Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:33 pm  

Not starting anything, I simply think the two situations are the same.

RW was asked to comment on Castleford Tigers' position on ground sharing. He answered. He no more stuck the boot into Wakefield than Elston did to Cas at licencing time by pointing out they had a number of things that Cas didn't have.

Your own paranoia and insecurity is leading you to call him an "awful terrible man", when in fact all he did was answer a simple question with factually accurate info that was in the public domain.

I'm not misguided at all, but I forgive you for saying that. Fear makes people do some odd things.

FWIW I hope it all goes well for Wakey, but the hysterical over-reaction to this non-story is just bizarre.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:39 pm  

Any chance the Cas v Wakey tedium can have it's own thread? Preferably on one of their forums? Then we can get back to this thread simply reporting general stadium progress.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:53 pm  

Why don't you just talk to yourself in a darkened room so you don't have to suffer the tedium of other people's opinions?

Get a grip. Read another thread if you don't like it.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:47 pm  

The desperate act of a desperate man. Just like a spoilt child who can't have a new toy, he's doing his best to scupper the chances of his 'friend' getting one.

In reality, I think he has long known that Cas have virtualy zero chance of funding a new stadium - read through his statements in The Pontefract and Castleford Express over the last 8-9 months.

One glaring fact that no one seems to have questioned is the statement that Opus will build Cas a new ground at GH should the supermarket go ahead. AFAIK the GH site is owned by Waystone. I can hardy see them agreeing to what is basically a competitor coming along and taking over on their 'manor'?

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:57 pm  

TypingMonkey wrote:

Not starting anything, I simply think the two situations are the same.

RW was asked to comment on Castleford Tigers' position on ground sharing. He answered. He no more stuck the boot into Wakefield than Elston did to Cas at licencing time by pointing out they had a number of things that Cas didn't have.

Your own paranoia and insecurity is leading you to call him an "awful terrible man", when in fact all he did was answer a simple question with factually accurate info that was in the public domain.

I'm not misguided at all, but I forgive you for saying that. Fear makes people do some odd things.

FWIW I hope it all goes well for Wakey, but the hysterical over-reaction to this non-story is just bizarre.

Well why didn't he, instead of responding to the objectors, knowing exactly what the response would be and the provocation it would cause, why didn't he send this information out to all parties involved in the PI, so not to appear like he has a agenda, you know like what all guys who are in his position would do, I know it's a lot to ask. Why not just refuse and tell them the information is already out there in the public domain because he has a conflict of interests. I think you'd have to be a bit stupid or a Cas apologist not to realize what he was up to.
By the way save the pseudo-intellectual psychobabble for someone who cares because frankly it's a bit cringe-worthy.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:59 pm  

TypingMonkey wrote:

Not starting anything, I simply think the two situations are the same.

RW was asked to comment on Castleford Tigers' position on ground sharing. He answered. He no more stuck the boot into Wakefield than Elston did to Cas at licencing time by pointing out they had a number of things that Cas didn't have.

Your own paranoia and insecurity is leading you to call him an "awful terrible man", when in fact all he did was answer a simple question with factually accurate info that was in the public domain.

I'm not misguided at all, but I forgive you for saying that. Fear makes people do some odd things.

FWIW I hope it all goes well for Wakey, but the hysterical over-reaction to this non-story is just bizarre.

You still co continue to miss the actual point and the thing most people actually have an issue with!

He was asked to comment ONLY by Barton Willmore, who are representing and acting solely on the behalf of a paying client, who is objecting to the Newmarket development at the Public Inquiry. Barton Willmore will have had to tell him whom they were working for and for what end... if they haven't done this, they could find themselves in serious trouble for misrepresenting themselves to him.

The letter RW wrote back was to Barton Willmore, the company acting solely and on behalf of a client objecting to the Newmarket development. It was requested by a commercial company with a legitimate and genuine vested interest in conformation of that information.

If you and some (by no means all by a long way) of your fellow Cas supporters fail to understand this important detail then you will continue to fail to understand why people are upset and angry at his actions.

That really is it now!

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:00 pm  

Mr Dog wrote: One glaring fact that no one seems to have questioned is the statement that Opus will build Cas a new ground at GH should the supermarket go ahead. AFAIK the GH site is owned by Waystone. I can hardy see them agreeing to what is basically a competitor coming along and taking over on their 'manor'? Waystone handed the land over to Cas over a year ago..that was in the paper did you not read it that week or just conveniently forget because it goes against your agenda? Oh and as most Cas fans have been trying to say, mountain out of a mole hill: http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 Inflatable_Armadillo wrote: fail to understand why people are upset and angry at his actions. Because as usual they're being over-sensitive and letting that chip on their shoulder get in the way of the fact everything he said is in the public domain and all he did was confirm 2 FACTS...how about you concentrate on the other 30 pages of objections and not a 200 word confirmation by RW which was NOT an objection, just a reiteration of facts.

Mr Dog wrote: One glaring fact that no one seems to have questioned is the statement that Opus will build Cas a new ground at GH should the supermarket go ahead. AFAIK the GH site is owned by Waystone. I can hardy see them agreeing to what is basically a competitor coming along and taking over on their 'manor'? Waystone handed the land over to Cas over a year ago..that was in the paper did you not read it that week or just conveniently forget because it goes against your agenda? Oh and as most Cas fans have been trying to say, mountain out of a mole hill: http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 Inflatable_Armadillo wrote: fail to understand why people are upset and angry at his actions. Because as usual they're being over-sensitive and letting that chip on their shoulder get in the way of the fact everything he said is in the public domain and all he did was confirm 2 FACTS...how about you concentrate on the other 30 pages of objections and not a 200 word confirmation by RW which was NOT an objection, just a reiteration of facts.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:03 pm  

SEB wrote:

Any chance the Cas v Wakey tedium can have it's own thread? Preferably on one of their forums? Then we can get back to this thread simply reporting general stadium progress.

I understand what you mean and I notice you are a mod, but I think this is worthy of a VT thread, which can be seen as neutral ground, for this debate.

You can split the current stuff on Cas & Wakey out, but would suggest that may be doomed to fail and you might as well leave it be? Mods (not sure if you are a VT mod) call?

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:34 pm  

Gronk! wrote:

Waystone handed the land over to Cas over a year ago...

Can you provide a link that states that they have been GIVEN the land because I can't find one?

The agreement I believe you're referring to assumes that Waystone will be the developer - in fact they talk about developing other leisure facilities alongside the stadium. Even if they have given Cas the land I'm sure there'll be a clause to ensure that they are the developers. As I've already said I really can't see them allowing Opus or anyone else to move in.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:42 pm  

Mr Dog wrote:

Can you provide a link that states that they have been GIVEN the land because I can't find one?

The agreement I believe you're referring to assumes that Waystone will be the developer - in fact they talk about developing other leisure facilities alongside the stadium. Even if they have given Cas the land I'm sure there'll be a clause to ensure that they are the developers. As I've already said I really can't see them allowing Opus or anyone else to move in.

Yes Waystone are the developers, Opus building on Wheldon Road has nothing to do with them - just like when Ben Bailey were going to build on Wheldon Road