Just the same one mate drawn out even more - there's more mileage in this ground saga yet!

It wouldn't necessarily end rugby at Belle Vue, and certainly a Sunday afternoon wouldn't be much of an issue. The flashpoint would be Friday night games, and it would make it more difficult for parking and other issues. The club would probably decide that it wasn't worth the fight for parking and the risk of racial flashpoints before and after games. Some clubs have caused problems in the past when there has only been Belle Vue to sneer at. Can you imagine how they'd behave if there was a large contingent of muslims leaving Friday prayers at the same time?

This is only hypothetical, of course, but the building of a mosque would present more difficulties than parking, and for the sake of its own image, the club would have to be sensitive to it, And don't worry about the cost of the mosque. The local muslim community would raise it without a problem.

Taxi fares would probably go up in the town.

If as suggested by some on the forum why would a council who are behind the development of a mosque allow this to happen. I would think that their involvement was overstated for reasons only known to those that post on here.
I also wonder if it the type of building that is causing some to object so strongly under the umbrella of their love for the club. I guess they didn't mind when the current buildings were put in place.
We have been given every opportunity to buy both the ground and surrounding areas and if we fail then it is our own faults. We will have been given time to match any larger offer which is not available to most developers therefore if we do not match it then once again it will be down to our own shortcomings.

Just as a point of note the six months grace is for purely community groups to come up with a bid, what they intend to do with it makes no real disernible difference at this stage as long as it is deemed for community use. A change of use can only be determined to be acceptable or not by the local planning authority once planning permission has been applied for which is likely to be after the bidding process. On the flip side if then any change of use is refused then they may look to sell on again a year down the line, maybe even resulting in a better deal for the trust.

As for condition 38 you are correct and it does offer some security but as a word of caution, the planning for housing has now expired and any new owner would highly likely apply to remove the condition with their new plans. Given the lack of movement on Newmarket for so long since S.O.S. approval and no real sign of it moving forward any time soon it will strengthen their case, especially if there are firm plans for other facilities in the district i.e. the new plans for Clayton Hospital and the Five Towns development in Glasshoughton. Also any termination by the club of the lease and a move out of the area WILL weaken it's case in the eyes of the planning commitee. With no 'immediate requirement' for a like for like Sport Englands opposition could at that point be negated by the new owner providing a patch of community land somewhere relatively nearby for recreational purposes. It is far from cut and dried which way it would go.

I don't really see the current owner appealing the decision as given the timescales and the original bidding deadline having already passed then it wouldn't really serve a great deal of purpose. Hopefully the trust bid is the winning one and all this is rendered unnecessary but there is likely more twists in the saga yet.

I'm not sure how friday night games could be ended due to Sky TV. They are the paymasters, would the club look to play any Friday night games/Good Friday games elsewhere? I find that unlikely.

Yes, just checked and the current consent for housing ran out on the 7th of last Month. Any new owner would not I believe have to apply to remove the condition as it would be a new and separate application. However I would expect the Council, as it was them who introduced Condition 38, to introduce a new similar condition to offer protection to the Club as we would object to the granting of any consent as would I hope Sport England as there are no facilities in the district. The Five Towns stadium would appear to be a fair way away at the moment.

I would agree that if the Club were to terminate the lease it would weaken its position.

That's that sorted then. Screwed by political correctness.
Thank goodness we weren't frightened of running the gauntlet as we passed the St Catherines church when we 1st played our Sunday games back in the 70's

Possibly some Conspiracy theorists believe that the Local Muslim Community applicants are the Rugby Football League in disguise!!!!

The ACV has been worked on over a long period and has taken some doing - all lead from the front by Sandal Cat.

Whilst you can all debate the ins and out of this (I'm not allowed to comment remember), could you all please raise a glass to Ian who has worked hard and dilligently to achieve this.

It's one battle won, for now at least, but it's effect could be significant!

Sandal Cat = top man!

I can remember seeing guys with boards stating that we were all doomed to eternal damnation for attending a game on a Sunday. I guess that sealed my fate and to make matters worse I'll be attending a game on Good Friday - in for a penny and all that.

It certainly not done us much good being part of the trinity, but I suppose we have needed Devine intervention on more than one occasion over the last few years.

The key is how quickly are BOI/owners of super bowl are wanting to sell. They've a extra 6 months to wait or sell straight to us done and dusted that puts us in a very strong position.

They can't sell it straight to us if another community group declares an intention to bid for it. The ACV is only likely to make a significant difference if we are up against a commercial bidder. Even then it will still come down to who is willing to shell out the most brass for it.

Not the case at all. We are the community with all to lose. We would vigorously defend that status - if required!

It can be defended as much as possible, it doesn't stop another community group bidding so would mean the term going the full 6 months. Then the bank will likely sell it to the highest bidder, whichever one that is. Lets hope its ours then it ain't an issue.

Seems very strange timing to me , council refused to give us AVC for a couple of years saying the criteria was not met at BV , now all of a sudden they change their minds. Have they given a reason for the about turn ?

Not really. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if I left a rugby game through the car park of the biggest mosque in Agbrigg. I live in a part of the world with a much bigger Muslim population than Wakefield and the muslims I come across in daily life are decent respectful people. Unfortunately, not everyone sees them that way, and any organisation has to think about the potential for issues arising.

If I were running the club and there was a large mosque literally on the doorstep, to the extent that fans had to walk around it or through the car park, I wouldn't have games on when it was going to be busy. That would be nothing to do with political correctness, but because I couldn't trust those attending games not to cause trouble for those attending the mosque and drag the club's name down. I would be protecting the Trinity brand, not acting out of political correctness.

No, that's not right - unless they intend to use it as a Rugby League ground, for it is registered as valued to the Rugby League fans and its community. Anyone else wanting to buy it would be seen as outside our community.

You do know this is good news and something we've been working on for a long time!?

You could also ask the question why would you want to build a mosque next to a rugby ground when your main event Friday prayer could be disturbed / disrupted. I would have thought that the council would take in to account all considerations before granting permission.

It's either a Mosque or a Rugby League ground. Not both.

Is the super bowl site also covered by the ACV?

No disrespect to the Muslim community and purely from a selfish point of view I hope they have to look elsewhere for their mosque. I would have though it would have been easier for them to find a site for a mosque, than for us to find a rugby site.
It's seems very insensitive of them to spoil our chances of progress - do they know the problems that we have encountered? do they care? - obviously not! Sorry but BV is for us not them.
Go and build it on Heath Common.