It's interesting that she fails to mention that the 'many issues' raised by the campaign group have been totally debunked by the Inspector; or that against the 1,300 objection there were 15,000 statements of support; or that she herself has been criticised in his report for making baseless allegations during the inquiry, but having absolutely no evidence to back them up.

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"[url Admitting defeat! www.methley-village.com/html/res ... ation.html[/url'" Love it!

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"[url Admitting defeat! www.methley-village.com/html/res ... ation.html[/url'" Love it!

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"[url Admitting defeat! www.methley-village.com/html/res ... ation.html[/url'" Its interesting that when the Council approved the application the Methley Residents Association were demanding a Public Inquiry. They got what they wanted and the application was scruitinised by HM Planning Inspectorate with cases put by those in favour (YorkCourt and Wakefield MDC) and the only statutory objector Leeds CC. Interested Parties (the Public) were also permitted to put their views - it was completely open and anyone who wanted to was allowed to speak. MRA now dont like the outcome, what a surprise. I think they need to take a long hard look at what happened in the Inquiry and particularly the section where Interested Parties spoke. The cases put by those is favour were articulate, intelligent and factually correct wheres the objectors were an absolute shambles and laughable. We had guys speaking about birds but when questioned had not even read the Environmental Statements etc. submitted with the Planning Application. MRA's case was that there had not been adequate consultation but Wakefield MDC's Barrister pointed out in their own report a photograph of them and a report in the Express speaking about the consultation. Ms Fender then mounted a personal attack on Peter Box which I felt was libelous which the Inspector seemed very annoyed about and has mentioned in his report. Then a Mr Cubbage who didn't want to say where his business was located until pressed by the Inspector - surprisingly it was in Castleford- attacked a report by YorkCourt's property professionals without any property qualifications himself and then started claiming that YorkCourt had no money - not the purpose of the Inquiry. Again the Inspector was not amused. The objectors did a fantastic job of shooting themselves in the foot and really helped the case for the application but its hard to put forward a good argument when all its based on in NIMBY and trying to stop Wakefield Trinity getting a Stadium. MRA, you have had the Public Inquiry you demanded and the outcome is not in your favour, it's called democracy. Its heavy going but if you get chance to read the report it makes intereting reading.

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"[url Admitting defeat! www.methley-village.com/html/res ... ation.html[/url'" Its interesting that when the Council approved the application the Methley Residents Association were demanding a Public Inquiry. They got what they wanted and the application was scruitinised by HM Planning Inspectorate with cases put by those in favour (YorkCourt and Wakefield MDC) and the only statutory objector Leeds CC. Interested Parties (the Public) were also permitted to put their views - it was completely open and anyone who wanted to was allowed to speak. MRA now dont like the outcome, what a surprise. I think they need to take a long hard look at what happened in the Inquiry and particularly the section where Interested Parties spoke. The cases put by those is favour were articulate, intelligent and factually correct wheres the objectors were an absolute shambles and laughable. We had guys speaking about birds but when questioned had not even read the Environmental Statements etc. submitted with the Planning Application. MRA's case was that there had not been adequate consultation but Wakefield MDC's Barrister pointed out in their own report a photograph of them and a report in the Express speaking about the consultation. Ms Fender then mounted a personal attack on Peter Box which I felt was libelous which the Inspector seemed very annoyed about and has mentioned in his report. Then a Mr Cubbage who didn't want to say where his business was located until pressed by the Inspector - surprisingly it was in Castleford- attacked a report by YorkCourt's property professionals without any property qualifications himself and then started claiming that YorkCourt had no money - not the purpose of the Inquiry. Again the Inspector was not amused. The objectors did a fantastic job of shooting themselves in the foot and really helped the case for the application but its hard to put forward a good argument when all its based on in NIMBY and trying to stop Wakefield Trinity getting a Stadium. MRA, you have had the Public Inquiry you demanded and the outcome is not in your favour, it's called democracy. Its heavy going but if you get chance to read the report it makes intereting reading.

Well said that man!

Although I didn't like her style and I certainly didn't want her to win, she was passionate about something that was important to her. Unfortunately for her the only arguement she had was, I don't want this thing near me even if it is good for other people.

She tried her best and failed.

Lets be graceous in victory.

Agreed. But you have to have a solid arguement and I respect anyone who is passionate about a cause even if I don't agree with that cause. What I cannot respect is someone who to try to make a point makes statements that have no truth behind them and libels an individual and tries to blacken his character - that's just not on.

Personally I think you give this nasty individual far to much credit - still she got exactly what she deserved, so I'm happy she is unhappy.

There are/were people with genuine concerns which is what the PE was for, and then there are those who just wish to be contrary and the centre of attention. That's fine on here, but at an expensive PE it's nothing more than pure selfish indulgence.

She can go boil her head.

The Andrew Glover Stadium gets my vote.

This.

Had to laugh at this, giving themselves way too much credit there. All that would would’ve been a given with or without a campaign ‘group’.

Correct, pretty standard conditions on a major planning application, nothing to do with the campaign group. The Council will have had them covered.

I do take your point. I editted my comment as I was going say more about"her style" but decide that wasn' being graceous in victory.
Where she has stepped over the mark I was probably less upset than those she directed her lies at so can understand the comments against her......but from my point of view, she actually helped the decision. She was not well accepted in the hearing and the fact that she lead with inaccuracies helped us, once we had the chance to put the record straight. There is no Fender love from me, but in some ways it was good that she was the one who was most vocal as it casts an integrity question on the rest.

I think John Kear should also be near the top of the thank you list.
I dread to think where the club would have ended up had we been relegated at the end of the "million pound game" season and
although Ted Richardson became disliked by many, it was he that started this process, before all the delays kicked in.

Onwards and upwards for the Mighty Trin

It's taken a while but I finally got round to reading the report.
I'm quite impressed at the content and can understand why it took so long.

I attended the hearing on a couple of days and felt at the time that the Chairperson (who's name eludes me) was quite impressed with our case and not so impressed by the LCC case. I wasn't there for the local residents part.

The one thing that jumped out at me was this comment:
“2.124 This Inquiry is unusual in that it has many supporters of the development as well as opponents of the development. It is unusual to attract supporters as opposed to objectors. The views of the many thousands of supporters should be given weight, because they relate to planning matters and the key needs that lie at the heart of this application:”

Along with all the hard work from the leaders of the cause in this battle which is undisputed, it cannot be underestimated the value of the letters that were written from supports (both Trinity and local residents as it says later in the document). Credit to those who started the campaign and credit to those who made the effort to send them in.

Also, the tone of voice of the document is pretty clear too. When talking about the individuals who spoke, there was clear respect shown to the evidence given from "our team" and even more clear the view for the objectors with words like "no challenge", Disappointing evidence" and "no foundation" often used.

Well done all!

Thought this was worth posting too as I've seen a couple of questions on it.
I know its early planning details but it shows intent:

Stadium
12,000 capacity with 7,000 seats and 5,000 standing
17 boxes
Restaurant for 400
800 space car park with potential for park and ride facility
28 coach parking spaces
644 cycle parking spaces
250 motor cycle parking spaces

Agree.

Sounds excellent, i do wonder if there's a need for so many motorbike and Cycle places, maybe when they're actually made it won't look that many.

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"[url Admitting defeat! www.methley-village.com/html/res ... ation.html[/url'" " We can see her sneaking out, we can see her sneaking out!!"

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"[url Admitting defeat! www.methley-village.com/html/res ... ation.html[/url'" " We can see her sneaking out, we can see her sneaking out!!"

It's usually to do with Green Travel Plans or something like that as they encourage cycle use. Very admirable but in my experience I have seen buildings that have provided cycle storage facilities with the bike sheds lying empty but nothing wrong with providing the spaces. I for one will not be cycling to Newmarket but I hope many do.

I will!

I'm super-impressed with the provision of cycle-spaces; hopefully, any link roads or road alterations will also include provision for cyclists.

Me too, but not in these conditions!

I like cycling in the rain - as me old man used to say, you only get wet once!

Not so bad when you come home for a bath - but we're going to a lot of trouble here to get us all under a roof when we watch a game - seems a bit self defeating if you're soaked to your duds before kick-off!

Time has flown this week, but now it's time to answer this thread...

I thank you all for your comments, they are flattering indeed and very much appreciated.

Why do this? Well, I love this City and I love this club and the two go hand in hand. 12 years ago someone asked me to get involved with a new supporters group and that person, and a few others, had the faith in me to hand me the top job - what else should you do but accept that and try and make the best of it?

Being involved with this club since then has been an incredible journey - for me and my family, but it has been worth every ounce of energy to me, not just because of the result yesterday (although that is brilliant and I am bursting with pride right now), but because of the wonderful people I have had the privilidge to meet and enjoy the company of - purely down to the sharing of my love of all things Wakefield and particularly Trinity.

People from WISA, WiSCA, SWAG, RfN and the Supporters Trust - even from the old Supporters Club with whom we have had some friction at times, but there are some great people in all of these groups who I would never have met except through Wakefield Trinity Wildcats. We are a community - or more of a family than that even - which means that sometimes we disagree on the best way forward, but we always agree on what we want ultimately - a club that can succeed and bring Civic Pride back to Wakefield - and perhaps the future IA's of the world may then grow up as young Wildcats and not be faced with the persecution and embarassment many of us have suffered from being associated with our club.

I have mentioned several times that this is a joint effort, I have tried to funnel the focus towards our goal but could achieve nothing without us all pulling in one direction and, in particular when completing the petition, I do not believe that any one thing has pulled us together more than we have seen for NM.

My greatest thanks have to go my colleagues at SWAG; to Ian; to Sue; to Judith and Phil and very much to Jonathan - who came along when we needed a fresh view and impetus and gave us so much more - not bad for a Whino (sorry IA), but also to the likes of many of you on here - especially the mods - you are all part of the machine behind what makes this club so great!



Anyway, enough mumbo jumbo from me - all you need to know really is that given the time over again I would change nothing and would do it all over again - it's been, and will now continue to be for decades to come, a blast!