: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:50 am  

SEB wrote:

I think you - as usual - are over simplifying and jumping to ill-informed conclusions. You are implying that Salford don't really want a stadium, they just to want to look like they want one. A lot of hard work and effort will have gone into their stadium project and they must be gutted things keep going wrong. Remember we were extremely fortunate Tesco wanted to build a store in the town and couldn't do it without us.

And as others have said - franchises were not simply awarded on stadium related criteria.

Im sorry Seb but I object to your somewhat over critical analysis of my post and also the way you have decided to comunicate it.

Your reply IMO is a personal attack and is not reasonable debate.

As for your comment about Tesco's, are you seriously telling me that their new store was dependent on Warrington Wolves. Tesco's is a giant entity and have massive influence on all things including political decisons both at local and central government. If they wanted a new store in Warrington they would get one simple as.

The reliance was the other way round, ie no tescos no new stadium.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:53 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

Im sorry Seb but I object to your somewhat over critical analysis of my post and also the way you have decided to comunicate it.

Your reply IMO is a personal attack and is not reasonable debate.

As for your comment about Tesco's, are you seriously telling me that their new store was dependent on Warrington Wolves. Tesco's is a giant entity and have massive influence on all things including political decisons both at local and central government. If they wanted a new store in Warrington they would get one simple as.

The reliance was the other way round, ie no tescos no new stadium.

Tesco's store was entirely dependent on Warrington Wolves they had been trying for years to get a big store in but as the council had recently spent A LOT OF MONEY on the Cockhedge Centre they turned them down. The stadium being funded was the answer.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:56 am  

Lefty wrote:

Tesco's store was entirely dependent on Warrington Wolves they had been trying for years to get a big store in but as the council had recently spent A LOT OF MONEY on the Cockhedge Centre they turned them down. The stadium being funded was the answer.

Where exactly did the funding come from for the new stadium?

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:58 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

Where exactly did the funding come from for the new stadium?

I'm going to take a shot in the dark here, but:

The council, who received the funding from Tesco's for being allowed to build a superstore within the town?

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:59 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

Im sorry Seb but I object to your somewhat over critical analysis of my post and also the way you have decided to comunicate it.

Your reply IMO is a personal attack and is not reasonable debate.

Do you have to turn everything into an argument? Get over yourself. The irony is you accuse me of strong views, yet it's you that starts all these threads with very strong views, and object when anyone offers an alternative perspective - and some truth to counter your guesswork.

Tones Tackle wrote:

As for your comment about Tesco's, are you seriously telling me that their new store was dependent on Warrington Wolves.

Yes. The community benefit of the stadium was THE factor that secured planning permission for a project that contravened national and local planning policy.

Tones Tackle wrote:

Tesco's is a giant entity and have massive influence on all things including political decisons both at local and central government. If they wanted a new store in Warrington they would get one simple as.

No, wrong. They tried and failed TWICE to secure planning permission, once with a retail park and once with a mixed use retail/residential. They were denied planning permission both times.

Tones Tackle wrote:

The reliance was the other way round, ie no tescos no new stadium.

The reliance was mutual - they needed us for planning permission, we needed them for finance.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:00 am  

RAI of Sunshine wrote:

I'm going to take a shot in the dark here, but:

The council, who received the funding from Tesco's for being allowed to build a superstore within the town?

Er, no, that's bribery! Quite simply - Tesco funded the stadium build.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:03 am  

SEB wrote:

Er, no, that's bribery! Quite simply - Tesco funded the stadium build.

I did say it was a shot in the dark. Turns out the gun was pointing towards me.

I'm going to make a complaint against you now for pointing out that I made a daft suggestion.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:04 am  

RAI of Sunshine wrote:

:lol: I did say it was a shot in the dark. Turns out the gun was pointing towards me.

I'm going to make a complaint against you know for pointing out that I made a daft suggestion.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:52 pm  

£10m to tesco is like a tenner to me and you so it was well worth it for them.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:07 pm  

Tones Tackle wrote:

This is exactly why teams like Leigh and Widnes should have been given a licence instead of Salford, wakey and celtic.

Yet another botch up from the RFL.

Wakey shouldn't have a license? Sitting 5th in the table and on the same points as Leeds? Don't know where you've got your superiority complex from but Wakey have so far more than justified their license.

Dawson wrote:

I'd rather have teams that can compete and play decent rugby than useless teams with good (but empty) stadiums

Completely agree with that. I understand the RFL wanting to make sure rugby grounds have certain standards and facilities but there is way more important criteria than whether a team's stadium will be ready in 2010, 2011 or 2012. I'd much rather have a competitive league than Leigh (for example) who have a lovely stadium but will get hammered each week.

Rugbychick