Tricky
You can do whatever you like when you like. Many of the opinions are based on ear say and guess work, and not based on fact.
You also have the right to ask questions, just not sure you will get an informed response on the Wakey forum.
Seems to me that many feel the need to look on the neg side of things, the pots half empty and all that.

You are right to question the club and imo you have always done so in a construtive manner, far too many posters on here need to stop grazing and lift their heads out of the grass from time to time.

Over the years we've not asked enough questions at this club.

Thats about 99% of everything written on these boards.

Glass half full/empty is sometimes difficult to decide upon.

I agree in principle. However when it's the same issue over and over again? Worse still when said issue is uses to make 2+2=500! How the issues with ccj's ends up with the sale of Smith to Salford is utter speculation of the most negative kind. If Tim Smith is wanted by Salford and he wants to go no number of ccj's will make a difference as we simply cannot compete with the money this guy is "allegedly" about to throw around.

I've said it since day one, AG has stabalised the club but we are a way off competing just yet.

HERE HERE! I dont think AG is rich but the guy has opened 2 shops in the City centre gave us a lovely stand at Belle vue helped crowds increase etc. Hes done amazing for us too many people on here cannot wait to stick the boot in. AG has done excellent and gave us 100% . He saves us where is the gratitude? SHORT MEMORIES ONCE AGAIN !

Has Tim Smith been lodging ccj's against us? What's this got to do with him? I watch the team, not the business plan!

The thread started with me posting a rumour from the Salford board about Tim Smith and principally that I would not want McGoldrick at Wakey. The CCJ side of it was an issue that came about in response to a comment you made, following someone else's comments about us maybe needing to cash in.

I never actually suggested that the CCJ's were anything to do with the reason why the club would consider selling Tim or indeed that they even were considering doing so, but merely offering them as one indicator that the club were not necessarily in the best of health financially. Consequently, whilst I am probably guilty of causing the thread to drift off topic, this does not in my opinion constitute putting 2+2 together and getting 5.

I'll explain NGBC so maybe you'll understand what it means.

Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one

Its what adults do.

Baa.

I probably caused the thread to drift off topic, but in response to your comment, the business plan has a direct impact on whose in the team your watching.

So leave worrying about it to those whose job it is. When I'm watching Tim unlock a defence with a well timed pass I don't think "I hope the club pays the caterers or we might lose him".

I keep hearing about the CCJ situation and I have kept off giving and informed opinion on the situation but feel now is the time to say something.
Firstly a CCJ is not a direct indicator of financial sustainability, it is purely an indicator that there is a discrepancy between what company/person A thinks is owed to them by company/person B.
It is often used as a lever by one party to another to force some kind of settlement out of them.
The cost of asking a court to rule on a CCJ is relatively cheap (depending on size of debt) and with the advent of online applications (as with the Northampton county court) makes it very simple to do with no need to employ and expensive legal advisor.
IMO these CCJ's that currently sit on WTW may cause some administrative concern but it does not worry my financially

The CCJs might have been paid but it can still show against the club if the small amount (was £1 a few years ago)to mark the CCJ as paid has not also been paid.