• Hello Guest, You'll need to login or signup to be able to post on here.

JRFC Aftermath

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pete said:
I don't think we are in any position to criticise Witton for taking rent off NVFC as it is not up to them to prove money is 'clean' it is up to other people to prove it isn't. In the difficult financial position they find themselves in we would do exactly the same.
I don't remember many of us giving up on Vics when Connet banned people. I don't remember many of us giving up on Vics as it became obvious what Connet was all about. I don't remember many of giving up on Vics when it was obvious things were 'iffy' under Rushe. I do remember people finally did something when there was no Vics to watch within 20 miles. That's what pushed us into action, not simply some moral outrage about the running of the club.
I've said before no one can accuse me of not standing up against Connet or Rushe and I feel as strongly as anyone about some of those still associated with Vics BUT WE HAVE TO MOVE ON. Our focus should be on gaining maximum positive publicity for us out of Vics discomfort and probable death throes rather than continually putting the boot into a bunch of losers who are more than able to achieve that without our assistance.
Click to expand...
The most sensible post and balanced view I have ever seen on this forum.
 
toddyb said:
Pete I'm not saying it would stand up in court,and I'm not saying they took cash,what I am saying is before Witton did the ground share some of their fan's were commenting on where the money was coming from to fund Vic's,then when the ground share was in place a complete turn around,as far as the bank we all know there are way's round that.I remember being told at one game against Vics the Witton fan's were singing about Vics funding and where it came from.
Click to expand...
Toddy you and others were quite happy watching V*cs with Mr Rushe in charge for several years until it went belly up on the pitch. Take your green tinted glasses off for once.
 
Paul you know nothing about my view.s watching Vics and even less about the fact's.the one thing you should know is your club is tainted by your association with Mr Rushe,and will be for a long time,
 
Last edited:
Not too sure what is meant by this melts window sticker.

20161203_013908.png

Only thing I can think of is...
Fake cocaine trying to pass as 95% pure
 
I think we should tone down the constant W***** bashing a little on here. Yes there are a few who continuously mock us but you can count them on one hand whereas most of their fans that I know do not have a problem with us and deep down admire what we have done. However the constant insinuations are just getting annoying to them and could undermine any future mutually beneficial dealings.

The fact is that they have not done anything illegal and all these insinuations about them taking drug money are mere speculation.

Yes, JR has been convicted over a £5m cocaine supply plot but it was a plot that was foiled by the police (he was caught planning it) and so it is fairly safe to assume that no profits were made as if they had then surely they would have been recovered using the the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
 
One thing to.make clear.

JRFC fans are deluded people who backed Rushe fully without question.

NVFC fans are people who just want to continue to watch and support their club without questions.

Speculation?
Strange how all of a sudden after Rushe's imprisonment the JRFC money dried up, even though at the time Rushe registered bankrupt was a banned director and had nothing to do with the club.
Speculation? I don't think so and neither did the Prosecution.
 
I think the word "speculation" was used in reference to any allegations that WA may knowingly (or suspectingly, if I may coin a word) have been in receipt of dodgy money from NVFC. As such, it had nothing to do with the prosecution's case against JR.

As for the use of the Proceeds of Crime Act, the problem there would be that as JR was a bankrupt with no official connection with NVFC at the time it would be next to impossible to recover any profits which may or may not have found their way through to NVFC (which is anyway a fairly assetless entity).
 
paul said:
But with people like Toddy's ever increasing nonsense about Witton and even your forum moderator Alan saying today "many of us would consider being called a Wittoner worse than swearing" (see Toddy/Hi Jean debate thread) I think this idea is becoming increasingly unlikely and perhaps impossible.
Click to expand...

'Many of us'? I would expect all full green-blooded 1874 or Vics fans to consider it worse. I'd also consider any full red-blooded Wittoner to consider being labelled an 1874 or Vics fan worse.

Chill good people.
 
Nicki said:
'Many of us'? I would expect all full green-blooded 1874 or Vics fans to consider it worse. I'd also consider any full red-blooded wittoner to consider being labelled an 1874 or Vics fan worse.

Chill good people.
Click to expand...
Fair comment Nicki. Can I say it then please? :p
 
Be my guest!

I'd find something really wrong with fans of rival clubs from the same town getting on too well. I don't mind being called green slime now (and I didn't in the past). You should hear what we call you guys in our house!! :scarf:
 
paul said:
In the future, with non league attendances generally decreasing, it might be a case of having to have some sort of mutually beneficial dealings.
Click to expand...
What dealings?
The only deal most would even contemplate would be a 50/50 ground share at a new neutral ground (that's obviously never going to happen).
Very few would want to play at witton and give them money in their pockets, plus the charges are ridiculous!!
Both teams joined .........you'd get about enough to fill a phone box interested!
Disband both and form a completely new Northwich based team.....never happen!.
So where are these beneficial dealings?
I would rather have no football and go and do something else than do something that benefits witton :finger.
 
Blackie said:
I would rather have no football and go and do something else than do something that benefits witton.
Click to expand...

This is exactly my point. You can end up so obsessed with W***** that it becomes to the detriment of our club.

Imagine a fantastic scenario where within the next 3 or 4 years we get promoted 3 times and end up in the situation where we can not stay at Winsford because it is not up to conference standards. What do we do? Move to a ground even further from Northwich, stay in the lower league at Winford or overtake W***** and agree to a ground share for a few seasons while we sort out a home of our own?

Would you really cut off your nose to spite your face?

We should concentrate on what is good for 1874Northwich and sod everyone else! If something that is good for us happens to be good for W***** then so what personally I don't care if it is good or bad as long as it is good for us.
 
paul said:
Blackie said:

What dealings?

I quoted David Brown (see above). Community projects, working together to try and make Northwich a better place. You know, that sort of thing.

The only deal most would even contemplate would be a 50/50 ground share at a new neutral ground (that's obviously never going to happen).

Why not? You know as well as I do that having more than one decent football stadium in Northwich is completely bonkers and makes no financial or commercial sense whatsoever. There are currently three football clubs attracting not many more than 500 fans each week between us. One stadium in Northwich with other sporting facilities alongside it would be more than adequate and may encourage the local community to get more involved in sport.

Very few would want to play at witton and give them money in their pockets, plus the charges are ridiculous!!

You might be surprised at the deal that was on the table when 1874 started out. You decided to take a cheaper option in a different town, which I completely understand and wouldn't disagree with.

Both teams joined .........you'd get about enough to fill a phone box interested!

Agree.

Disband both and form a completely new Northwich based team.....never happen!.

I would hope not and I would never support that.

So where are these beneficial dealings?

See responses 1 and 2 above.

I would rather have no football and go and do something else than do something that benefits witton :finger.

Fair enough. I can tell that you are the type that would rather watch American Football on tv than see two local football clubs working together for the benefit of the local community and to give local football a chance to grow and prosper in the future. Good for you.
Click to expand...
You make a good politician Paul, twisting things to suit.
Didn't see the remark about community projects otherwise I would have mentioned them with the others above.
If you think Im the type of person who would rather sit and watch tv than help in the community then obviously you don't know me at all! Just because I don't like witton doesn't make me a bad person, just a true northwicher!!

The ground deal I can't see happening as I doubt if 1874 could raise an amount equal to witton for a while yet as we don't have a ground to sell like witton do.

Other statements I believe have been answered satisfactorily.
 
Paul what community work do you do for Witton at the moment or in the past?,
 
David Brown said:
Yes, JR has been convicted over a £5m cocaine supply plot but it was a plot that was foiled by the police (he was caught planning it) and so it is fairly safe to assume that no profits were made as if they had then surely they would have been recovered using the the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
Click to expand...

Alan M said:
As for the use of the Proceeds of Crime Act, the problem there would be that as JR was a bankrupt with no official connection with NVFC at the time it would be next to impossible to recover any profits which may or may not have found their way through to NVFC (which is anyway a fairly assetless entity).
Click to expand...

Despite there being no available assets at the time of conviction, under PoCA 2002 an order can be made that should any assets become available at a later time that they can be seized to satisfy that order. A PoCA order lasts until paid or the subject dies.
 
I really do wish that the claim of "200 kids playing" would be more detailed with actual facts, to me it seems more wishful thinking !!
 
5th Dec a day after the deadline set by CH. Anyone know if they are still gasping for air?
 
Nothing showing on Companies House yet, but it does usually take a couple of days to register. Just done my Confirmation Statement today, on time by the way! But email says allow two days to update.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top