Rich for PM

.

Most of the time, if not all of the time, the simplest option is the best.

And when it came up no one would have been bothered, so why does Wright need to get involved.
If the request had come to you Fully, Would you A) have done it B) understood that it might be harmful to Wakefield?

That's what everybody is upset about. He knew what the effect would be and did it anyway.

Why don't you play from the Galpharm?

Your answer to that is the reason why each club won't play from the other.

If they asked for my personal opinion I wouldn't.

If they asked questions, which can be found out via public places then there's nothing harmful in any way. The only thing that may have changed is the respective position of CTRLFC in offering their facilities to WTW, which obviously isn't the case.

Barton Willmore will have been briefed by their client and were always going to mention the feasibilty study fiasco and the fact that groundshare at GH is a possibilty.

All the letter does is confirm to the inspector that their 1 paragraph refrence to this in their statement in is still the case.

AFAIK this was brought up by the Leeds Council barrister and not Barton Willmore who have yet to speak.

I think WTWC should be much more concerned about the other 31 pages of the Barton Willmore statement rather than a 200 word confirmation letter from Richard Wright.

But that's the point, if they are public, they could have got the facts themselves. By asking Richard Wright they want his opinion or at least his name behind it, and by using language like "disappointed" and "don't hesitate to contact me", he is making it an opinion rather than facts.

I honestly don't think it will change the judgement, which makes it worse, because he leaves all the fans argueing about this and when none of them had anything to do with it. We are now going to get everybody trying to stick the nife in to each other rather than getting on with their own stadum.

It was brought up by Yorkcourt's barrister during Sir Rodney Walker's evidence.

No one is overlay concerned with Barton Willmore evidence. LCC is the rule 6 statutory objector and it is them that the focus will be on.

How absurd.

"Don't hesitate to contact me" = courteous point made when responding to people if they have any further concerns or questions, nothing about opinions whasoever.

"disappointed" - Cas were, end of. Fact, not opinion.

Wakefield fans are reading too much into it or at least trying to make more out of it too. As I repeat, whoever has asked him for his comment has possibly asked if the offer remains open for Wakefield to share at GH. This is the only thing that can change.

Richard Wright knew that the request was coming from an objector, he knew why they were asking, he knew what they would use his letter for and he knew his opinion would lend weight to their argument. Instead of doing what any other Chief Executive of a fellow club would do and declining their request and not getting himself or Cas involved he went the other way. He has consciously and purposely aided LCC and sought to help strengthen their case to prevent another SL club from making progress towards a new stadium.

What were his motives for doing this?

It's a dispicable act and he ought to be ashamed of his actions!

The letters highly emotive language bordering on hyperbole says a lot about Dickie Wrights motivations.

The thing about the so called feasibility study is the fact it wasn’t feasible. The parameters were complete bias! The study was to look into which ground would be built quickest. It said nothing about what would be the best location to benefit both clubs as a business. More importantly it had no reference at all to funding of the project! Imagine if we had agreed and the study decided on Glasshoughton, what would have happened? Newmarket would have been shelved and still no funding would have been available for Glasshoughton.

How would funding for Glasshoughton be achieved even if we came aboard?

Richard Wright is a desperate man the RL family seems a thing of the past. I wonder why he isn't keen on the City of Wakefield having a community Stadium & why is he so bothered about it if his own privately owned stadium is progressing so well?

But RW hasn't objected to it.

Quote ="deeHell"The thing about the so called feasibility study is the fact it wasn’t feasible. The parameters were complete bias! The study was to look into which ground would be built quickest. It said nothing about what would be the best location to benefit both clubs as a business. More importantly it had no reference at all to funding of the project! Imagine if we had agreed and the study decided on Glasshoughton, what would have happened? Newmarket would have been shelved and still no funding would have been available for Glasshoughton. How would funding for Glasshoughton be achieved even if we came aboard?'" Actually you're incorrect: Quote We have suggested an independent assessment of both proposed sites to determine which one is deliverable in the timescale and is the most financially viable. '" www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/18415

Quote ="deeHell"The thing about the so called feasibility study is the fact it wasn’t feasible. The parameters were complete bias! The study was to look into which ground would be built quickest. It said nothing about what would be the best location to benefit both clubs as a business. More importantly it had no reference at all to funding of the project! Imagine if we had agreed and the study decided on Glasshoughton, what would have happened? Newmarket would have been shelved and still no funding would have been available for Glasshoughton. How would funding for Glasshoughton be achieved even if we came aboard?'" Actually you're incorrect: Quote We have suggested an independent assessment of both proposed sites to determine which one is deliverable in the timescale and is the most financially viable. '" www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/18415

Nope - not even that; the land is owned by the developer, being the site of the old Newmarket colliery.

WMDC, as far as I'm aware, offered both clubs the opportunity to use land as security to obtain loans, to the value of £2million apiece, on the proviso that the money went to a Community Trust, not a private company; the Wakefield Community Trust (who would operate the proposed Community Stadium at Newmarket) have taken them up on this and CT haven't. My understanding is that CT don't have a Trust, as their stadium proposal is not a Community Stadium but a privately owned venture - as such, WMDC are legally unable to give them access to that money as they don't have the appopriate legal entity.

At planning committee, WMDC were unanimously minded to approve this development; it's widely believed to have been called in to PI due to the objection of Leeds City Council, who appear to be opposed to any development that happens anywhere other than in Leeds; they're now using Leeds council tax payers money to fund a legal objection to the development, having engaged a barrister and employed the services of a specialist planning company called Barton Wilmore.

There - you're up to speed!

What's the main point to their objection?

They think that the distribution and warehousing business should go to Leeds, not Wakefield.

Mispost

Its an end, were the away fans always go. Usually in a larger nunber than the Home support.

castlefield wildtigers...... it does have a certain ring to it.

To evolve into Castlefield Wildtiger Rovers?

Wakey V Cas stadium thread number 1254869 and counting.

How would it be funded? wakefield have no money to put into a stadium (they cant sell bv as they don't own it) it would just mean that cas had to find more money for a larger stadium and to purchase land and that the whole process would have to start again, this option would be more difficult and take longer than either nm or gh.

I was being hypothetical.

I was also not aware that WMDC aren't actually putting as much in as I thought.

Shame really.

Best of luck to both clubs, I think you're both going to need it.

I posted this last night on the Wakefield Board, I think it prudent it is posted here too. Then the following post will be a response and as far as I am concerned the matter is closed and we move on.

[iRight, 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?[/i