The on-going court case between the Russos and Bassini, as reported in the WO, is most enlightening--like shining a lamp down a dank well or lifting a stone to show the toads beneath. What a narrow escape we have had from both these parties. Why does football attract such characters into ownership? The Russos were trying to take secret control of the club , using Bassini as a front man. He was prepared to collude in this, and also in a scheme to lever up the apparent value of the club when it was up for sale , using sham letters. Inevitably the conspiritors fell out, and Bassini spirited money away that had either been "lent" to him by the Russos (they say) or given to him in secret exchange for the promise of shares (he says). Both parties as bad as each other-- one lot motivated by the desire for revenge and for power, the other by simple greed-- none of them interested in the club or the fans. In his defence statement Bassini started the rumour that the Russos have a secret deal with the Pozzos, and are part owners of the club....please,nooooooo.........
There is a strange similarity between this case and the one between the Rossos and Paul Scally chairman of Gillingham. The Russos lent Scally money without having legal documents drawn up and then complained when they didn't get the loan plus interest back in a reasonable time. The judge in that case said "Mr Scally had not come across as an open and candid witness at all times," similar to the football inquiry comments about Bassini. Although the salad kings and Baz appear to be in collusion I wouldn't be surprised if it is all part of the strange world that the Stanmore businessman lives in.
Two lizards were feeding with gusto On salads they'd covered in pesto Prince Baz knelt low down To kiss each on the crown In a flash they were Vince and Jim Russo
http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/11066307.Laurence_Bassini__evasive__and_made__empty_threats___court_told/
Russos story very suspect!! What kind of businessman "loans" 3.5 millionĂ‚Â£ interest free with no security for no benefit in terms of sharres or the like? Sounds a bit Hans Kristian Anderson to me.