Jump to content
IGNORED

Bristol R*vers dustbin thread


42nite

Recommended Posts

aren't they ever. I bet the bosses at the Uwe are getting frustrated by the long delay, and just want the land released for another purpose asap.

 

Perhaps they could use the whole Gas / Sainsburys / Wonga / UWE fiasco as an counter-example in their Business Studies courses?

 

Question 1

 

In what three ways did Nick Piggs get it all totally wrong?

Edited by Aizoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps they could use the whole Gas / Sainsburys / Wonga / UWE fiasco as an counter-example in their Business Studies courses?

 

Question 1

 

In what three ways did Nick Piggs get it all totally wrong?

 

Sounds more like a dissertation topic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more significant that they missed out on a signing because they would only offer him a contract to the end of the calendar year, instead of the whole season! I think the whole "wage demand rant" from their conference manager could be a smokescreen.

"I think it's more significant that they missed out on a signing because they would only offer him a contract to the end of the calendar year, instead of the whole season!"

 

If that's true that's bizarre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I think it's more significant that they missed out on a signing because they would only offer him a contract to the end of the calendar year, instead of the whole season!"

 

If that's true that's bizarre.

It was Angelo Balanta who signed for Carlisle instead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps they could use the whole Gas / Sainsburys / Wonga / UWE fiasco as an counter-example in their Business Studies courses?

 

Question 1

 

In what three ways did Nick Piggs get it all totally wrong?

 

I prefer multiple choice questions please instead of an essay mainly because the essay would really only be about a 7 word dissertation..

 

"Its the Gas, what do you expect?"

 

..and that means its not exactly a riveting read is it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer multiple choice questions please instead of an essay mainly because the essay would really only be about a 7 word dissertation..

 

"Its the Gas, what do you expect?"

 

..and that means its not exactly a riveting read is it? 

I would just put a link to their forum........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see a bloke who writes a blog for the Evil Post is keeping up the delusion. Apparently Ellis Harrison's stats last season are up there with the likes of Eusebio and Pele!!!

http://gasheads.org/thread/3552/unsung-heroes-promotion-4

And with no hint of humour or even a nod to the fact that Non-league football might be just slightly lower in class to the competitions that those players were operating in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jul/05/sainsburys-booting-badgering-living-wage

Decision day is almost certainly upon them - Sainsburys expect a decision next week.

Sounds like they've had an indication from the Judge's clerk.

This article states that the sags are suing sainsburys. I thought it was sainsburys who brought this to court?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest I am the mole

This article states that the sags are suing sainsburys. I thought it was sainsburys who brought this to court?

they are but I beleive rovers counter sued??? I'm not an legal expert though!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

they are but I beleive rovers counter sued??? I'm not an legal expert though!!

That is how I understand it. We know it is not listed for tomorrow so any of Tues, Weds, Thurs or Fri it seems.

If anyone wants a read a place to get it when it's out is www.bailii.org.uk. How quickly it will go up is anyone's guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest I am the mole

Would be a gamble...

I can't believe the EP has gone so low as to cite a 'twitter with 2,000 followers'...... bog roll then.

they might as well gone with my mate Dave said his mums brothers uncle knows something!!! :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus H Christ, Chopra at R*vers

 

If there's anything more repulsive, football wise, I'd like to see it. By like, I mean absolutely ******* despise

 

I just picture GJ tripping him up, always brings a smile.

 

article-0-07D6813A000005DC-482_468x286.j

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's another nose snort moment right there!

 

I'd love to ask GJ sometime what made him do it - because it was ******* brilliant!

 

That's 2 - 0 to me Woodsy!

 

Perhaps the mods can add a "Snort" button to go with the "Like" one.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not listed for tomorrow. Assuming the Guardian were right about Sainsbury's expecting a decision this week looks like it could be a great way to kick off Friday's festivities: either with a laugh or to celebrate the prospect of them leaving Bristol... again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On their forum some are suggesting perhaps the delay is taking so long because the judge is trying to broker a deal.

What planet are they on? That should've been attempted before going to Court. Her job is not to appease both parties or to reach a 'compromise' agreement, it is to rule on a point of law and mediating or pleasing either party does not come in to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On their forum some are suggesting perhaps the delay is taking so long because the judge is trying to broker a deal.

What planet are they on? That should've been attempted before going to Court. Her job is not to appease both parties or to reach a 'compromise' agreement, it is to rule on a point of law and mediating or pleasing either party does not come in to that.

Why does he judge need to broker a deal, they have a water tight contract
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On their forum some are suggesting perhaps the delay is taking so long because the judge is trying to broker a deal.

What planet are they on? That should've been attempted before going to Court. Her job is not to appease both parties or to reach a 'compromise' agreement, it is to rule on a point of law and mediating or pleasing either party does not come in to that.

They are clutching at straws as they ran out of sensible reasons to be optimistic a long time ago. Perhaps they need a new thread on their forum:

"When all else fails...................."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another classic from their forum:

"I think the longer this takes the more chance we have of a good outcome... What that outcome will be is anybody's guess"

That's brilliant.

You could make a case for the exact opposite analysis. For example if D-day was the end of June as seems to have been suggested the fact that judgment was not delivered before then could've put Rovers in a position whereby performing the sainsburys contract was no longer viable - arguably preventing natural justice.

Personally I wouldn't make any prediction about what the timeframe means or make any inferences from, but if you were going to surely the logic would be the longer this takes the less likely a positive outcome...? Especially as I'm sure someone reported Watola said damages would be inadequate, they want the stadium whilst giving evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The longer it takes the less likely it is that their contract is water tight.

 

Water tight - the sort of phrase that can only come back to bite you.

 

I've seen another fan on their forum criticising the 'madness of the contract law system'. I'm not sure what he wants from a contract law regime but the one we have where it's very light touch, barely any legislation and the principle is largely 'you are free to contract on the terms which you agree upon' seems anything but mad.

 

Not sure if his gripe is really with the system which allows parties to agree upon things like cut off dates, or with the contracting parties who seemingly didn't appreciate what they were agreeing to be bound to, or not, in certain circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Water tight - the sort of phrase that can only come back to bite you.

I've seen another fan on their forum criticising the 'madness of the contract law system'. I'm not sure what he wants from a contract law regime but the one we have where it's very light touch, barely any legislation and the principle is largely 'you are free to contract on the terms which you agree upon' seems anything but mad.

Not sure if his gripe is really with the system which allows parties to agree upon things like cut off dates, or with the contracting parties who seemingly didn't appreciate what they were agreeing to be bound to, or not, in certain circumstances.

When they lose it will be everyone else's fault but rovers, they are worse the Liverpool for playing he victim card

They are getting what they deserve after failing to support us in our bid for a new ground

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they lose it will be everyone else's fault but rovers, they are worse the Liverpool for playing he victim card

They are getting what they deserve after failing to support us in our bid for a new ground

Careful old chap, it could also go the other way. They were always quite lucky in certain ways, that's how they got the rugby ground in the first place. Personally I still think the judge will give them a bit of compo for Sainsbury's dragging their feet, Sainsbury won't argue even though they'll have done nothing wrong in legal terms. Where that leaves them is still a case for laughter, sorry, discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful old chap, it could also go the other way. They were always quite lucky in certain ways, that's how they got the rugby ground in the first place. Personally I still think the judge will give them a bit of compo for Sainsbury's dragging their feet, Sainsbury won't argue even though they'll have done nothing wrong in legal terms. Where that leaves them is still a case for laughter, sorry, discussion.

They are ****** even if they win it, they don't have the funding to complete the project and have admitted it,

That's why pigs is whoring himself to try and sell because he know if they win they can't do anything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are ****** even if they win it, they don't have the funding to complete the project and have admitted it,

That's why pigs is whoring himself to try and sell because he know if they win they can't do anything

I know but, let's remain dignified and not shouting until the fat old lady sings, we don't want to get bit on the bum.

I half expect a fairy god mother to wipe out their debts and strike oil under the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know but, let's remain dignified and not shouting until the fat old lady sings, we don't want to get bit on the bum.

I half expect a fairy god mother to wipe out their debts and strike oil under the pitch.

Why would it bite us in the bum,

Their club will remain a joke and the laughing stock of the football league,

They brought it on the self trying to sue other clubs when the get relegated

Or proclaiming they are massive with a huge fan base the envoy of the football league

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful old chap, it could also go the other way. They were always quite lucky in certain ways, that's how they got the rugby ground in the first place. Personally I still think the judge will give them a bit of compo for Sainsbury's dragging their feet, Sainsbury won't argue even though they'll have done nothing wrong in legal terms. Where that leaves them is still a case for laughter, sorry, discussion.

Surely if Sainsbury's have done nothing wrong in legal terms no compensation would be payable?

You can't say you're right, the contract can be broken legally, but the losing side get a consolation prize

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful old chap, it could also go the other way. They were always quite lucky in certain ways, that's how they got the rugby ground in the first place. Personally I still think the judge will give them a bit of compo for Sainsbury's dragging their feet, Sainsbury won't argue even though they'll have done nothing wrong in legal terms. Where that leaves them is still a case for laughter, sorry, discussion.

If Sainsburys have done nothing wrong in legal terms therein it ends. There'll be no compo to appease nor will there be a slap on Sainsburys over conduct - although they may get reprimanded if they haven't acted bona fide.

There are more examples of totally innocent parties ending up out of pocket or even mistreated with no right to compo than there are posts on this forum about SOD. Sympathy or empathy won't get them anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sainsburys have done nothing wrong in legal terms therein it ends. There'll be no compo to appease nor will there be a slap on Sainsburys over conduct - although they may get reprimanded if they haven't acted bona fide.

There are more examples of totally innocent parties ending up out of pocket or even mistreated with no right to compo than there are posts on this forum about SOD. Sympathy or empathy won't get them anywhere.

I can't recall the term used but, it referred to a party deliberately dragging their feet to make sure the contract could not be completed satisfactorily by the other party. I believe this is what Rovers claimed. If that were the case, perhaps the judge might be persuaded to award some compensation to the wronged party. But I await your wisdom on the matter, as sometimes the law isn't so cut and dried, as we found out with AV and tvg applications.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst Sainsbury's appear to have been 'prevarication personified' in discharging aspects of their obligation I wonder how much emphasis will be placed by the judge on what appears to be the first attempt to unilaterally vary the 'terms of the deal', namely Higgs seeking to amend in Rovers' favour liability in respect of the CIL? I've been involved in deals whereby first 'loss of trust' has been key if it establishes the party seeking variation weren't as honourable or committed as their outward intentions appeared. If Higgs was to be taken at his word and the deal fallen through should Sainsbury's not uprate their CIL contribution then reasonably one might ask whether, at that point, the intent to conclude the contract (a key component in contract law) had dissipated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't recall the term used but, it referred to a party deliberately dragging their feet to make sure the contract could not be completed satisfactorily by the other party. I believe this is what Rovers claimed. If that were the case, perhaps the judge might be persuaded to award some compensation to the wronged party. But I await your wisdom on the matter, as sometimes the law isn't so cut and dried, as we found out with AV and tvg applications.

But it wasn't completely sainsburys fault

Not getting the conditions they wanted then losing the appeal,

Rovers won the appeal but I think that may be dodgy on the councils part (something sainsburys brought up in court)

The verious jr involved again not sainsburys fault

Rovers trying to shaft them on some money issues (which the gas admitted in court) again not sainsburys fault

Listening to the reaction from the case it came across as rovers trying to play the victim of the evil sainsburys which the judge saw through,

The the main telling thing about it was the fact it was sainsburys that took rovers to court not the other way round as pigs and co would of had us believe

I think that is one of the reasons dunceford left because he knew it's going tits up and wanted out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't recall the term used but, it referred to a party deliberately dragging their feet to make sure the contract could not be completed satisfactorily by the other party. I believe this is what Rovers claimed. If that were the case, perhaps the judge might be persuaded to award some compensation to the wronged party. But I await your wisdom on the matter, as sometimes the law isn't so cut and dried, as we found out with AV and tvg applications.

Ah, no you are absolutely bang on. I was picking up on the 'done nothing wrong legally' comment in relation to dragging their heels. I suppose the point there is again it turns on the contract and really what it required of Sainsburys. Their delays could in the circumstances be reasonable, so no compo even if they were heel-dragging.

That's why predictions aren't really worth making, I'd say even of those who went along to watch. Simply because you really need to have the contract, read it cover to cover and get the themes and the essence of 'ok what did the parties actually agree to here' because the Courts will rarely infer or imply terms. Largely, it is what it is.

Explains why it's such a laborious task making judgment. If complex it's not a case of listening to what's presented in Court and getting a feeling. She may be painstakingly going through the contract, evidence of negotiations leading there, correspondence after etc. To a Rovers fan it might feel like it's taken ages but there's an unthinkable amount of work to do... And then write the damn thing, all the meanwhile juggling other cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would it bite us in the bum,

Their club will remain a joke and the laughing stock of the football league,

They brought it on the self trying to sue other clubs when the get relegated

Or proclaiming they are massive with a huge fan base the envoy of the football league

Because they are lucky bar stewards, who most likely will come up smelling of roses and overtake us,to become champions of England, then Europe in a stadium to make Real Madrid jealious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, no you are absolutely bang on. I was picking up on the 'done nothing wrong legally' comment in relation to dragging their heels. I suppose the point there is again it turns on the contract and really what it required of Sainsburys. Their delays could in the circumstances be reasonable, so no compo even if they were heel-dragging.

That's why predictions aren't really worth making, I'd say even of those who went along to watch. Simply because you really need to have the contract, read it cover to cover and get the themes and the essence of 'ok what did the parties actually agree to here' because the Courts will rarely infer or imply terms. Largely, it is what it is.

Explains why it's such a laborious task making judgment. If complex it's not a case of listening to what's presented in Court and getting a feeling. She may be painstakingly going through the contract, evidence of negotiations leading there, correspondence after etc. To a Rovers fan it might feel like it's taken ages but there's an unthinkable amount of work to do... And then write the damn thing, all the meanwhile juggling other cases.

You are correct. I know people that worked on the case and I can tell you that no one has a scooby which way this will go.

My inkling is that this is a messy case tho and I suspect neither party will get what they want in totality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So has there got to be a winner here or could there be a compromise where both sides get to save face? I'm thinking to get this far, go through this court case, and that all avenues of mediation and negotiation have been explored, so winner takes all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So has there got to be a winner here or could there be a compromise where both sides get to save face? I'm thinking to get this far, go through this court case, and that all avenues of mediation and negotiation have been explored, so winner takes all?

No compensation will be decide at this stage redm,

This case is about whether sainsburys can legally terminate their contract with the gas,

Yes and no money will change hands

No and they will have to go through another court case to decide compensation etc.......

This is just the beginning of a very long and drawn out process and don't be surprised if this rumbles on for a few years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoot me down if you wish, but will there ever be a day when rovers aren't discussed in so much detail on this forum?  I can't be the only one who feels sick of seeing their name seemingly glued to the pages of OTIB for almost 2 years now.  Sorry, I just had to say it and get it off my chest!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoot me down if you wish, but will there ever be a day when rovers aren't discussed in so much detail on this forum?  I can't be the only one who feels sick of seeing their name seemingly glued to the pages of OTIB for almost 2 years now.  Sorry, I just had to say it and get it off my chest!!!

Hopefully a day will come, the day they go bust.

Until then I'm enjoying the constant piss taking.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...