wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/2010/07/ ... -wildcats/

wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/2010/07/ ... -wildcats/

great statement

There will be a also be a SWAG statement in due course.

TRB, can you clarify what the club mean by a review of Glasshoughton/Newmarket? I hope the council aren't pushing the groundshare agenda. I would be sincerely p*ssed off, if so.

Pro's and Con's of each site.

I think they are,i also think this is why the planning is being delayed on Newmarket,until they can thrash out which would be best for the council,Newmarket or Glasshoughton

Pros of Glasshoughton
- It's in Cas.

Cons of Glasshoughton
- Wakefield fans won't want to travel

Pros of Newmarket
- It's in Wakefield

Cons of Newmarket
- Cas fans won't want to travel.

Easy - solution, stadium each, please.

Shouldn't be about what's best for the Council, it should be about what is best for both clubs. A groundshare is the LAST resort for either club.

I dont disagree Fully.

But i reckon the council will be looking at which site will give them the most council facilities at the least cost to the council.

If we're to assume everything is fine with Castleford's funding for Glasshoughton i don't really see what the issue is regarding either stadium. From what i gather Newmarket is to be funded by the developer with a share coming from the sale of Belle Vue. Why would the Council need to look at what is best for them when both clubs have found ways to finance their own stadiums?

At least this is showing some movement. I would much rather share on either site than not get a franchise.

Front page of Wakey Express is calling for a ground share, from the image I saw on Facebook earlier.

COMMON GROUND - is the headline.

'Wildcats and Tigers look set to share same stadium due to cash shortage' is the sub-title.

[urlhttp://www.facebook.com/#!/notes/wakefield-express/this-weeks-express/414238279643[/url

its the front page of tomorrows wakey express according to the express facebook page,saying both clubs have been told to ground share by the council,

[i[FULLY WROTE:TRB, can you clarify what the club mean by a review of Glasshoughton/Newmarket? I hope the council aren't pushing the groundshare agenda. I would be sincerely p*ssed off, if so.[/i

you need to live in a real world and look at the economic climate

i probably live at the farthest extreme of wmdc away from newmarket, and it would inconvenience me greatly.

but we need to get real - both us and cas.

newmarket is an ideal location for a ground share.

not a merger - a ground share. would secure the future for both clubs and help both to be more of a force in super league

Words fail me.

No, it isn't. That would see the death-knell of Castleford Tigers.

Well something doesn't add up here. Earlier this week we had Dick Wright promising plans will be out shortly and full planning permission will be going in. We also have Sir Rodney and us saying it's full steam ahead! So where does the Wakey Express headline come from? Just a cheap headline hopefully! But what is worrying is that all we have at the moment from both clubs is nothing but hot air!

Box

Don't understand!!

If both schemes are (fully?) privately funded, why is there a cash shortage? What does this have to do with WMDC, other than the planning permission? Are the council putting any funds into either (or both) of the schemes? I was under the impession the answer was no!!

And what does this have to do with council? Neither club is asking for handouts from the council so where has this come from and why?

When are SWAG going to release their statement?

..and Glasshoughton would be the same for Wakefield Trinity Wildcats!!

The value of the loaned land.

Later this evening.

Which is why a groundshare is a last resort - and it should only be agreed if the RFL allow us more time to get the stadium in order in a completely neutral location away from Wakefield and away from Castleford that is not Glasshoughton and not Newmarket - i.e. Normanton.

It must be a hell of a value,in order to give them this amount of control over two essetially privately funded developments.