To all those dissatisfied at the moment

It's all well and good if it's a theoretical risk, but if there is an ongoing dispute or a party entitled to the benefit of a covenant has flagged the issue then an insurer won't touch it.

 

£36 to watch Barnsley nil? Yeah, me n ar lass don't have a problem staying away.

 

Next time if you could message me with your circumstances on a match by match basis I'll give you a pass to miss the game if I judge it to be an adequate reason

Ta.

Ps. 'crystal won't carry me to the game' is not an adequate reason

 

The old memory isn't as Sharpe as it used to be, so apologies if I get this totally wrong...
In the early 60s I recall many a time standing on the kop stood watching the game that was taking place on the old coop ground behind the kop ( usually it was a better game than what we were offering up) the Coop ground became part of our Academy/training facilities ....
Now from what I recall, the land its self was gifted to the coop society on the grounds that its sole purpose was for local sport to be played on it and not for commercial use and a Covenant placed on it stating should that ever change in future generations later down the line the land had to return to its original owners or their future family generations
I think John Dennis touches on this in his book
The training facilities were deemed to be under that umbrella of sport hence why it was allowed to become part of the club..and the Covenant was respected....
As far as I'm aware that existing Covenant is still lawful and still in place today regardless of who owns what of oakwell...and is being policed and enforced by both by the council and I do believe the coop who were and still are gaurdians of the surrounding land under the original covenant... despite the council now owning 50% of the ground its self
This also came to light when Peter Doyle took over as it was a major stumbling block with his plans after he separated the club and team league registration.and discovered the full extent of the said Covenant .. it therefore stopped him taking out loans or a mortgage due to not being able to use the land as a guarantee
Fast forward to these present owners and in my opinion it appears that someone hasn't done their due diligence when it comes to the land on their part .....you would have thought their representatives would or should have picked up on it as it will be on file at the land registry ...I doubt for one minute that neither the Cryne family or the council for that matter offered up that information as they werent legally obliged to
There is nothing stopping them developing the land for SPORT....but they can't sell it for commercial use and from where I'm sitting this is the stumbling block hence they've openly pulled out of buying the ground...at the minute I'd say the only thing of substance they own is the league registration.....they are buying the club from the profits they are generating and not using any of their own money....Good business sense from their position not good for the actual club though
Is it.....
If you wait long enough you catch them out...(unfortunately it's not illegal to do what they are doing as far as I'm aware).... but in my opinion they haven't got our best interests at heart....id hazard a guess in the begining they saw an easy way of making a profit on the land by selling the land for commercial use and I'd also hazard a guess that once they've paid the agreed price for the club ( playing side) out of the clubs profit they will sell up and move on....where that leaves us anybodies guess but there won't be any money in the pot that's for sure
Just my opinion...

 

Damn!

 

Essentially.