Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:52 am  

TheTigersVOR wrote:

Oh my, i see you are on the general attack again. As you choose to post on our board on a regular basis i thought i would join you where you are most likely welcome and help you out again.
At least in another of your above posts you choose to single out Richard to vent your frustration where it is better directed - the route cause of your dismay. However i note you still struggle to resist the chance to elaborate further and decide to attack Castleford's fans/general public or town in your usual ways as you throw the teddy out after hearing or reading some thing that upset you -bless (stick to your battles with Neverdid, they are the ones you nearly win before showing yourself up in the process).
1) Regardless of Richards reply to we will both still remain one of each others biggest crowd pullers (maybe with a little extra spice after the passion this issue has created) lets be honest the clubs dont exactly have a loving relationship prior to this episode do we, both Wright and Glover have made derogatory comments about each other before franchise decisions to aid each others cause.
2) Rival clubs fall out on many occasions, all part of looking after your own business interests (Bradford/Leeds over Harris just as an example) life goes on we will both upset each other further in future.
3) If this means we would be unwelcome at NM if GH falls through, it would be my preference, i will still be proud to follow Cas in the National leagues as i have previously and im sure Richard would be long gone before he needed help packing, many Cas fans may feel different, many the same (just as if the boot was on the other foot).
I dont own a track suit or a pitchfork however but i get a feeling if i had the need i would know where to come to find one

For the record before i have to reply to a barrage of nonsense - i will await an official statement from one or both of the clubs regarding this issue/letter before making a better informed personal opinion, thus far it seems a question was asked and an answer was given - one that made no direct comment on NM just facts that are already open in the public domain - tbc.
Either way i bid you all well in your quest for your new home - i understand why you would be defensive when some thing in appearance goes against what you are trying to achieve, i also truly believe this issue would be/is already on an objectors agenda and will have no lesser or greater impact than it would have if Richards reply was - no comment (if anything it may only reflect on him in a negative way) !

Regards.

I presume you have read the letter, its on here somewhere if you haven't.
In his letter, (which he didn't have to write, would have been best advised not to have wrote, and would clearly have seen the inflamatory nature of his writing it) he has caused provocatation where it was not needed.
I can understand objectors seeing value in his negative comment, however i think he has only served to show up what a desperate position both he and cas are in regarding their own future.
RW has offered his views on GH to all that will listen in his typical style, with confidence with enthusiasm etc.
Now why if he is so confident would he need to try and detract from our development, if he has so little concern for it, he has stated you are so far down the track with development of GH, you future is assured, surely?
Apart from it being bad form from RW, involving himself in such a way in something that concerns him so little, i think it is beginning to show the cracks in his very fragile facade.
These are my views on his letter:
1) You are not very far down the track with GH, you have all the fluff and none of the substance to make the build happen (ie £££££)
2) Wakefield only objected to the GH focus of the feasibility study, as it was not a considered balanced view, on the strengths of both developments.
FWIW my view is that RW always new GH was going to be a financial struggle (as it has proven to be) but because of his grandstanding nature, and his own shaky position at Cas, he has had to follow this through.
When Wakefield "refused to cooperate" with the feasibility study, he knew IMO it was his last chance saloon, and the doors had been slammed shut on him, hence he is now doing what he can to throw a spanner in the NM works, simply out of spite.
I think this is the beginning of the end for RW, i thing in recent years he has become very unpopular within WR and his popularity with those that don't cling on to his every word in the Cas support base is also slipping drastically.
I would love to see this story make the league express next week so the rest of RL can make for themselves what kind of a man RW is and what kind of spiteful act he has chosen to involve himself in on the behalf of Cas.
I will offer my full apology on the cas forum, if i am wrong, but i will state on record, that cas will not get GH in the near future, and Cas never were going to, but RW has strung the supporters along in order to keep himself in a job, but ultimately he will go because of it.

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:06 am  

OK, my take on it is this:

Richard Wright was asked to comment, he chose to do so and once again to try and make Cas's progress look better than ours.

Yes, what he said was all stuff that is in the public domain, but as usual he neglects to mention the more salient points.
How can we share a stadium at Glasshoughton that is looking unlikely to be built anytime soon? There is NOTHING to share!!
By suggesting that we could share he gives the impression that our "need" for a stadium at Newmarket is not essential.
Any Cas or Wakey fan in their right mind knows that if one or either of us are not in a new ground for the next round of franchises we are GONE!!
If we do not get the go-ahead for Newmarket, Yorkcourt will not transfer the funding to Glasshoughton (why would they, they are really only interested in getting the development land at Newmarket). We then become reliant on sharing a non-existent ground at GH to keep our place in SL.

This is why what he has done is so wrong! He has dleiberately tried to put a spanner in the works of our development, to detract from the fact that Cas still are not making any significant progress.

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:20 am  

Fordy wrote:

OK, my take on it is this:

Richard Wright was asked to comment, he chose to do so and once again to try and make Cas's progress look better than ours.

Yes, what he said was all stuff that is in the public domain, but as usual he neglects to mention the more salient points.
How can we share a stadium at Glasshoughton that is looking unlikely to be built anytime soon? There is NOTHING to share!!
By suggesting that we could share he gives the impression that our "need" for a stadium at Newmarket is not essential.
Any Cas or Wakey fan in their right mind knows that if one or either of us are not in a new ground for the next round of franchises we are GONE!!
If we do not get the go-ahead for Newmarket, Yorkcourt will not transfer the funding to Glasshoughton (why would they, they are really only interested in getting the development land at Newmarket). We then become reliant on sharing a non-existent ground at GH to keep our place in SL.

This is why what he has done is so wrong! He has dleiberately tried to put a spanner in the works of our development, to detract from the fact that Cas still are not making any significant progress.

Well said Fordy, we need to move on from what our "friend" from over the "common" has said.
Our focus should only be on N/M.
Exchanging insults with Cas' fans may be good sport, but its not important right now.

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:23 am  

It's better for us if Wright stays in charge at Cas. Hes holding that club back

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:27 am  

He has issued his statement. Says nothing of any worth as usual. http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931

He has issued his statement. Says nothing of any worth as usual. http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:33 am  

Theboyem wrote: He has issued his statement. Says nothing of any worth as usual. http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 Looking at that Cas website you'd think they only had one player.

Theboyem wrote: He has issued his statement. Says nothing of any worth as usual. http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 Looking at that Cas website you'd think they only had one player.

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:35 am  

"However, we remain open to the concept of a shared stadium (as long as it's ours and at Glasshoughton).... blah blah, blah..."

I'm sure those people who are qualified to represent our interests at the PI won't be distracted by this pathetic sideshow being staged by the CE of the Castleford club.

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:41 am  

It sounds like you put a lot of thought into that statement Mr Wright, well done.

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:47 am  

In response to Richard Wrights statement this morning - http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 I would just like to comment as follows. It is a shame that Richard Wright did not take the opportunity to clarify why he felt he need to respond to the questions raised and asked directly of him by Barton Willmore, whom he clearly knew to be working on behalf of a group objecting to the Newmarket development. He has said that there is nothing new in what he said in this letter and indeed, I would say that is correct. So in that case, why did he write the letter just to them and if he felt he needed to clarify his and Castleford Tigers position on this issue, why was the letter not sent to the planning inspector, sent to all parties, or issued as a general media release... or even, just left it alone completely, which should have been his decision IMO! He has missed the opportunity to either clarify why he felt the need to write this letter, or in hindsight apologise for possibly make a misjudgement in issuing this letter to Barton Willmore, knowing for whom they were working but that he he stands by the actual content of the letter. That is shame and I still think the initial release and this statement lack clarity and indicates a potential lack of professional integrity on his part. Right, that is it, move on!

In response to Richard Wrights statement this morning - http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 I would just like to comment as follows. It is a shame that Richard Wright did not take the opportunity to clarify why he felt he need to respond to the questions raised and asked directly of him by Barton Willmore, whom he clearly knew to be working on behalf of a group objecting to the Newmarket development. He has said that there is nothing new in what he said in this letter and indeed, I would say that is correct. So in that case, why did he write the letter just to them and if he felt he needed to clarify his and Castleford Tigers position on this issue, why was the letter not sent to the planning inspector, sent to all parties, or issued as a general media release... or even, just left it alone completely, which should have been his decision IMO! He has missed the opportunity to either clarify why he felt the need to write this letter, or in hindsight apologise for possibly make a misjudgement in issuing this letter to Barton Willmore, knowing for whom they were working but that he he stands by the actual content of the letter. That is shame and I still think the initial release and this statement lack clarity and indicates a potential lack of professional integrity on his part. Right, that is it, move on!

Re: Public Inquiry : Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:14 pm  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote: In response to Richard Wrights statement this morning - http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 I would just like to comment as follows. It is a shame that Richard Wright did not take the opportunity to clarify why he felt he need to respond to the questions raised and asked directly of him by Barton Willmore, whom he clearly knew to be working on behalf of a group objecting to the Newmarket development. He has said that there is nothing new in what he said in this letter and indeed, I would say that is correct. So in that case, why did he write the letter just to them and if he felt he needed to clarify his and Castleford Tigers position on this issue, why was the letter not sent to the planning inspector, sent to all parties, or issued as a general media release... or even, just left it alone completely, which should have been his decision IMO! He has missed the opportunity to either clarify why he felt the need to write this letter, or in hindsight apologise for possibly make a misjudgement in issuing this letter to Barton Willmore, knowing for whom they were working but that he he stands by the actual content of the letter. That is shame and I still think the initial release and this statement lack clarity and indicates a potential lack of professional integrity on his part. Right, that is it, move on! Spot on IA! I think we've seen Dickie hit a new low, what really bothers me is how some Cas fans are trying to justify his actions. Let them get on with it while we look at getting Newmarket passed. Keep up the good work.

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote: In response to Richard Wrights statement this morning - http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1931 I would just like to comment as follows. It is a shame that Richard Wright did not take the opportunity to clarify why he felt he need to respond to the questions raised and asked directly of him by Barton Willmore, whom he clearly knew to be working on behalf of a group objecting to the Newmarket development. He has said that there is nothing new in what he said in this letter and indeed, I would say that is correct. So in that case, why did he write the letter just to them and if he felt he needed to clarify his and Castleford Tigers position on this issue, why was the letter not sent to the planning inspector, sent to all parties, or issued as a general media release... or even, just left it alone completely, which should have been his decision IMO! He has missed the opportunity to either clarify why he felt the need to write this letter, or in hindsight apologise for possibly make a misjudgement in issuing this letter to Barton Willmore, knowing for whom they were working but that he he stands by the actual content of the letter. That is shame and I still think the initial release and this statement lack clarity and indicates a potential lack of professional integrity on his part. Right, that is it, move on! Spot on IA! I think we've seen Dickie hit a new low, what really bothers me is how some Cas fans are trying to justify his actions. Let them get on with it while we look at getting Newmarket passed. Keep up the good work.