Believe me pal, the club doesn't love people like me at all, I go when I choose, I don't always buy a shirt, and generally I see most of what comes out of club as $hite!!!
However I love my club, and if we're up against it, I'll fight our corner as ferociously as the next man.
I can also smell a rat, so go and find somewhere else to play, I can do without your heartfelt sentiment.
Come back when you can back up your facts!

Oh dear,the last resort of a true gimp,to start correcting people on their grammar.

It really does make you look a tad foolish.

But i did roll around laughing when you enlightened us how you came up with these facts/opinions!!!So basically they are not even your own opinions,just some opinions from"certain people" you know.

Just who are these certain people?Your Nanny?

And how do you propose to deliver the promised land?

Oh, you don't do you - Mr Negative Agenda!

Actually mate i never said i was against any proposals, i was just expressing the view of people other than Wakefield fans who are totally biased and wouldn't consider anybody's alternate opinion if they fell over it!!

The vitriol i have seen expressed on here towards anyone who doesn't want this massive development (as if they are the excrement on the bottom of someones shoe) is a total disgrace, people who don't want it are described as Nimby's at best and plenty of other things at worst!!..........Why should this be so?

They have a right to their own opinion because they might have to look at it out of their window for the rest of their life.......it might reduce the price of their house?

Surely these are valid opinions???

A Leeds United fan pontificating about finacial prudence.



A NIMBY troll.About all WTW supporters need right now

Steady on now - no need to get personal.

I am not trying to stick the boot in, but just had enough of the rubbish being written about certain things!!

Exhibit A above is a prime example of what I am talking about =#4000FF"The tax bill as paid by Sir Rodney is not for that element"
In English TRB is saying that the amount of money that Rodney Walker paid the the HMRC was nothing to do with this b*llocks about image rights, it was in fact money owed to the tax man which Wakefield had decided to spend on running the club even though it was not there money.

This is a prime example of what i mean!!

Hi im a hull kr fan I come in peace , ive been keeping a eye whats going on at wakefield. At mo . I sincerley hope you get this situation sorted . I noticed about the agm/egm and while I wasnt at the meeting it seems its desperate . I do empathise you u all hull kr was in a simalar trouble some years ago and I wish you well and a happier new year for you all
Adrian
Hull kr

Some clubs could be looking at an eye watering seven figure tax bill if Leeds don't win the image rights case???

Wonder who they are? When's the case being heard?

Careful Rugbyball, I resemble that remark about being TRB's side-kick!





Newmarket has no chance of being built eh! Well once again Rugbyball you just proffer your opinion (which you are entitled to do) but don't make even the slightest debatable or factual point on how you reach your conclusion.

You may well be right about the current application failing (which I still doubt) but one fact appears to be becoming ever clearer about the 33ha of the Newmarket Colliery site and you seem to be ignoring this fact... it looks likely to be taken out of Green-belt by March 2012 and re-designated as for B8 (distribution & storage) use. So someone is going to build warehouse on it in the near future, if not Yorkcourt!

As for your, we don't need any more warehouse space line, once again that is just YOUR opinion isn't it! Central Government, Wakefield Council & Regional Government disagree with you and agree with me... what about the 95ha additional land for B8 development on the M62 corridor that they asked Wakefield to provide for and is now a legal requirement of the IN FORCE LDF Core Strategy? A minimum of 33ha of that space (the largest of four sites... all currently in Green-belt!) is currently proposed to be at Newmarket! Now of course if the actual develop a larger amount of B8 space at Newmarket that saves Green-belt in another location and the LDF requirement met along with community sports facilities, which are also required under the LDF.

If not someone can just build on the 33ha at Newmarket and then also use the other 3 sites. That would of course mean that the residents of Newmarket Lane would 'actually' get HGV's running past their front doors instead of on a new road remote of their houses, that would be required to serve a larger development... hey, if they are lucky they might resurface it and widen it a little!

We of course (and the Wildcats, and Wakefield College) would get bugger all... sounds like a great idea!

As for the decision to take this to a local INQUIRY (I have told you before, it is not enquiry) I was and remain surprised by the lack of joined up government (but, we are not very good at this, so maybe I should not be). I think the SoS office is going to come out of the forth coming process looking rather silly if they are not careful... I can imagine the conversation now -

So why do you want to more build warehouses anyway?

You told us we had to?

Did we really, ah, ok, so why on this site then?

Because it is former industrial land and next to the M62?

Yes, but is Green-belt!

Well no, it probably won't be from March 2012, as another department in your office agrees with us that is should no longer be Green-belt!

Why's that then?

Because you told us to make more space available for warehouse?

Did we? Oh yes, you just mentioned that!

Is there not any better sites then?

Errr, no, otherwise we would have picked those instead wouldn't we!!!!

Ah, ok, well in that case....

.... to be concluded!

They do have a right to their opinion... however, that doesn't include a right to a view or a right to object about a house price reduction or rise! These are material considerations are not valid opinions... even if that is their opinion!

Also, you don know that bit is not disputed and the SoS office is not disputing those elements of the scheme don't you?

You never said you were against the proposals no, but it's not difficult to read between the lines is it??

Do you have a nice view out of your window currently?

Enjoy it while you can because if the PI goes the way you wish then perhaps you'll just get to look at HGV's.

to me this smacks of a final attempt from the club to fleece a bit more money from its supporters before they drift off into the sunset,if and its a big if the 500k is raised and then the club doesnt get a franchise the shares become almost worthless and i guess the club would go into administration after a struggle.

if it was my club i would find a way to raise the 1k needed to do my bit but it would be in blind faith so i understand those that will empty their pockets for the club.

a question id be wanting to know would be if the club has got its self into this position despite selling its assets and reducing the wage bill no end how can it afford to continue and continue has a viable business,imo it cant.

the rfl can see this and will also use this as a valid reason for saying wtw cannot function has a full time club.it all looks to be coming to a sorry end and i hope you find investment from somewhere but nobody would invest in something thats going out of business when it can be bought for next to nothing in the near future.

its all very sad tbh

You quoted so called 'facts' earlier why are they now an alternate opinion??

When asked to back up your facts you completely avoid the subject by spewing even more bile. Many of these 'facts' have been posted by other personalities in the past, funny how 'rugbyball and falmouth???' were both not apparently affiliated to any club, one I believe was a Liverpool fan and you are a Leeds United fan. So why do you care what happens to any of us egg chaser clubs????

You appear from nowhere on a self proclaimed righteous crusade to fight for the supporters of Wakefield against the evil duo of TRB & IA. You obviously have so much dirt you can spill about the pair of them and how one or both have led us up the garden path, please share with us less worthy mere mortals.

The fact is if you had a thought go through your head, it would be the fastest trip in the world. What you probably think you know could be written on the back of a postage stamp in white emulsion using a 6 inch brush.

Makes me laugh when the objectors say they dont want HGV`s going down Newmarket lane when only a bit further on from the pit site theres a HGV companys yard!. Strange that.

Give him chance -- he needs to get his opinions/facts from "certain people"

Personally i think he talks to fairies at the bottom of his garden.

Don't start slagging the fairies, we're in enough $hite without getting in cas' like bother aswell!!

Leeds is rumoured to be £2m + not sure about yours, but suspect it is larger than a £1m as it dates back to early in the new century and your glory days!

Leeds are taking this one on because of a potential legal discrimination issue that HMRC may have fallen in to! HMRC have done a deal with the RU (on-mass) and RL want the same deal (of 15% and it would reduce the bill significantly) but the HMRC are saying that RL players don't have an 'image' like football or RU players (sounds like a London based assessment) so all image payments in RL where illegal! Leeds have an excellent and strong case that they are taking to a test case at the High Court as they own an RU and an RL club! First, how is it legal for HMRC to tax the same business differently, you want less tax here but more tax there and yet these blokes do almost the same job for the company... play Rugby! Second, we can prove that our RL players have a significantly more prominent 'image' in our primary location of operation... Leeds and the whole of the surrounding area! So your argument is is fact a load of balls (which we all of course know it is!) anyway!

Charlies gone all quiet! I think he's realised he's been rumbled!!
More fizzy wine than champagne!!!!

Cheers IA. Seems to be a solid case that Leeds have. When's it due to be heard?

Careful

If Leeds and their QC don't pull this legal challenge in the high court off then the whole of SL is is up crap creek and we could see a whole raft of clubs going bankrupt and doing a phoenix job... I would think Cas would be on that list!

Also Saints are £8m in debt and seven figure tax bill could hit them hard and given Leeds are going to spend £10m on the new South Stand, it might end up being more 'basic' if they have to fork out £2m to the tax man... who will not wait for his money!

Hes popped his cork prematurely.

Probably something to do with spending all that time with the fairies!!!!!!!!!!

Not sure when the case is due to be heard but I understand that Leeds and the RL are going to be updating the rest of Super League on progress before mid-Jan.

It might not get to the High Court as the HMRC legal team might realise they are on a losing wicket anyway and give in on the High Court steps... but I doubt it will be before they get close to court!

i dont doubt it for a minute,every club has its debts just look at manchester united.

Mate, i am not fussed either way about this.....honestly!!! but there you go again with the NIMBY thing.

I am merely pointing out what might be the view of people who do not have a biased opinion of wanting their Rugby club to survive on the basis of a new ground being built.

These people just live next to where it is going to be unlike most of the people on here!