meanigless comment after all thats gone on the last week and thats the best they come up with, says it all realy utter dribble!
 
Stevec189

Stevec189

New Member
Will it be binding abirtration on both sides? I'd yes then a good thing. ACL Have right on their side I believe. PUSB
 
SkyBlue_Bear83

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member
They want a third party to help sort the deal out now?
It says again but I didn't know they has proposed this before
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
KarmicChris said:
It's the usual they're being unfair so we're not gonna cooperate and the same from the other side. Best bit of this statement is the third party getting involved, might be able to bang their heads together so we can get this sorted.
Click to expand...

Surely there's too much bad blood by now? They should have done this months and months ago; ahead of looking at other venues in Northamptonshire, ahead of faing foul of a court order, ahead of agreeing heads of terms and then changing their minds, and ahead of pulling the rabbit of a £30m stadium just outside of Rugby from the hat?!?

I note they don't refute any of yesterday's claims. But that wording is not at all helpful
 
Last edited:
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Surely there's too much bad blood by now? They should have done this months and months ago; ahead of looking at other venues in Northamptonshire, ahead of faing foul of a court order, ahead of agreeing heads of terms and then changing their minds, and ahead of pulling the rabbit of a £30m stadium just outside of Rugby from the hat?!?

I note they don't refute any of yesterday's claims. But that wording is not at all helpful
Click to expand...


They did refute the claims. What planet do you live on. They also claimed the guy who made the statement has never even been at any of the meetings.

Why do you lie all the time?
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
They did refute the claims. What planet do you live on. They also claimed the guy who made the statement has never even been at any of the meetings.

Why do you lie all the time?
Click to expand...

Where do they refute the claims in that statement? On the official, written statement?

Your day is going from bad to worse...
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Where do they refute the claims in that statement? On the official, written statement?

Your day is going from bad to worse...
Click to expand...

What flavoured sausage is that?
 
ajsccfc

ajsccfc

Well-Known Member
I hope a mediator does get involved. It needs some kind of parent figure to stop the kids squabbling and telling stories about each other.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
How do they think this sort of language is received?!?
Click to expand...

What sort of statement did you expect them to make, the council, ACL and Higgs have all been putting the boot into SISU for the last couple of days why wouldn't they take a shot back?

The chap who posts on here from Higgs was interview by the Free Radio today and said independent arbitration wasn't an option as far as they were concerned. That seems a very odd stance to take to me. Look at the possible outcomes:
1) arbitrators agree with ACL and SISU have to pay up. you may argue that if they don't like the result they won't pay but if the findings of the arbitrator were made public you would imagine any support for SISU would disappear.
2) arbitrators pitch something between what ACL want and SISU want. not really a victory for either side but as above if SISU didn't follow through with that agreement they would lose the majority of their support.
3) arbitrators agree with SISU. Obviously SISU would agree with that and would then pay up, if they didn't they would not have any comeback having got their own way.

The only reason I can see for Higgs not wanting to go to arbitration is that you think you will lose. As above I don't see any kind of 'SISU wouldn't abide by it' as a valid reason to turn it down as it would see a huge shift in public support towards ACL.
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Wisest thing they have said all day.

However the mediator needs to be chosen by both.

Not introduced by SISU otherwise there will be dis trust again.

The only way this will get concluded.
 
ajsccfc

ajsccfc

Well-Known Member
If it's Deloitte there's really no chance whatsoever of SISU having any influence. To companies like that SISU are a speck on the windscreen.
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Would any arbitration be binding by contract if adjudicated by Deloitte? If not, I guess ACL - who have already had their stance sanctioned by court - would purely see this as the latest diversionary tactic, such as those I already list above.

And it's not a case of tit-for-tit. ACL claim a deal was agreed and then reneged upon. That's not denied in this statement. But they do say that ACL are 'forcing' them into a deal. That's an accusation. And that, my friend, is a very different thing
 
Sky Blues

Sky Blues

Active Member
"Therefore, we again propose to invite a leading expert in football finance - such as Deloittes to act as a mediator and help drive through a deal which makes sense." - CCFC

Can anyone tell me when they first made this proposal?
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
Wisest thing they have said all day.

However the mediator needs to be chosen by both.

Not introduced by SISU otherwise there will be dis trust again.

The only way this will get concluded.
Click to expand...

To be fair all SISU have suggested is a sports specialist and given Deloittes as an example and to be honest they don't strike me as an unknown company who SISU could manipulate. For me this is exactly what needs to happen, bring in a specialist to look at everything independently of all the petty bitching. If that was done there would be little argument left to be made by either side.
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Sky Blues said:
"Therefore, we again propose to invite a leading expert in football finance - such as Deloittes to act as a mediator and help drive through a deal which makes sense." - CCFC

Can anyone tell me when they first made this proposal?
Click to expand...

Probably when Joy told them the Heads of Terms they agreed to were unacceptable and to go back with some new ideas. This being akin to sending on a substitution in injury time. Probably a good idea; but why not earlier?!?
 
B

Bluegloucester

New Member
The courts have backed ACL, it is too late for arbitration. Fisher should have suggested this months ago. To propose arbitration now is very arrogrant, but par for the course. Who is to say they would accept anything that wasn't totally in their favour?
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
ACL are not intrested in arbitration as it is yet another delaying tactic by Joy Division.

The first thing ACL have to do is get access to the money that is the only thing that will force SISU to the table, note that will be done through the High Court, which is an independant interpretation of the law.

I just listened to CWR sky blues interactive, the majority of people phoning/texting supported ACL/Council stance.
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
How much do you think they would cost?

I think Deloittes decision would have to be legally binding.

Also it would have to be completed in a month.

Otherwise as MMM says could just be more delaying tactics
And who is to say either camp will honour it.
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Bluegloucester said:
The courts have backed ACL, it is too late for arbitration. Fisher should have suggested this months ago. To propose arbitration now is very arrogrant, but par for the course. Who is to say they would accept anything that wasn't totally in their favour?
Click to expand...

It is a bit like the bloke who's picked on the wrong chap in the pub suddenly suggesting its a big misunderstanding, and it can easily be settled over a pint...
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Probably when Joy told them the Heads of Terms they agreed to were unacceptable and to go back with some new ideas. This being akin to sending on a substitution in injury time. Probably a good idea; but why not earlier?!?
Click to expand...

She is hands on now involved in all negotiations
Yet she was not there-why?
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
How much do you think they would cost?

I think Deloittes decision would have to be legally binding.

Also it would have to be completed in a month.

Otherwise as MMM says could just be more delaying tactics
And who is to say either camp will honour it.
Click to expand...

Yup. ACL won't agree to it being binding as they've already got their stance sanctioned by court. And if its non-binding then SISU can walk away having wasted yet more time.

Too late. Simply too late. Should have offered this instead of looking around Rushden and fookin' Diamond's ground
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
She is hands on now involved in all negotiations
Yet she was not there-why?
Click to expand...

Her hands are only on Timmy's neck for agreeing those damn Heads of Terms! Boy I bet he took a bollocking. His floppy hair would have been all over the place; flapping like Hedman with a corner!
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Her hands are only on Timmy's neck for agreeing those damn Heads of Terms! Boy I bet he took a bollocking. His floppy hair would have been all over the place; flapping like Hedman with a corner!
Click to expand...

Maybe he believed it was about the rent and he needed to get it down to 170 and when he got 150 he went running back to Mummy. I have done the deal.
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Fair enough, MMM. Must just be CJ who has the champagne on ice then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top