Which club would you support? (1 Viewer)

mark82 · May 21, 2013

If Haskell and co. bought CCFC Limited but then the league/Appleton announced golden share was with holdings forcing Haskell and co. to start a new Coventry club lower down the leagues, which club would you support?

1. Club owned by SISU called Coventry City but playing outside Coventry (at least temporarily) and in league 1.

2. Club owned by PH4/Hoffman consortium, playing in Coventry but not allowed to be called Coventry City but with equal right to claim Coventry City's heritage. Playing in non league.

stupot07 · May 21, 2013

Option 1. Ccfc the club I support.

Grendel · May 21, 2013

Optiton 1 as that is the football club

covmark · May 21, 2013

Number 1 for me

mark82 · May 21, 2013

Depends what you consider the real club really I guess. Have to say I am on the fence about this.

The history matters to me more than anything. That I can say my club was in the top flight for 34 years and won the FA Cup in 1987 matters more than the name or the colour of the kit. And of course that the clubs permanent home is in Coventry.

mark82 · May 21, 2013

Devils advocate for those going with option 1. If the name was with option 2 would that switch you to that option? Is that what you consider key? Or is it something else?

stupot07 · May 22, 2013

mark82 said:
Depends what you consider the real club really I guess. Have to say I am on the fence about this.

The history matters to me more than anything. That I can say my club was in the top flight for 34 years and won the FA Cup in 1987 matters more than the name or the colour of the kit. And of course that the clubs permanent home is in Coventry.

Well if the football league keep the sisu owned ccfc in league one called ccfc with carl baker, murphy, etc plus the ccfc academy, training at ryton, etx and only a temp move away then they are the same club. Heskells is a different club. What happens a year or two down the line an someone buys ccfc from sisu and wants to bring them back to cov?

Unless ccfc move permanently and rebrand or are liquidated then there is only one ccfc.

psgm1 · May 22, 2013

Loaded pro-sisu questions going on here. NEITHER option in truth could truly clai, to be coventry city. So by leaving the city they have broken the bond of loyalty fans have

mark82 · May 22, 2013

psgm1 said:
Loaded pro-sisu questions going on here. NEITHER option in truth could truly clai, to be coventry city. So by leaving the city they have broken the bond of loyalty fans have

How is it pro-SISU? I was concerned it may be too loaded the other way. Think you just like to try to be controversial and stir things up but everyone sees right through you.

covmark · May 22, 2013

stupot07 said:
Well if the football league keep the sisu owned ccfc in league one called ccfc with carl baker, murphy, etc plus the ccfc academy, training at ryton, etx and only a temp move away then they are the same club. Heskells is a different club. What happens a year or two down the line an someone buys ccfc from sisu and wants to bring them back to cov?

Unless ccfc move permanently and rebrand or are liquidated then there is only one ccfc.

This is bang on

mark82 · May 22, 2013

And by the way, if I had to be pushed into a decision I may go with option 2 as they, for me, would be the team representing my home city. I personally would prefer a club with fan ownership, if we were to start fresh.

honestken · May 22, 2013

mark82 said:
If Haskell and co. bought CCFC Limited but then the league/Appleton announced golden share was with holdings forcing Haskell and co. to start a new Coventry club lower down the leagues, which club would you support?

1. Club owned by SISU called Coventry City but playing outside Coventry (at least temporarily) and in league 1.

2. Club owned by PH4/Hoffman consortium, playing in Coventry but not allowed to be called Coventry City but with equal right to claim Coventry City's heritage. Playing in non league.

1

though i would not attend any home games until we were playing in coventry,

Paxman II · May 22, 2013

More fantasy thinking I'm afraid. Will never happen. Why on earth would Haskell ever contemplate such a silly move? Oh and how the hell would option 2 even have any rightful claim to the clubs history?

Crikey, the paranoia is reaching hysterical levels.

skybluelee · May 22, 2013

stupot07 said:
Unless ccfc move permanently and rebrand or are liquidated then there is only one ccfc.

This is 100% my standpoint as well. If this happened it would be game over for me. As much as I despise sisu, and I will not attend one 'home' game outside of Cov, it is still my club.

bigfatronssba · May 22, 2013

Depends how long this goes on for.

At the moment my opinion is we should just be trying to starve sisu out, i.e. boycott. New clubs being set up is something to consider further down the line.

RedSalmon · May 22, 2013

Option 2 as it doesn't involve SISU,

WillieStanley · May 22, 2013

It depends on who has the right to claim the history. I'll support the club that brought me so many happy memories growing up. The club that lifted the FA cup in 87, that stormed the leagues with Jimmy to stay in the top flight for over 3 decades. The club with the badge I have adorned all over my house and office. Regardless of owners managers players ground or league.

Sky Blues · May 22, 2013

This is essentially the question I was pondering in this thread yesterday: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/31119-Which-CCFC-do-you-support. Which company do we fans consider to be Coventry City? CCFC Ltd or CCFC (Holdings) Ltd? One can trace its founding date back to 1907 (not 1883 mind) and is owned by Sisu, and the other had the last recorded right to play in the Football League and is in administration. Stupot07, Grendel and CovMark say one, while Mark82 and RedSalmon say two.

I agree with what WFC said in the other thread yesterday: We fans have more power than we often believe we have. Which company we decide to back could play a major role in swinging how this debacle plays out. If the fans overwhelmingly back option 1, then we are surely supporting, or at least accepting, Sisu has the right to be doing what they doing, or may have the stronger legal claim to the FA Cup win and that that matters above all else. If the fans overwhelmingly back option 2, then that is saying the company that had the last clearly defined and recorded right to put 11 men out on the pitch to represent Coventry City is the true Coventry City (and if that is different from the company that owned the team back in '87 that is a decision made by the board in the 1990s that we cannot reverse) and anyone who buys CCFC Ltd will have the support (even if they don't receive the golden share back) of those who believe Coventry City belongs in Coventry.

I wonder what reaction the Football League would receive if the fans overwhelmingly tell it they believe one of the companies represents CCFC, and they give they give the golden share to the other company?

Sorry if I am over simplifying here, but the basic point I was trying to make yesterday was we have the power, if we work collectively or by a large majority, to decide what constitutes CCFC. Whichever company does not have that support will either need a lot of external funding or face extinction.

Noggin · May 22, 2013

I wouldn't be going to watch team 1 play but I would be following their progress, team 2 it would depend on alot of things, while I see alot of scenarios though I don't think this is one that could happen.

If Sisu stay and we arn't at the ricoh I'm probably not going to be seeing us play again untill they are gone.

mark82 · May 22, 2013

Paxman II said:
More fantasy thinking I'm afraid. Will never happen. Why on earth would Haskell ever contemplate such a silly move? Oh and how the hell would option 2 even have any rightful claim to the clubs history?

Crikey, the paranoia is reaching hysterical levels.

You would think he wouldn't, which ultimately means we will be stuck with SISU.

In my eyes they would have a claim to the history as they would have bought CCFC. I would guess they would put up a legal fight for everything (history/name/golden share). Not sure how all the clubs debt could be in limited but it not be the club.

italiahorse · May 22, 2013

Two .............

mark82 · May 22, 2013

Sky Blues said:
This is essentially the question I was pondering in this thread yesterday: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/31119-Which-CCFC-do-you-support. Which company do we fans consider to be Coventry City? CCFC Ltd or CCFC (Holdings) Ltd? One can trace its founding date back to 1907 (not 1883 mind) and is owned by Sisu, and the other had the last recorded right to play in the Football League and is in administration. Stupot07, Grendel and CovMark say one, while Mark82 and RedSalmon say two.

I agree with what WFC said in the other thread yesterday: We fans have more power than we often believe we have. Which company we decide to back could play a major role in swinging how this debacle plays out. If the fans overwhelmingly back option 1, then we are surely supporting, or at least accepting, Sisu has the right to be doing what they doing, or may have the stronger legal claim to the FA Cup win and that that matters above all else. If the fans overwhelmingly back option 2, then that is saying the company that had the last clearly defined and recorded right to put 11 men out on the pitch to represent Coventry City is the true Coventry City (and if that is different from the company that owned the team back in '87 that is a decision made by the board in the 1990s that we cannot reverse) and anyone who buys CCFC Ltd will have the support (even if they don't receive the golden share back) of those who believe Coventry City belongs in Coventry.

I wonder what reaction the Football League would receive if the fans overwhelmingly tell it they believe one of the companies represents CCFC, and they give they give the golden share to the other company?

Sorry if I am over simplifying here, but the basic point I was trying to make yesterday was we have the power, if we work collectively or by a large majority, to decide what constitutes CCFC. Whichever company does not have that support will either need a lot of external funding or face extinction.

Completely agree. This is where the trust come in. Like it or not they are our supporter representative and if they throw their collective weight behind one then that would make a big difference.

I can see many scenarios that end with 2 clubs but lets hope not.

mark82 · May 22, 2013

Didn't see your thread from yesterday by the way.

Sky Blues · May 22, 2013

mark82 said:
Didn't see your thread from yesterday by the way.

Great minds...

Sorry, I put you down as an option 2 when looking back you said you were on the fence. I must have misread one of your earlier posts.

Which club would you support? (1 Viewer)

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Banned

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency