Tue Jan 26, 2021 4:42 pm
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:15 pm
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:18 pm
Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:20 pm
fred keenor wrote:Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:28 pm
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:30 pm
Forever Blue wrote:fred keenor wrote:Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
I would like that as long as Welsh Prem
Better than Under 23’s .
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:40 pm
Welshman in CA wrote:Forever Blue wrote:fred keenor wrote:Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
I would like that as long as Welsh Prem
Better than Under 23’s .
Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:49 pm
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:49 pm
Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:50 pm
pembroke allan wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
Wimbledon is good enough reason that makes him not fit or proper ask their fans! Langston us another! Would you trust a guy who made club lose ground for profit council didn't
trust him.... and a guy who is suing club? Langston=sam, as for others well we know nothing about them for anyone to form opinion ...
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:53 pm
Ponty Bluebird wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
It was called the Barclays premier reserve league
Tue Jan 26, 2021 5:59 pm
Welshman in CA wrote:Ponty Bluebird wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
It was called the Barclays premier reserve league
Before the premier league was invented. Now it's annoying me that I can't remember but I know I will when someone says it.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:26 pm
Forever Blue wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Forever Blue wrote:fred keenor wrote:Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
I would like that as long as Welsh Prem
Better than Under 23’s .
Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?
That’s a question def needs to be answered?
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:32 pm
Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:48 pm
skidemin wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
football combination is what i think your thinking of...
we have competed in the welsh lge 2 but not for decades
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:49 pm
skidemin wrote:Forever Blue wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Forever Blue wrote:fred keenor wrote:Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
I would like that as long as Welsh Prem
Better than Under 23’s .
Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?
That’s a question def needs to be answered?
nope...cant have teams from the same club playing in 2 different national leagues.... its also why we are no longer in the Welsh cup amongst other things including Newport who were told they had to join the then Konica Welsh league refusing and having to play home games in England....while legal battles took place
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:53 pm
Forever Blue wrote:skidemin wrote:Forever Blue wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Forever Blue wrote:fred keenor wrote:Forever Blue wrote:I was shocked no one discussed this?
The CCFC Committee are planning and looking to have a Cardiff City B team and put it in a league.
May well be a better environment to gain experience, perhaps a team in the welsh league?
I would like that as long as Welsh Prem
Better than Under 23’s .
Agreed but would the Welsh FA allow us to have a team in both the English & Welsh leagues?
That’s a question def needs to be answered?
nope...cant have teams from the same club playing in 2 different national leagues.... its also why we are no longer in the Welsh cup amongst other things including Newport who were told they had to join the then Konica Welsh league refusing and having to play home games in England....while legal battles took place
Bang goes that then , I wonder what they are on about?
Or maybe another 5yr plan
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:53 pm
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:56 pm
Forever Blue wrote:My prediction and sorry to say I feel it very strongly
Tan will lose
Emiliano Sala case could end up costing CCFC up to £25mill
Tan will win easily
Michael Isaacs suing for £10mill for his 2% stake in CCFC.
Tan without a doubt will lose because he signed and agreed to it.
Langston suing for up to £15mill for an agreement Tan signed with them and has not been resolved.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:02 pm
Bakedalasker wrote:Was it not the Welsh FA that banned us from playing in their competitions if we remained in the English matrix?
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:05 pm
Ray Bishop wrote:Forever Blue wrote:My prediction and sorry to say I feel it very strongly
Tan will lose
Emiliano Sala case could end up costing CCFC up to £25mill
Tan will win easily
Michael Isaacs suing for £10mill for his 2% stake in CCFC.
Tan without a doubt will lose because he signed and agreed to it.
Langston suing for up to £15mill for an agreement Tan signed with them and has not been resolved.
In regards to Langstone, if it’s right what you say about Langstone definitely winning, surely the settlement will be nowhere near £15 million? Langstone already had a fortune off the club. How is Sam coming up with the £15 million figure?
Tue Jan 26, 2021 9:42 pm
skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:01 pm
piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:04 pm
Welshman in CA wrote:Ponty Bluebird wrote:Welshman in CA wrote:Didn't there used to be a reserve team league or something similar many years ago? Can't for the life of me remember what it was called.
It was called the Barclays premier reserve league
Before the premier league was invented. Now it's annoying me that I can't remember but I know I will when someone says it.
Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:11 pm
skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:37 pm
pembroke allan wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
He sold the stadium promising a new ground but instead built houses on site and left Wimbledon with no ground as you know they've been without a ground upto this season... ans its common knowledge Cardiff council wouldnt deal with him when he was at city as they did not like his financial. Plans regarding city and new stadium... hence there is a clause that anyone owns city cannot sell ground.... hope this clears up for you? All I've said as been public
domain at time of events... Anyway that's me out of here
Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:02 am
skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:35 am
piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?
Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !
Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:43 am
piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?
Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:16 am
Forever Blue wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:skidemin wrote:piledriver64 wrote:"The offer made to Vincent Tan was genuine and acceptable (to him) one that met his pre-conditions. However, the circumstances surrounding that specific bid were not to Tan's liking, so he pulled the plug"
Maybe he didn't believe the prospective buyers had the best interests of the club at heart or felt that they didn't have a realistic chance of meeting the league's "fit and proper person" criteria (Hammam ?).
The truth is none of us know, or are ever likely to know, the full details and therefore have to accept that decision.
My feeling is that there are a number of people previously involved in the club who are angling to get back in and Tan just will not countenance that (a position that I would agree with on the face of it).
I'm not sure how speculating and guessing will assist on this matter.
why are you assuming that Sam would not be considered fit and proper ?
that is speculating....
im not pro or anti Sam ....but people say things like you just have regular as if its a given and everyone knows...but never with any meat on the bones....
My presumption is based on the FACT that he had to admit to have covered up loaning money to club via Langston (a company led by him) in the High Court.
It’s not illegal for owners/investors to loan or give money to their club but, as I understand it, it is limited and has to be declared otherwise it’s a way of circumventing FFP rules.
My view is that Tan knew that which is why he pressed it all the way to a court appearance. It also safeguarded the club against retrospective sanctions.
The fact that he’s admitted that as well as some of the dealings that went on at the end of his time at Wimbledon, would make it very doubtful that he would pass the test.
I’m no expert and have no inside knowledge but that’s my view.
im not an expert either but im buggered if that means im going to go slag him off for nothing which defo seems to be the case with all these very vague accusations .... what dealings at Wimbledon... ? i dont think people like you and Allan should just chuck sentences like that around without saying what exactly they are... .... as for FFP there was no FFP back then....so therefore could not be retrospective action taken against a rule that did not even exist....
So those who are not anti-Tan can't speculate (I made it clear it was just my view) yet it's OK for anti-Tan posters to make claims such as the offer to buy the club was wrongly dismissed ?
Nobody apart from the board and the people behind the bid know what the bid entailed or who was actually behind it. Therefore nobody on here can know whether the bid was good, bad or indifferent for the club or even Tan !
Wrong, first I know who did both offers and second both agreed to give Tan what he wanted and even Dalman said it was a good offer for the club.
I put it out on here over a year ago and certain posters said I was talking rubbish and guess what I was proved right and those posters vanished .
I said I can’t divulge as private.
I agree Tan followers or what ever are all allowed their views and opinions that’s what this forum is for