I for one have not taken as much interest as I should have , mainly because I never thought Newmarket was the right location. I have left it to more informed supporters to provide feed back and keep the information flowing. I have no doubt that the people who grasped the nettle did so for all the right reasons and the lack of any funding should and must be taken in to account.
The end result seems to be that a new stadium once again seems unlikely and that money for B V will not be provided.
Unless anyone has or can provide legal advice, professional advice, or some kind of funding nothing can be added.
Just what the next steps are will be decided over the coming weeks by people better informed than me and I wish them all the best.

I think its fantastic that we have people like trb, sandal cat and IA who have put so much into the fight for our new ground and I say long may they continue as, as a club and a community we would be much worse off without their efforts. But one thing in this whole" farce" as it seems to be becoming that worries me is that when TRB says he asked people on the committee if they had any recollection of being told that newcold would not count towards the 106, all they had in reply was they could not recall this being said.
Now this could just be me being pedantic but I would feel much more comfortable with a solid no and if this does end up in the courts then I think a statement of I cant remember this being said could be very easy to pull apart.

So am I correct in thinking that the go ahead for the stand alone NC monstrosity was given prior to members of SWAG becoming members of the trust?

That's what it sounds like isn't it

Yes.

The point that Sandal Cat is trying to get over and what you and others (bigalf inc.) are missing is this. It does not essentially matter what was written down or not, the fundamental point is that as a s106 is land charge then you can't simply avoid it by banging in another application and using some words in the application documentation to get you around planning law. Simple as that!

The discussion around what was and was not written down at the time has only come about from WMDC claiming they took legal advice & that they 'told' certain people and that no objections were received. The counter point we have been making it was not at all clear (certainly to the public and layman) and as much as Bigalf is banging on about it being clear because they wrote it was legal seperate, then that is just bull, because we are still arguing about it and if that is what they wanted to convey then it should have been written large and made ultra-clear from the outset. So why wasn't it?

However, if and when it comes to having this in front if a high court judge, then what matters is did WMDC act unlawfully or ultra-varies in granting permission for Newcold outside of the UU? We believe, as does our lawyer, that they probably did and therefore it is this upon this which we expect any ruling to hinge, the discussion around how they may or may not have tried to justify or alert the general public that this was their intention, is purely just mitigation.

You can write what the hell you like trying to justify (or not) what you may (or may not) be intending to do, but if it is ultimately an unlawfully act, it changes absolutely nothing and certainly does not change the law or absolve you from being lawful in your actions.

Hopefully, this clears that up?

Fair enough. All i will say is surely then it would be better to get on with the court action then so we know where we stand as soon as possible. Forget about protests, facebook pages and piddling about with two-faced politicians and get the process going if you think that is the only option.

Give over!

It doesn't say that Englebert Humperdink won't duet with buster Bloodvessel in a concert to be held on top of the Newcold building either, maybe Sir Rodney should have checked that one out as well.

The fact is it is the Councils duty to uphold the U U as part of its obligations during the planning process. As SC says, at the time, why would anyone be looking for a loophole being used.

If you don't care why post such a long winded load of crap - just go and do us all a favour you utter disgrace to Rugby League.

Actually that can't happen, concerts aren't permitted under under the planning permission....

And with that sentence you've just undone your own argument.
Why would think a concert could take place if it's against the planning law. If wmdc now announced the concert we'd all be pointing at the line about not being in any way linked to the original planning so it was obvious they were going to hold a concert. Why didn't you object?

I was being sarcastic...

why are we blaming everyone apart from the previous owners and board, If it wasn't for Wakefield council where would we be?! people seen to forget they have helped us in the past. Yes I am as gutted at the current situation but playing the blame game isn't going to do anything.

I for one cant see any light at the end of the tunnel............

I cant see us being able to buy the super bowl and Oasis gym(which is under offer) cause even if we where given some money this could easily take £1,000,000 to acquire and then even if we did get that how do we get the stadium back from BOI? I do genuinely think we need to ground share it would cost less than the 250k a year we are spending now.

Please tell us where you would like to build this shared ground. You won't get a more central site than Newmarket.

Under offer? Is this correct?

Quote ="Khlav Kalash"Under offer? Is this correct?'" According to the estate agents advert yes.... www.christie.com/en/leisure_oppo ... /wakefield

Quote ="Khlav Kalash"Under offer? Is this correct?'" According to the estate agents advert yes.... www.christie.com/en/leisure_oppo ... /wakefield

Please tell me where I implied we build one?! if I don't think we can afford to build one for ourselves why would I think we could build one to share........

it was meant that we share with a club with a ground....

just a quick one . would it make a difference for us to object to the next phase of buildings. ie the new Mc Cains chip facility and the new storage facility, which are planned after the great white lump is finished.

Quote ="wtw"According to the estate agents advert yes.... www.christie.com/en/leisure_oppo ... /wakefield'" If its the offer I think it is it fell through. I don't think Christies are the agent any more as there is another agents sign up.

Quote ="wtw"According to the estate agents advert yes.... www.christie.com/en/leisure_oppo ... /wakefield'" If its the offer I think it is it fell through. I don't think Christies are the agent any more as there is another agents sign up.

In simple terms yes, we will object to the next planning application on the grounds that the previous application was excluded from the S106 Agreement. We will also ask as many of you to object as well.

Unless of course that application is a reserve matters application and leads to the building of the Community Stadium.

From what iv heard they are reluctant to take on new customers...

It ultimatley depends on whether you think that if the council have acted unlawfully, we should let them off?

Also, given what we have know about Newcold has been known for some time, and we have spent ALL of that time trying to do exactly what you suggest, not play the blame game, how much longer do we try to do this and again, do we then not fight at all and give in?

Thirdly, who do the club share with (outside the City of Wakefield) and given that non-match day revenue is the key to a successful club how is that achieved renting a third-party stadium outside of Wakefield?

I see your point exactly but would we be in a worse financial situation ground sharing?! I don't think we would!

We can blame and blame and blame it won't change what's happened and while complaining let's try and resolve the problems rather thank banking on getting anything from YC or the council!!

One quick question, if we do take legal action as it looks likely we will have to get anywhere and we win our case and NC is put on the 106 what do people think would happen.
The 2m from the council looks as though its long gone and I don't see YC having x millions to build us a ground.
So all I want to know is what are wwe hoping to get if we win.

I don't think we'll get anything, however it may stop YC from developing the site further.