|
Post by banjoflyer on Mar 1, 2016 23:47:36 GMT
Shame the build up for the 3rd isn't shown - that was quality
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Feb 25, 2016 13:16:03 GMT
There is no way we can realise the potential of Rovers at the Mem - supporters nowadays come from miles around and one ingredient for a full house is missing - parking! - the reason why Cribbs beats Cabot etc etc There is a second ingrediant...........staying dry in the rain, and many more
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Feb 23, 2016 22:08:04 GMT
After tonight's results the game just grew even more in importance. Wyc need to win to leapfrog us into a playoff place whereas a gas win will push us 4 points clear of them and retain our top 7 spot.
Anyone thinking of going but not got a ticket yet, go for it. It's shaping up to be a key clash.
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Feb 16, 2016 8:54:38 GMT
All the NH/Board bashers stating about the bad way the finances are standing and the bad way the club is being run should look further afield as well to:
Shamesbury's Trash / Greens Carstairs Bad drafting/checking by legal team (subject to result of appeal!) All those fans who moan when they have to pay for Cat A games All those fans who moan when we don't back the manager All those fans who spend their money in pub (me included) and not the ground before matches
It is easy to point the finger at those at the top, but we all have a part to play in supporting a lower league club - can we all hand on heart say we do?
sure mistkaes have been made and rightly been criticised (share scheme, Cheltenham, backing the wrong managers, etc...), but until we know there are viable alternatives we should be careful what we wish for.
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Feb 3, 2016 18:35:16 GMT
Not sure hindsight plays a part here.. Why would you import risk into something? By reducing the available time for something to happen, you increase the risk. Basic project management. Before anyone gets too excited about this, the judgement confirms that the alteration of the Long Stop Date was agreed on 6th December 2011, i.e. 5 months before Sainsbury's submitted their original planning application to BCC. Whilst it is a concession by the club, it accompanies a concession by Sainsbury's. It should not be presented as if TW had knowledge of TRASH, JR or the council imposing the "Store Onerous Condition" of restricted delivery hours. Thanks for the info Curly, can you advise what the Shamesbury concession was at the time?
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Dec 21, 2015 22:04:53 GMT
If NH really believed the contract was dead and the appeal woulf fail he could have called the project dead and saved face by blaming the greens/trash/carstairs/shamesbury's with some justification and not "invested" more money and energy in continuing the fight. He didn't, why? Either the advice was so strong as to suggest chances of success on appeal were high from the legal advisors or there is some other motive. Whatever anyone says I for one do not think he would risk the future of the club on fight he knew he could not win. Maybe, just maybe, one of the interested parties have suggested that it is worth the punt to spend a few hundred grand on the appeal that might bring £30m plus or possibly an offer of some out of court settlement. A price may be on offer that varies depending on the result of the appeal. I'm not ITK but there must surely be some strategy and reasoning here from our majority owner as otherwise the evidence shows we could be in serious financial difficulty if the court rules against us. I am probably more optimistic than many on here, but you do realise you are talking about the man who went to court believing we had a watertight contract. Well it would be brainless to go to court knowing you were going to lose. You have to think that his legal advice suggested a strong case. That proved wrong, but I sure hope the current advice is stronger otherwise I sure hope there is good reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Dec 21, 2015 21:42:54 GMT
If NH really believed the contract was dead and the appeal woulf fail he could have called the project dead and saved face by blaming the greens/trash/carstairs/shamesbury's with some justification and not "invested" more money and energy in continuing the fight.
He didn't, why?
Either the advice was so strong as to suggest chances of success on appeal were high from the legal advisors or there is some other motive. Whatever anyone says I for one do not think he would risk the future of the club on fight he knew he could not win.
Maybe, just maybe, one of the interested parties have suggested that it is worth the punt to spend a few hundred grand on the appeal that might bring £30m plus or possibly an offer of some out of court settlement. A price may be on offer that varies depending on the result of the appeal.
I'm not ITK but there must surely be some strategy and reasoning here from our majority owner as otherwise the evidence shows we could be in serious financial difficulty if the court rules against us.
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Oct 29, 2015 17:25:30 GMT
Well I remember the original case judge refused to allow certain emails within Shameburys to be submitted to court. This would suggest that our team were aware of the existence of some evidence but weren't allowed to use it -why?
Also remember that that same judge seemingly accepted our application to appeal quite readily - why?
Just straw clutching..........
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Sept 29, 2015 11:29:45 GMT
Easter has been our only striker this season whose first touch and football brain enables him to hold the ball and bring others into play. On Saturday when he went off we had no-one upfront who held the ball and only Bodin in midfield who done so with a positive intention. I would keep Easter in the side and play him the whole 90 minutes. If he can't last that long then why are we employing him. DC does seem to always change one of the strikers mid 2 nd half regardless of how the game is going as if he is trying to keep all (3) of them happy.
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Sept 25, 2015 14:09:14 GMT
Question for me is how did the club get £10m into debt with the council. Could you imagine Bristol council agreeing to lend us £10 yet alone £10m
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Sept 22, 2015 16:55:21 GMT
Of couse, it is probably speculative and based on the little we do know or has been rumoured, but if the deal is not acceptable because of the desire to have loans repaid, can they not agree to repay all loans should the appeal against JS be successful bringing in more funds for the Mem and not, or a lower amount, should the appeal fail. Payment by results?
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Aug 28, 2015 13:06:43 GMT
I meant and NOT the UWE Stadium
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Aug 28, 2015 13:05:48 GMT
I think in the recent chairman's report it was referred to as the UWE Stadium Complex and the UWE Stadium?
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on May 26, 2015 11:47:38 GMT
Brilliant. But they wouldn't do it to a prem team would they!
Was about to post that picture myself on the other thread but haven't mastered photo upload yet.....
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on May 26, 2015 11:36:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by banjoflyer on Aug 4, 2014 19:28:47 GMT
Sorry I do not agree. Can you seriously tell me Sainsbury's would be less willing to take on a skint 4th division club rather than a skint 5th division club. With their resources, i think not. If they are trying to pull out/renogotiate as appears more likely by the day, I think it goes back longer than our relegation. Remember they were not represented at the JR and their strategy, generally, has been changing for a few years. Being cynical, maybe this is the reason they tried to modify the terms of the s106 before the JR was even concluded maybe to reinforce their case about about unacceptable planning consent (just my speculation). Beside all the above, I still fail to see how the UWE debacle cost us our league position (for me that was the players and management) or how Sainsbury's losing interest is the fault of the BOD. Maybe the lawyers if they can get out of it, but not the BOD. If true, they are doing what is right commercially for them regardless of what division we may be in.
|
|