Thats only for the posh people

I live in Normy and don't do posh

DC, I understand what you are saying, but we Wakefield have bull crapped our way into SL on some promises which we did not keep, and we have had many a year to get it sorted, this is not a surprise, this was known for years, and if we fail and get kicked out of SL, then we deserve it more than any other club.

The rules are there, like em or not, but our pi55 pot approach to this over the last few years is the reason why we are in the brown sticky smelly stuff !

I also see what you are saying but I think we all either in business or personally make promises we don't keep.I promise to loose weight every year but it doesn't happen




I have a business in Wakey and my customers promise to pay in 30 days but actually pay in 60

and then I have to promise my supplier when my customer pays me I will pay them it just go's on and on. It's not easy out there and if you have to make false promises to buy some time then you make them.

eh? dont get the analagy? what we are saying here is we have some water and were told 3 years ago to go buy a bucket or the water would be given to someone else, we tried to buy a bucket but it had a hole in it, so we went of in search of a new non holey bucket thought wed found it only to be told that we had to share the bucket by the person who was paying for some of it.

much better, clearer than all that cashflow nonesense.

Quote ="i8no-one"DC, I understand what you are saying, but we Wakefield have bull crapped our way into SL on some promises which we did not keep, and we have had many a year to get it sorted, this is not a surprise, this was known for years, and if we fail and get kicked out of SL, then we deserve it more than any other club. The rules are there, like em or not, but our pi55 pot approach to this over the last few years is the reason why we are in the brown sticky smelly stuff !'" The "promise" that was broken is Thornes Park - and it wasn't the club that failed to deliver on that promise, it was WMDC. In little over a year from the plug being pulled on TP, Trinity had identified a new site, found a developer and worked with them to develop the outline of what the stadium facilties would look like. Selective memories by various people turn what is actually a fantastic effort by the club into a tale of continued mis-management!!! IMHO the impact of the withdrawal of WMDC's offer of land to help secure the finance package is nowhere near as drastic as it first appears (my admittedly lengthy post on the other thread explains this in more detail viewtopic.php?f=33&t=463017&start=465). The major obstacle in the way at the moment is planning permission. If we can get that, the new stadium at Newmarket WILL happen.

Quote ="i8no-one"DC, I understand what you are saying, but we Wakefield have bull crapped our way into SL on some promises which we did not keep, and we have had many a year to get it sorted, this is not a surprise, this was known for years, and if we fail and get kicked out of SL, then we deserve it more than any other club. The rules are there, like em or not, but our pi55 pot approach to this over the last few years is the reason why we are in the brown sticky smelly stuff !'" The "promise" that was broken is Thornes Park - and it wasn't the club that failed to deliver on that promise, it was WMDC. In little over a year from the plug being pulled on TP, Trinity had identified a new site, found a developer and worked with them to develop the outline of what the stadium facilties would look like. Selective memories by various people turn what is actually a fantastic effort by the club into a tale of continued mis-management!!! IMHO the impact of the withdrawal of WMDC's offer of land to help secure the finance package is nowhere near as drastic as it first appears (my admittedly lengthy post on the other thread explains this in more detail viewtopic.php?f=33&t=463017&start=465). The major obstacle in the way at the moment is planning permission. If we can get that, the new stadium at Newmarket WILL happen.

Quote ="RDM"The "promise" that was broken is Thornes Park - and it wasn't the club that failed to deliver on that promise, it was WMDC. In little over a year from the plug being pulled on TP, Trinity had identified a new site, found a developer and worked with them to develop the outline of what the stadium facilties would look like. Selective memories by various people turn what is actually a fantastic effort by the club into a tale of continued mis-management!!! IMHO the impact of the withdrawal of WMDC's offer of land to help secure the finance package is nowhere near as drastic as it first appears (my admittedly lengthy post on the other thread explains this in more detail viewtopic.php? ... &start=465). The major obstacle in the way at the moment is planning permission. If we can get that, the new stadium at Newmarket WILL happen.'" The thing that's concerning me about this is that the council have delayed the planning decision until September, which just so happens to be the date that the land offer expires. It's almost as if they are covering their bases with any pending review. If both sites had outline it would make any decision that little bit more unpredictable.

Quote ="RDM"The "promise" that was broken is Thornes Park - and it wasn't the club that failed to deliver on that promise, it was WMDC. In little over a year from the plug being pulled on TP, Trinity had identified a new site, found a developer and worked with them to develop the outline of what the stadium facilties would look like. Selective memories by various people turn what is actually a fantastic effort by the club into a tale of continued mis-management!!! IMHO the impact of the withdrawal of WMDC's offer of land to help secure the finance package is nowhere near as drastic as it first appears (my admittedly lengthy post on the other thread explains this in more detail viewtopic.php? ... &start=465). The major obstacle in the way at the moment is planning permission. If we can get that, the new stadium at Newmarket WILL happen.'" The thing that's concerning me about this is that the council have delayed the planning decision until September, which just so happens to be the date that the land offer expires. It's almost as if they are covering their bases with any pending review. If both sites had outline it would make any decision that little bit more unpredictable.

I think everybody's pretty much accepted that GH is going to be chosen (although I expect a few to come out and say they're not giving up on Newmarket yet).

The official stance of Trinity is they will not move to GH regardless of what an unnecessary review says.

Is that the official stance of the club or the official stance of SWAG? And what happens if the RFL reject Newmarket after? Where then?

Given that BOTH proposals still appear to have their own problems and the various amounts of spin from both camps does nothing to clear this up I don't think that either proposal can really be considered to be the most likely "winner" at this stage.

Cas have got outline planning & Wakey have got outline funding. Cas don't appear to have the funding as yet & Wakey are waiting on the outcome of the planning application.

If the council want a feasibility study, then the key focus will be on what each proposal delivers to the district of Wakefield so that WMDC can appear to have delivered "value for money" from the "donation" of land to support any finance package. As there isn't the option of moving both developments to a location that would be a little more acceptable to both sets of fans (i.e. building a joint stdium at J31) I would be surprised if the feasibility study found Glasshoughton to be a better location for the district of Wakefield rather than Newmarket.

Like you Fully, I would still prefer to see both clubs have their own ground. I still believe this is possible and if the Newmarket proposal can finance itself without the land made available by WMDC there's no reason why this shouldn't happen. Cas would then have the use of the full £4m of land value to support their funding package (albeit that it wouldn't actually get you an extra £4m from the bank, more like £2.5m to £3m).

Sorry that should've said unofficial. It's definitely SWAG's position, and as the club have created a business plan for moving to GH and come to the conclusion it would be akin to suicide in the long term then it pretty much identifys their intent.

I don't think the RFL would reject NM, however, if you meant the council then I don't believe they would. Box concerned enough to remove the threat of NM getting outline by delaying matters till after his imposed deadline. Also the scheme meets the requirements of the districts needs, whether the public agree or not the council want the distribution units.

Yes, sorry, I meant council not RFL.

Richardson should have some of this money we have got rid of brough and tronc, newton with drugs we must have some money to put in to help i.e.to help reduce this 2 million we need . Questions should be asked if not.

Taxman and the iva will have taken care of that lot imo

You seem to think that Ted has put cash into the club in the same way that Roman Abramovich has ploughed cash into Chelsea!!!

The club is definitely better off with the lower wage bill following the 3 departures and we got a relatively small amount for Brough (about £15k to £20k). The flip side of course is that we now have the wages being paid to Cooke, Kirmond & Leano, who we won't be paying as much in total as we paid the 3 who have left us but the net benefit at the end of the season will be no more than £50k.

£50k is not going to make any difference to the financing of the new ground. Obviously the land from the council would make it a slightly easier deal for the bank to support, but I think we may find that sufficient finance can be raised for Newmarket without the need for additional land from the council to support the deal.

Trying to look objectively, without my amber-tinted glasses:
Castleford have outline planning for the proposed stadium, granted with no objections.
Wakefield do not have outline planning permission, and the current application has many objections.

Castleford have appointed architects who are working on delivering detailed plans for the stadium and surrounding area.
Wakefield have not put the plans out to tender or involved any architects.

Wakefield have outline funding but this is from a company who want to built industrial units around the stadium, which will probably be rejected as the land is greenbelt.

And finally - the RFL are probably fed up of Wakefield using lies and deception to stay in Super League. The council probably realise this and therefore see Wakefield more at risk of losing their place in SL, so building the stadium there would just be silly!

Okay, maybe I kept those amber-tinted specs on!

Whatever colourered specs they are they arnt working, odds on favourite is no ground for either team one cant do timescale, one cant be afforded. neither team can afford to pay rent! WAKE UP!

One plus today is Batley winning the Northern Cup which takes away's one of Widnes's options for SL Status. Batley for the double ?

was really pleased about that! well done bulldogggies!

The detailed designs are already drawn up. DLA are the architects. If/when outline is granted they will be submitted to the planning department.

oooh i can hear you clutching at straws from here, which happens to be batley



however as a cas fan, i'd rather have wakey than widnes. for my money widnes bring nothing to super league.

So you are saying that Wakey have paid architects a lot of money to draw up detailed design plans on Newmarket when outline planning permission hasn't even been accepted?

dont believe either club,ilstand by that and never have,false promises always

What do you think the loan guaranteed by the council was for?

Yes they do .....more fans