Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:46 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

I am sorry but it is not the council's fault the position we find ourselves, we did that alone. We sold the ground, we signed the lease and we wanted a new ground on the cheap that we were out thought by the developer. It's just too easy to blame others and we as a club are becoming quite good at it, even seeing conspiracy where there isn't any.

The interesting point for me in this old chesnut is the royal WE bit, perhaps you could clarify who the we people are because had it been the present chairman, I'm sure you would have named him instead of implying his quilt by association.

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

We are still to be informed the club's side but then again we have been waiting for several weeks,all we have is what the developer offered which apparently wasn't acceptable but we still don't know why.

What is your problem here? the fact that club has not kept you personally in the loop, or maybe the offer was not acceptable to you.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:32 pm  

bren2k wrote:

I'm sure if we secure a multi-million pound facility, he'll do the same photo op for us.

I'm sure they did. It's just that all traces of these photos have since been deleted from all media records. A bit like the snakes in Ireland.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:38 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

I am sorry but it is not the council's fault the position we find ourselves, we did that alone. We sold the ground, we signed the lease and we wanted a new ground on the cheap that we were out thought by the developer. It's just too easy to blame others and we as a club are becoming quite good at it, even seeing conspiracy where there isn't any.
We are still to be informed the club's side but then again we have been waiting for several weeks,all we have is what the developer offered which apparently wasn't acceptable but we still don't know why.
With regards the new development you tell me one council leader of whatever persuasion would not want to be seen supporting it especially during these times of austerity. I wish Castleford well let's hope they have learned from our mistakes.

well that's done it.
My military spec, guaranteed indestructible irony meter has just exploded. Paid top dollar for that too.
Troll, cas fan or both?

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:39 pm  

You really must get over this man crush you have on me it's getting embarrassing because you are just ignoring everyone else, you have not even been seen posting on the other clubs forums. I didn't name Carter because he was not immediately involved with the exception of being either the accountant or an associate director when the lease was agreed.
With regards your latter comment (which means last) was it not Carter who said he would reply to the developers statement in the Wakefield Express the following Monday and also stated the club would be making a statement the day after the news broke that we were staying at Belle Vue. I suppose he could be having trouble accepting the last bit because he had his heart set on Dewsbury and selling off everything at Belle Vue including the topsoil.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Wed Sep 30, 2015 6:09 am  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

You really must get over this man crush you have on me it's getting embarrassing because you are just ignoring everyone else, you have not even been seen posting on the other clubs forums.

You really are deluded squire, I've seen enough of you at Waterton Park to dismiss any thoughts of a man crush on you, as for ignoring everybody else perhaps it's because they talk sense and you being the odd exception

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

I didn't name Carter because he was not immediately involved with the exception of being either the accountant or an associate director when the lease was agreed.

You did not name Mr Carter simply because you had nothing to link him with the sale of Belle Vue, but full marks for the effort in trying to link him tenuously to it.

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

With regards your latter comment (which means last) was it not Carter who said he would reply to the developers statement in the Wakefield Express the following Monday and also stated the club would be making a statement the day after the news broke that we were staying at Belle Vue. I suppose he could be having trouble accepting the last bit because he had his heart set on Dewsbury and selling off everything at Belle Vue including the topsoil.

Talking of man Crushes, I don't know what the chairman has said or has not said as I don't hang on every thing he say's or does, unlike yourself who seems to have made a small pitiful career out of stalking him, so if he's allegedly said these things then who am I to dispute what your saying, other than to say maybe he thinks that at this moment in time, there is nothing to say, unless of course he's deliberately withholding any statement just to get up your nose which lets face it is not too difficult to do.
As for your last snide sarcastic remark, chose where and when we end up anybody with any sense would realise the money to be made from stripping the ground of resalable goods, especially steel, everybody except you apparently. Come back when you have something new and not just in your imagination to talk about, you should write a book on him with what you think you know about him.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Wed Sep 30, 2015 7:13 am  

This blameless council oversaw the writing and submission of the UU in place of a 106.
This blameless council chose to allow NC to be developed without contributing to the 60,000m2 trigger point - thus nullifying the reduction from the 90,000 the developer originally requested.
This blameless council has not registered the UU as a Land Charge, despite the document inviting it to be so.
This blameless council led us a merry dance over NC.
This blameless council has, so far, failed to respect and protect the wishes of the 15,000 people who supported this development on the basis of getting a Community Stadium.
Just for clarity.

We do have an opportunity to out this right and we will soon have news as to how that is going on. Discussions were difficult whilst the BV situation was being resolved, but we hope to get moving again as soon as the lease is signed!

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Wed Sep 30, 2015 7:44 am  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

I am sorry but it is not the council's fault the position we find ourselves, we did that alone.

I have followed your posts and never knocked you or disagreed with you, in fact in all fairness I think you often make some very good points. However on this occasion you are way off the mark, this whole mess we are in has been caused by the council for all the reasons TRB has just stated.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:36 am  

jack in the box wrote:

I have followed your posts and never knocked you or disagreed with you, in fact in all fairness I think you often make some very good points. However on this occasion you are way off the mark, this whole mess we are in has been caused by the council for all the reasons TRB has just stated.

Agree on this. Your comments (SP) saying the club alone is to blame for the stadium problems is an almighty kick in the teeth to all the tireless and often thankless work of all those involved in our supporter trust and others doing their bit from within the club. Wakefield council have shafted Wakefield Trinity end of.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:57 am  

wtid71 wrote:

Wakefield council have shafted Wakefield Trinity end of.

Not entirely end of; Wakefield Council have colluded with Colin Mackie to shaft Wakefield Trinity, HM Inspector and the people of Wakefield. It's actually worse than you describe.

Re: Not For The Squeemish.. : Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:25 am  

TRB wrote:

This blameless council oversaw the writing and submission of the UU in place of a 106.
This blameless council chose to allow NC to be developed without contributing to the 60,000m2 trigger point - thus nullifying the reduction from the 90,000 the developer originally requested.
This blameless council has not registered the UU as a Land Charge, despite the document inviting it to be so.
This blameless council led us a merry dance over NC.
This blameless council has, so far, failed to respect and protect the wishes of the 15,000 people who supported this development on the basis of getting a Community Stadium.
Just for clarity.

We do have an opportunity to out this right and we will soon have news as to how that is going on. Discussions were difficult whilst the BV situation was being resolved, but we hope to get moving again as soon as the lease is signed!

The only body who can put this right is the Council. They have to ensure that the Developer delivers what he promised the people of Wakefield at the Public Inquiry to secure planning.

Will they do it ? We'll have to wait and see but if they don't they will be letting at least 15,000 people down.