 |
| 
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 13355 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2019 | Nov 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote ="The Clan"Theres a pretty damning letter in tonights EP, it gets a prominent position and will likely stir up a few more NIMBY's.
Despite it being factualy incorrect in many aspects of the writers acusations it has now had the benefit of being published and hence the damage is done. The letter originates from Andrew Pearson of Woodlesford of all places, not sure why someone from such a distant area is so bothered.
We need to get busy rebuffing some of this anti development stuff or we will find ourselves in a hole.
Letters tothe EP please!
eped@ypn.co.uk'"
linky no worky clany |
|
Quote ="The Clan"Theres a pretty damning letter in tonights EP, it gets a prominent position and will likely stir up a few more NIMBY's.
Despite it being factualy incorrect in many aspects of the writers acusations it has now had the benefit of being published and hence the damage is done. The letter originates from Andrew Pearson of Woodlesford of all places, not sure why someone from such a distant area is so bothered.
We need to get busy rebuffing some of this anti development stuff or we will find ourselves in a hole.
Letters tothe EP please!
eped@ypn.co.uk'"
linky no worky clany | |
|
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 7665 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2003 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jun 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
| | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 13870 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2006 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
I think the editor will know that this letter will generate numerous responses from the 'for' camp too and is using it to generate debate. The Evening Post has been fairly supportive of the scheme.
Also the anti comments got a boost today at the planning office. Anyone who hasn't sent theirs in please do so ASAP and tell anyone you know who doesn't visit this site to write in too.
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 10926 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Dec 2021 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
As sent:
[iDear Sir,
In reply to recent correspondence which is factually and emotionally detached from any realities regarding the proposals for the development of the former Newmarket Silkstone colliery on Newmarket Lane, Stanley.
This once working colliery, with all the attributes of the grimey surrounds that went with it will, without doubt, find a route back into life at some stage. The fact that it is happening now is merely the reflection of the needs of the wider community of the Wakefield District, with the identified targets of new development land for industry and the requirement to provide new sporting facilities both well recognised.
As with any sizeable development, any planning application is supported by numerous studies on the potential effects of the development on traffic movements, flooding issues, noise, ecology and so forth - and yet those opposed to the development (and they are fundamentally those who live on Newmarket Lane) are using scare-mongering as a method to drum up support which verges on the scandalous!
For the record, of the consultation responses recieved to date, only that of West Yorkshire Ecology has come back in opposition to the proposals, and even here the suggestion is very much that the issue is one of providing more details of the mitigation measures to be provided by the development.
So, to those who may be sueded by reading these columns, I would note that there is no danger of flooding to the existing residences; there will be no huge increase in accidents; there will be no issues with ambulances gaining access on Aberford Road or the surrounding area and the likelihood is that there will be weight restrictions to the access to Methley - preventing the movement of HGV's beyond the new site roads and the immediate access to the under-utilised junction 30 on the M62.
What will be created are industrial / business / office facilities - which will bring employment and wealth into the area; a new Sporting Stadium and other Community facilities to enhance the lives of supporters and participants in a number of sports together with substantial landscaping and habitat creation with a quality far greater than the partially reclaimed, private, land which currently exists.
Regards,
Phil Townsend
Spokesman for SWAG - Stadium Wakefield Action Group[/i
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 13870 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2006 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="TRB"As sent:
[iDear Sir,
In reply to recent correspondence which is factually and emotionally detached from any realities regarding the proposals for the development of the former Newmarket Silkstone colliery on Newmarket Lane, Stanley.
This once working colliery, with all the attributes of the grimey surrounds that went with it will, without doubt, find a route back into life at some stage. The fact that it is happening now is merely the reflection of the needs of the wider community of the Wakefield District, with the identified targets of new development land for industry and the requirement to provide new sporting facilities both well recognised.
As with any sizeable development, any planning application is supported by numerous studies on the potential effects of the development on traffic movements, flooding issues, noise, ecology and so forth - and yet those opposed to the development (and they are fundamentally those who live on Newmarket Lane) are using scare-mongering as a method to drum up support which verges on the scandalous!
For the record, of the consultation responses recieved to date, only that of West Yorkshire Ecology has come back in opposition to the proposals, and even here the suggestion is very much that the issue is one of providing more details of the mitigation measures to be provided by the development.
So, to those who may be sueded by reading these columns, I would note that there is no danger of flooding to the existing residences; there will be no huge increase in accidents; there will be no issues with ambulances gaining access on Aberford Road or the surrounding area and the likelihood is that there will be weight restrictions to the access to Methley - preventing the movement of HGV's beyond the new site roads and the immediate access to the under-utilised junction 30 on the M62.
What will be created are industrial / business / office facilities - which will bring employment and wealth into the area; a new Sporting Stadium and other Community facilities to enhance the lives of supporters and participants in a number of sports together with substantial landscaping and habitat creation with a quality far greater than the partially reclaimed, private, land which currently exists.
Regards,
Phil Townsend
Spokesman for SWAG - Stadium Wakefield Action Group[/i'"
Might be worth sending this to the Express as I imagine the objectors will have targeted that also. | | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 5392 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="TRB"As sent:
[iDear Sir,
In reply to recent correspondence which is factually and emotionally detached from any realities regarding the proposals for the development of the former Newmarket Silkstone colliery on Newmarket Lane, Stanley.
This once working colliery, with all the attributes of the grimey surrounds that went with it will, without doubt, find a route back into life at some stage. The fact that it is happening now is merely the reflection of the needs of the wider community of the Wakefield District, with the identified targets of new development land for industry and the requirement to provide new sporting facilities both well recognised.
As with any sizeable development, any planning application is supported by numerous studies on the potential effects of the development on traffic movements, flooding issues, noise, ecology and so forth - and yet those opposed to the development (and they are fundamentally those who live on Newmarket Lane) are using scare-mongering as a method to drum up support which verges on the scandalous!
For the record, of the consultation responses recieved to date, only that of West Yorkshire Ecology has come back in opposition to the proposals, and even here the suggestion is very much that the issue is one of providing more details of the mitigation measures to be provided by the development.
So, to those who may be sueded by reading these columns, I would note that there is no danger of flooding to the existing residences; there will be no huge increase in accidents; there will be no issues with ambulances gaining access on Aberford Road or the surrounding area and the likelihood is that there will be weight restrictions to the access to Methley - preventing the movement of HGV's beyond the new site roads and the immediate access to the under-utilised junction 30 on the M62.
What will be created are industrial / business / office facilities - which will bring employment and wealth into the area; a new Sporting Stadium and other Community facilities to enhance the lives of supporters and participants in a number of sports together with substantial landscaping and habitat creation with a quality far greater than the partially reclaimed, private, land which currently exists.
Regards,
Phil Townsend
Spokesman for SWAG - Stadium Wakefield Action Group[/i'" spot on phil  | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 1413 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2008 | 17 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2021 | Mar 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
And my two penn'orth!
Sir,
In response to the letter submitted by Andrew Pearson concerning the proposed development on the Newmarket Colliery Site.
I totally agree that our countryside is precious, and should be respected. That does not mean to say, however, that it should not be subject to change. From the information I have read about the proposed development it will actually enhance the area as far as wild-life is concerned, creating areas of managed, sustainable habitat rather than the current derelict scrub-land. It is my opinion that objections to development should be reserved for existing areas of importance rather than scrub-land on an old pit site next to one of the busiest motorways in the country. Modern farming techniques have caused far more damage to natural diversity than this development would!
It seems to me that WMDC have a plan in mind for Wakefield, which is slowly starting to become clear. The City Centre is being transformed, there are plans for yet more country parks and even a forest, transport routes are being over-hauled - including a new Northern ByPass around the city along Aberford Road,(allowing easy access to Pinderfields Hospital) linking onto Doncaster Road and bypassing a congested City Centre and Chantry Bridge and it seems clear that the plan is to re-vitalise the urban life of Wakefield. To do this jobs are needed, and developments such as Newmarket is where modern jobs are created.
I think it is fitting that a derelict Pit site in Wakefield, a city once boasting a pit round virtually every corner, should once again offer families in Wakefield a means to earn a living wage, and doubly fitting that Rugby League, a proud working class sport once associated so strongly with colliery life in West Yorkshire, should be a part of this.
If you look at the plans with an unbiased eye you will see that many of the objections raised by Mr Pearson have actually been addressed by the plans submitted, and that the website he refers to is sponsored by a small business near the development which actually boasts on it's own web-site the virtues of the easy access to the site!
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 4259 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| May 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2020 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Me as well...
[iDear Sirs
I felt I must respond to the letter by Andrew Pearson of Woodlesford over
the proposed development at Newmarket Lane in Stanley, Wakefield by
Yorkcourt Developments, in which it is planned to incorporate a new
stadium for Wakefield Trinity Wildcats.
It would appear that Mr Pearson has received a flyer published by the so
called 'Wakefield Community Conservation Group' and this is what has
clearly prompted his letter to you. This group would in fact appear not
to be 'Community Conservation Group' at all and is in actual fact a
vehicle created by a resident of Newmarket Lane to try and solicit angry
responses and objections to the development, by making widely inaccurate
and potentially libellous claims about the development. This resident is
clearly trying to drum up support from as many people as possible, far and
wide, as he/she quite simply does not want this development near them. It
is very much the definition of a NIMBY objection.
Unfortunately, Mr Pearson (and I suspect many others) have been taken in
by the 'claims' made within this leaflet without any real knowledge of the
scheme or even the history of the site itself.
Let us address the issues raised in Mr Pearson's letter. Firstly, it is
true to say that in the current Wakefield UDP, this area is designated as
green belt. However, this is not a green field site! It is in the main
the reclaimed brown-field industrial land that was previously Newmarket
Colliery. It is hardly a 'green lung' and is mainly scrub land and
unkempt grassed and new wooded area, oh and of course a nice place to
fly-tip, as many who are inclined to this despicable activity have indeed
already done. Not so much 'lots of litter' Mr Pearson, but certainly less
fly-tipping!
Mr Pearson is shocked that, "At a time when we are being encouraged to
live sustainably and to reduce our carbon footprint this proposed
development beggars belief". He clearly does not know, or chooses to
ignore the fact, that the Community Sports Stadium in which Wakefield will
reside will be used during the working week and on Saturdays, as an 800
space park and ride scheme for Wakefield City Centre.
He also states that the Aberford Road (A642) is the main road that
services Pinderfield's hospital. Well given that Newmarket lane is less
than 500 yards away from Junction 30 of the M62, where the majority of the
traffic will originate from to enter the development, it is hardly a long
stretch of road that 'services' the hospital 2 miles further along near
Wakefield. He also fails to point out that the developer will be building
a new signal controlled junction on Aberford Road to service both
Newmarket Lane and also Castle Gate Road. Both these junctions are in
desperate need of improvement and accidents happen on a regular basis,
indeed people have been killed at this junction on several occasions over
the years. Far from creating "a massive rise in accidents" I suspect it
will in fact see a massive drop in accident statics along this section of
Aberford Road.
Why will Newmarket Lane and Watergate "be a 'rat run', with rugby fans,
construction workers and HGVs taking shortcuts". Shortcuts from where Mr
Pearson? The majority of the vehicles are going to access and egress from
the site from Junction 30 of the M62. HGV's and construction traffic will
be banned from any other route and will have to enter the site this way,
the only Rugby fans that will ever come from Methley towards the
development will be Castleford Tigers fans, and to be honest most of them
will come down the M62 as well, as it is quicker!
Lets look at the real facts about this development and not the ones 'made
up' by a NIMBY resident.
The proposed development is expected to increase to the visitor economy
impact on the Wakefield District by 3%, a value of some £10m
It is anticipated it will create over 2000 new employment opportunities
and 256 temporary construction jobs.
There will be a NET gain of 8.96 hectares of tree, woodland and scrub
habitat as a result of the development. Grassland will only decrease by 4
hectares. A wild-flower meadow of 1,64 hectares, 16 new water
bodies/ponds, a swamp and 632m of ditch habitat will be formed as part of
the development.
And the list goes on!
This is welcome development in the area by all but a few NIMBY's, hence
the reason they are bending the real truth to support their objections.
For readers looking for a balanced view of the scheme, as well as the
Wakefield CCG site, I suggest they also visit the Wakefield Stadium Action
Group site at www.swag-online.co.uk/
Finally, I notice that Mr Pearson lives in Woodlesford in Leeds, so I am
not sure why he is so upset about a development outside his district and
which he at least 2 miles away from? I on the other hand, live in
Stanley, less than a mile from the development and no, I don't support
Wakefield Trinity Wildcats, I am a Leeds Rhino's season ticket holder | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 5392 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| it goes with saying Inflatable_Armadillo your showing tremendous support for the project and can see the long term gains,
thank you for your support  | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 627 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jul 2023 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Mr Armadillo is a top bloke who posts sensibly and knowledgeably. rare on here and i should know  | | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 4259 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| May 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2020 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| My pleasure, I want this to go ahead. It is good for Stanley, Wakefield, The Wildcats and the whole district.
Plus, quite frankly, I am sick of coming to your sorry excuse for ground (and losing now as well... but still with the best pitch in SL by a mile)... oh and I would quite like to walk there as well and not have to find a bloody parking space near Belle Vue!  | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 5392 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"Me as well...
<snip>'"
Can only echo what the others have posted. Thank you! | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 5392 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"My pleasure, I want this to go ahead. It is good for Stanley, Wakefield, The Wildcats and the whole district.
Plus, quite frankly, I am sick of coming to your sorry excuse for ground (and losing now as well... but still with the best pitch in SL by a mile)... oh and I would quite like to walk there as well and not have to find a bloody parking space near Belle Vue!
'"
Glad you left that bit out of your reply. | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 554 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Dec 2021 | Oct 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="The Clan" The letter originates from Andrew Pearson of Woodlesford of all places, not sure why someone from such a distant area is so bothered.'"
Subtle humour  | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 7665 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2003 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jun 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"Me as well...
[iDear Sirs
I am a Leeds Rhino's season ticket holder
The papers usually like letters which are shorter than this. I do hope they print it as it tells it how it is, but if they don't, length will be the issue (oooh errr! )
Any more......???? |
|
Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"Me as well...
[iDear Sirs
I felt I must respond to the letter by Andrew Pearson of Woodlesford over
the proposed development at Newmarket Lane in Stanley, Wakefield by
Yorkcourt Developments, in which it is planned to incorporate a new
stadium for Wakefield Trinity Wildcats.
It would appear that Mr Pearson has received a flyer published by the so
called 'Wakefield Community Conservation Group' and this is what has
clearly prompted his letter to you. This group would in fact appear not
to be 'Community Conservation Group' at all and is in actual fact a
vehicle created by a resident of Newmarket Lane to try and solicit angry
responses and objections to the development, by making widely inaccurate
and potentially libellous claims about the development. This resident is
clearly trying to drum up support from as many people as possible, far and
wide, as he/she quite simply does not want this development near them. It
is very much the definition of a NIMBY objection.
Unfortunately, Mr Pearson (and I suspect many others) have been taken in
by the 'claims' made within this leaflet without any real knowledge of the
scheme or even the history of the site itself.
Let us address the issues raised in Mr Pearson's letter. Firstly, it is
true to say that in the current Wakefield UDP, this area is designated as
green belt. However, this is not a green field site! It is in the main
the reclaimed brown-field industrial land that was previously Newmarket
Colliery. It is hardly a 'green lung' and is mainly scrub land and
unkempt grassed and new wooded area, oh and of course a nice place to
fly-tip, as many who are inclined to this despicable activity have indeed
already done. Not so much 'lots of litter' Mr Pearson, but certainly less
fly-tipping!
Mr Pearson is shocked that, "At a time when we are being encouraged to
live sustainably and to reduce our carbon footprint this proposed
development beggars belief". He clearly does not know, or chooses to
ignore the fact, that the Community Sports Stadium in which Wakefield will
reside will be used during the working week and on Saturdays, as an 800
space park and ride scheme for Wakefield City Centre.
He also states that the Aberford Road (A642) is the main road that
services Pinderfield's hospital. Well given that Newmarket lane is less
than 500 yards away from Junction 30 of the M62, where the majority of the
traffic will originate from to enter the development, it is hardly a long
stretch of road that 'services' the hospital 2 miles further along near
Wakefield. He also fails to point out that the developer will be building
a new signal controlled junction on Aberford Road to service both
Newmarket Lane and also Castle Gate Road. Both these junctions are in
desperate need of improvement and accidents happen on a regular basis,
indeed people have been killed at this junction on several occasions over
the years. Far from creating "a massive rise in accidents" I suspect it
will in fact see a massive drop in accident statics along this section of
Aberford Road.
Why will Newmarket Lane and Watergate "be a 'rat run', with rugby fans,
construction workers and HGVs taking shortcuts". Shortcuts from where Mr
Pearson? The majority of the vehicles are going to access and egress from
the site from Junction 30 of the M62. HGV's and construction traffic will
be banned from any other route and will have to enter the site this way,
the only Rugby fans that will ever come from Methley towards the
development will be Castleford Tigers fans, and to be honest most of them
will come down the M62 as well, as it is quicker!
Lets look at the real facts about this development and not the ones 'made
up' by a NIMBY resident.
The proposed development is expected to increase to the visitor economy
impact on the Wakefield District by 3%, a value of some £10m
It is anticipated it will create over 2000 new employment opportunities
and 256 temporary construction jobs.
There will be a NET gain of 8.96 hectares of tree, woodland and scrub
habitat as a result of the development. Grassland will only decrease by 4
hectares. A wild-flower meadow of 1,64 hectares, 16 new water
bodies/ponds, a swamp and 632m of ditch habitat will be formed as part of
the development.
And the list goes on!
This is welcome development in the area by all but a few NIMBY's, hence
the reason they are bending the real truth to support their objections.
For readers looking for a balanced view of the scheme, as well as the
Wakefield CCG site, I suggest they also visit the Wakefield Stadium Action
Group site at www.swag-online.co.uk/
Finally, I notice that Mr Pearson lives in Woodlesford in Leeds, so I am
not sure why he is so upset about a development outside his district and
which he at least 2 miles away from? I on the other hand, live in
Stanley, less than a mile from the development and no, I don't support
Wakefield Trinity Wildcats, I am a Leeds Rhino's season ticket holder | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 1314 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2008 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2011 | Oct 2010 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| excellent well reasoned and structured letter | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 1494 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2009 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2011 | Feb 2011 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
10/10 and a gold star Wakeyrule.
Keep up the good work.
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 7426 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| May 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Excellent letters Wakeyrule and IA.
More of those would be welcome! | | | |
| |
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2025 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
|
|
