WIZZO83 Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Did the club set the chron up with the Cisak story because of the Storm Clouds/Take over article? Is it me or have things at the club in the past couple of weeks been very odd?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c.hill12 Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 The story didn't come from the club did it? Wasn't it bouzanis who broke it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Did the club set the chron up with the Cisak story because of the Storm Clouds/Take over article? Is it me or have things at the club in the past 15 years been very odd?? Just thought I'd slightly tweak your original post. And in response to your conspiracy theory, no, I don't think the club set the Chron up. Things in football are constantly changing. Players come and go. It's part and parcel of the business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 The story didn't come from the club did it? Wasn't it bouzanis who broke it? Correct. And Matt Chambers would have clarified with a source before going to print. Likewise, the BBC broke the Vaughan news and the Chron had conformation from the consortium that there was genuine interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIZZO83 Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 I understand that but Chambers was quick to say he was signing but still leaving..... The club were clearly not happy with the takeover story Alot of Biting to tweets, facebook posts from staff, the picture of the sunny day over boundary park (unlike the chrons) etc etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cav Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Do you not think you're over reacting? Story was probably confirmed in the morning. Paper gets printed at lunchtime. Deal changes late afternoon. That's it. No conspiracy no nothing. Can't wait for the season to start to end the infantile thread on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Have the Chron and club ever got on? I remember being at Halifax for a pre-season friendly in 2009, and Corney was giving both barrels to Tony Bugby over an article he had printed in the Chron... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Cosnspiracy theories - 99.9% of the time utter bollox. This is not in the 0.01% category Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Yeah the same Tony Bugby who is now the clubs webmaster - but Corney's the type of guy who would argue with his reflection then kiss and make up 30 seconds later.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceStationLatic Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I understand that but Chambers was quick to say he was signing but still leaving..... The club were clearly not happy with the takeover story Alot of Biting to tweets, facebook posts from staff, the picture of the sunny day over boundary park (unlike the chrons) etc etc If the club were so unhappy, maybe SC or someone should have responded sooner then and come out to deny it. There's no smoke without fire, talks clearly have taken place - so acting like it was a ridiculous accusation is wrong. The Chron reported the facts best known to them at the time, to their deadline (which would be well-known to the club). SC or no-one from the club had bothered to publish a statement at that time. They couldn't just come out and say a corrupt businessman has said he wants to takeover the club, so what? They went with the fans' reaction - and it was a pretty actual betrayal. The MEN later that day went with the best known facts at that time, after SC/Billy finally issued a comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesidg Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Have the Chron and club ever got on? I remember being at Halifax for a pre-season friendly in 2009, and Corney was giving both barrels to Tony Bugby over an article he had printed in the Chron... Does Bugby now work at latics? Spullchucking the website articles! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I didn't realise he did now, but judging by Paul's post, he must do. I think the story was something to do with the new stadium or new stand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Heck C-Beck Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Do you not think you're over reacting? Story was probably confirmed in the morning. Paper gets printed at lunchtime. Deal changes late afternoon. That's it. No conspiracy no nothing. Can't wait for the season to start to end the infantile thread on here. You haven't been on here during the season before have you?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Does Bugby now work at latics? Spullchucking the website articles! Being a journalist he shouldn't need to! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I guess the directors and the voice of the fans and the trust that is Barry, didn't want to or, didn't feel the need to let the fans know that they were in advanced negotiations with a crook and a non fit person to direct a football club? I wonder if the price was right we would be owned by the Vaughan's now? Thanks for the heads up Barry, you're doing ba grand job of keeping us informed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I guess the directors and the voice of the fans and the trust that is Barry, didn't want to or, didn't feel the need to let the fans know that they were in advanced negotiations with a crook and a non fit person to direct a football club? I wonder if the price was right we would be owned by the Vaughan's now? Thanks for the heads up Barry, you're doing ba grand job of keeping us informed. And of course you're more willing to believe the words of a crook and a non fit person to direct a football club over those of club representatives because it fits the fanciful conspiracy bull:censored: so many people seem to love so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Fanciful conspiracy,???wtf are you on about?? negotiations took place, Barry came out with a statement after the news broke from another source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Vaughan said negotiations took place. Personally I'd question his definitions of "negotiations" and "at an advanced stage". The man's a :censored:ing liar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 And Barry didn't deny any talks took place, so the "conspiracy bull:censored:" is bull:censored:. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Nobody has denied that Vaughan's consortium has contacted - or attempted to contact - the club. However, Barry's very clear statement that there are NO plans to sell the club to Vaughan's consortium would appear to be somewhat at odds with Vaughan's claim that negotations are "at a very advanced stage". I call what Vaughan says as bull:censored:, in fact I do so because he's gone public. I also call his claim that he would be ok to take a 30% personal stake as bull:censored:. The Football League would give him the biggest :censored: OFF you could possibly imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 It would worry me if talks had taken place over a number of months, Corney was willing to sell and run and only backed out when Vaughan's lot went public. But that didn't happen, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longtimeblue Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Nobody has denied that Vaughan's consortium has contacted - or attempted to contact - the club. However, Barry's very clear statement that there are NO plans to sell the club to Vaughan's consortium would appear to be somewhat at odds with Vaughan's claim that negotations are "at a very advanced stage". I call what Vaughan says as bull:censored:, in fact I do so because he's gone public. I also call his claim that he would be ok to take a 30% personal stake as bull:censored:. The Football League would give him the biggest :censored: OFF you could possibly imagine. Talks would be at an even more advanced stage if there'd been a £10,000,000 cheque dangled. I'm not convinced the takeover didn't happen for the welfare of OAFC. I have no doubt SC would want to leave the club in the hands of someone capable but I have no doubt the club would go to the highest bidder. The league may well have :censored:ed it off if a proposal had been submitted but conversations have still been entertained by the sound of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Barry hasn't said at what stage the negotiations broke down though or how advanced the negotiations went as he? If you are, In The Know, then say so, otherwise i have every right to voice my concerns, since Barry hasn't shed that much light on it to be fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I wouldn't pay ten grand for the club, never mind ten million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Barry hasn't said at what stage the negotiations broke down though or how advanced the negotiations went as he? If you are, In The Know, then say so, otherwise i have every right to voice my concerns, since Barry hasn't shed that much light on it to be fair. I'm not in the know. Just making my own interpretations of what has been said. Does it really matter how advanced the talks were as long as Vaughan is rejected? He claimed talks ARE at an advanced stage, not WERE. So there remains a significant contradiction between statements from Vaughan and Barry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.