Was some of it used for stadium refurbishment that should have been paid for from the SMC and wasn't it Ehab who spilled the beans when being thoroughly condescending about it in one of their very poor interviews? Have we ever seen a detailed breakdown of how it was spent so we could understand that the PL did actually believe it was money well spent in the spirit of the ASI?
It'd be good if something positive was generated out of this, and I totally agree about the depressing part. As you know, I've been involved in a few things with that very aim, which for a variety of reasons fizzled away. What I would add is, why does it have to be limited to people that can get to a pub? Couldn't it start right here, right now, and then have some meat on the bones at a gathering?
You've repeatedly claimed on this thread that the Premier League are very happy with what the club did. The correspondence I've seen says they haven't broken any rules, but it certainly doesn't give the impression they're happy.
If people meet up, the dynamics will be different, while they just converse on here things will just remain as they've always been.
Actually yes. I'd be up for that too. Have to be in the new year mind. Happy to say we sold our house today so going to lose the next 6 or so weeks. Me that is, not City. I hope. I'm also going to stop baiting you because, honestly, it gives me no pleasure at all and it's all gotten quite stupid and childish. All said and done we all do have sommat in common and we need to use that as a basis at the very least.
Why does it have to be either or? Why not both, or more? Surely the wider the input the better? A small group can never really reflect things, and any thoughts would need to be shared more widely anyway. If nothing else, an on board discussion would help show where the log jams are and who are serious about it. A starter could simply be people not labouring half truths and negatives but pushing positives.
Good idea, only you left out total lies, misrepresentation and insults; who will take this essential principle to the owners? It's gone fairly quiet on the owner front as they try to balance the books by promotion - there is no other way - so they have let self-interest develop a false cloak of benign stewardship of the club. But of course, you were referring to those who decided to fight the name-change, those who have been lied about by the owners, those who challenge the lies and manipulation. Perhaps it should be started by a list of the half-truths and negatives you claim are being pushed, as it is good to know what it is folk are supposed to be doing wrong. Perhaps this should be all inclusive and include all of those coming from the club, although, to add a positive balance both parties could include anything that might have been redressed todate.
