Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:42 pm  

youngcat wrote:

Well i have just read his response. He has not slagged us of at all nor has he objected to NM.

He confrimed that they would take part in a council led feasability study and we wouldn't. He also says that Wakey can play at J32 if needed.

All we are doing is creating more publicity that we were not confident enough to up against Glasshoughton.

This may not be popular to some, but what he has sais has been said before. We have said we would welcome the Tigers to play at NM. And we did refuse to take part in the feasability study.

We should spend our time supporting our plans, in stead of going over the top like some have on here.

Are u for real ?

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:43 pm  

There's no way on earth youngcat is a WTW fan.

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:45 pm  

youngcat wrote:

Well i have just read his response. He has not slagged us of at all nor has he objected to NM.

He confrimed that they would take part in a council led feasability study and we wouldn't. He also says that Wakey can play at J32 if needed.

All we are doing is creating more publicity that we were not confident enough to up against Glasshoughton.

This may not be popular to some, but what he has sais has been said before. We have said we would welcome the Tigers to play at NM. And we did refuse to take part in the feasability study.

We should spend our time supporting our plans, in stead of going over the top like some have on here.

It's not what he said, because I doubt it will carry any weight, it's the fact that he said it. He is objecting by implication, by stating that we can play at Glasshoughton, thus suggesting that there is no need for Newmarket, and that we acted unreasonably. He doesn't use the word "object" but he tries to give reasons why the scheme is unnecessary.

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:45 pm  

"Wakefield Trinity are maintaining a diplomatic silence over the discovery that Richard Wright, the chief executive of their local rivals Castleford, has CONTRIBUTED to the case AGAINST their application for a new stadium."

"Wright has yet to respond to the storm caused by his letter, although Castleford have promised a statement on Wednesday."

"Leeds city council, which is challenging the development because it involves greenbelt land, produced a batch of documents including a letter from Wright which confirmed that Wakefield have previously rejected the opportunity to share a stadium that Castleford HOPE to build a couple of junctions along the M62 – although their plans are DEPENDENT on planning permission being granted for a supermarket to be built on the site of their current home in the town at Wheldon Road."

nice report

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:49 pm  

Right, I don't really intend to get into a debate on this but will say my piece.

Barton Willmore are acting on behalf of an objector and possibly being jointly financed by another developer who has had their site rejected for Newmarket. We don't know, we think we know, but don't for certain.

Barton Willmore have written to Richard Wright and asked him to write a letter, exactly what they have asked him we don't know... but they have asked him to write that letter. Barton Willmore are a well established, respected and professional planning consultancy, I am sure that they will have not misrepresented themselves to him and they will have explained who they are, whom they are acting on behalf of and why they would like this information. I don't believe Barton Willmore would have tricked Richard Wright into writing this letter, they have asked for it and he has taken the decision to write this letter. I think that Barton Willmore will have seen this as a punt worth taking. They clearly had decided on this as one of their arguments against Newmarket, so they would have gone down this route no matter what RW did or didn't write. I suspect they might have been surprised and pleased to get a reply!

The issue for me comes right here! I can't see anyway that Richard Wright did not know for whom and for why he was asked to write this letter. As many people have posted, other than a bit of Cas spin, the content of the letter is nothing that RW has not said before in the press pre-July.

He has taken a decision to write this letter in the full knowledge of what they were going to use it for, to use it to object to Newmarket!!! I am sorry but at this point Richard should have written back, very politely, and said that he did not wish to comment any further and that his previous comments on this matter are available in media records.

Simple!

He didn't do that and that is very disappointing and I think it lacks professional integrity and common courtesy!

I think that the some of the posters from Cas who are defending his decision should actually just put the boot on the other foot. If James Elston had been asked and then written to a group objecting to WR, maybe Edinburgh House, saying that Castleford could ground share at Newmarket, intimating that there is no need to build a supermarket on the WR site how would Cas fans feel?

Come on, be honest?

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:49 pm  

Wakefield No 1 wrote:

But the first thing you should ask yourself is WHY SAY ANYTHING AT ALL?? why? what is the agenda of a man who could have said nothing but CHOSE to comment to a group who were against our new ground? with 'friends' like that...

But we just keep highlighting the point that we would not take part into the council feasability study. We are now telling everyone that fact, that is my point. Other clubs fans, the media and maybe those at the council will draw the conclusion that we were running scared and they were not.

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:55 pm  

maxswaby wrote:

"Wakefield Trinity are maintaining a diplomatic silence over the discovery that Richard Wright, the chief executive of their local rivals Castleford, has CONTRIBUTED to the case AGAINST their application for a new stadium."

"Wright has yet to respond to the storm caused by his letter, although Castleford have promised a statement on Wednesday."

"Leeds city council, which is challenging the development because it involves greenbelt land, produced a batch of documents including a letter from Wright which confirmed that Wakefield have previously rejected the opportunity to share a stadium that Castleford HOPE to build a couple of junctions along the M62 – although their plans are DEPENDENT on planning permission being granted for a supermarket to be built on the site of their current home in the town at Wheldon Road."

nice report

Link?

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:00 pm  

RebelRebel wrote: Link? http://m.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/dec/ ... pe=article

RebelRebel wrote: Link? http://m.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/dec/ ... pe=article

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:11 pm  

maxswaby wrote:

http://m.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/dec/06/wakefield-castleford-stadium?cat=sport&type=article

The neutral eye view of the whole situation.

I think the club are right to maintain their diplomatic silence. Treat this mischief-making with the contempt it deserves.

Re: Public Inquiry : Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:12 pm  

Just wait until Yorkcourt read out the list of "pre-let" agreements they have.
If government wants the private sector to "pick up the slack" this will make their slack "rock hard".

This list will show definitively that NM is sustainable, the business is already there; signed up & chomping at the bit to get going.

Tesco's are 100% on board with NM & that's only the lions share.....

Business such as this can't be ignored, especially in times like these. You know it, I know it, Eric Pickles knows it & evidently Richard Wright knows it (which is why he's had to resort to moves such as this!).

FWIW I think WR's comments could come back & haunt him in a number of ways.
1. WTW are going to have a "frosty" relationship with him/CT, not good to have with your biggest crowd puller....

2. He's shown his true colours to all the RL family. Who will want to do business with someone obviously that low/desperate/underhanded.

3. If wind blows against him he's effectively signed his own warrant. Before this he MAY have been able to survive taking CT to NM- "The economy...boo hoo... The WMDC... boo hoo... The chemical licence... Boo hoo.. Ben Bailey... Opus/Tesco (watch this space).... Boo hoo.. But I kept us in SL by bring us to NM!!!"
Now for me he's screwed should it come to this.

Should it ever come to #3 I'm sure he'll have many a (red, white & blue) man happy to help him pack before his "midnight flit", just before the mass of track suits and pitchforks at his door!