Castleford have interviewed 4 Architects practises to take the scheme to detailed design but last I heard (Friday), and trust me it is in my interest to know these things, they have not yet decided. They were due to do this prior to Christmas but suspect it will be in the new year now.

I doubt that RW has said that following these latest proposals. Yorkcourt, I now understand from other posters, have already bought the land and while this will mean it will have been cheaper, it is still quite a bit of money they have spent to let this thing fail!

Also, in respect of Wakefield Council they have also given Castleford an equal plot of land to use as and asset (it might the stadium land itself in this case... anybody help on that one?). So they are been very fair and it will not be there fault if either fall through.

Sorry, Fully, did not see your post till after posting mine above about four Architects. Your understand is exactly the same as mine.

=#8000FFOne place I thought of for there is where the current swimming baths are, all that land could secure a massive loan, and when Surfworld is built the council (or Cas) could sell that land for millions which could be used for just about anything, as the baths wouldn't be needed anymore due to Surfworld being in the town as well.

You need to let this one go mate, Fully is correct, the current DLA proposal in respect of the stadium itself are exactly the same sort of thing Castleford will have submitted for their outline application. They will have thought about how they would like it to look and done a few sketches and then got some young lad, who is a whizz on the old 3-d rendering package, to knock out the drawings over a few hours and a couple of bottles of Tizer! It ain't detailed and will not be until they get the real guy, the Structural Engineer, on the project to knock out the detailed design working with the Architect.

statement from fev... www.featherstonerovers.net/2009/news120.htm

statement from fev... www.featherstonerovers.net/2009/news120.htm

I don't see how a shared stadium would lose fans if it was situated between the two teams, surely a supporter supports a team not an area of grass with rugby posts at each end. Inter and AC Milan seem to manage, non of them "died"

On the Wigan point, Wigan have a 50+ year lease on the ground (DW stadium) at a nominal rent, which is beneficial to the club as far as running costs are concerned.
We won't have problem with a Superleague license, however if we were in the same position as Saints and yourselves and we were offered a groundshare with Saints in Billinge or Ashton for example then I wouldn't see a problem.

My concern for Wakefield and/or Cas is that if things don't start to happen in the next few months then one of you will be lost to Superleague at the next franchise allocation which is something none of us want.

Only because you are not in that position , if you were it would

I concur. A lot of fans say one thing, but if the boot was in their position it would be a whole different matter.

Just so that I am clear on this.

Are you saying that you (either Wakey or Cas) would rather lose your Superleague license than groundshare at a new purpose built stadium somewhere between the two towns?

Yes.

I'd rather us retain our own identity in our own stadium than lose our identity playing outside of our respective town of Castleford, yes. I'll follow Castleford in whatever league and I firmly believe that licences should focus more on the rugby, not the stadia they are played in. After all, The Jungle is one of the most loved stadiums amongst rugby fans so what damage is it doing in all honesty? I recognise the fact that we need contemporary facilities but don't think the amount of urgency placed by the RFL on it should take precedent over other licensing points, for instance player development.

Also, they have to take into consideration the financial state of clubs, the fact we do not have richer footballing neighbours of whom we can share facilities with such as yourselfs, nor do we have councils willing to stump X amount of funding as part-payment.

=#8000FFThey're also based in, shock horror, MILAN so it's the same city, Cas isn't Wakefield, it's Castleford and that's why it wont work it's as simple as that, it'd be like Wigan playing in St Helens.

The new purpose built Community stadium at Stanley is equal distance from Wakefield City Centre and cas town centre. It's been offered to all sporting clubs in the district

that is the problem, each club don't want to lose their identity and the Stanley community stadium is the closest your going to get to retaining it if we was going to share, Fev have made a bold statement in saying that they are willing to go it alone very brave of them but good luck to them,
both Wakefield and Castleford are strong enough in history and in a strong hold of talent but its financially whether they can keep up with the others

Maybe so Snowie mate, but I'd rather us fall into Championship mediocrity if it meant following Castleford, in Castleford. I would never a support a 'fake' Castleford side outside of the town. The heritage has been at The Jungle, in Castleford. We are progressing with plans for a new stadium. The RFL have to take into consideration that we have authorities that do not have the money to support two stadiums, we do not have the money ourselves in terms of sugar daddies and also the fact we're in the midst of an economic slowdown which has put constraints on any form of developments. The amount of progression we're going to make is relatively slow when thinking of these constraints. As long as we're showing a willingness to move and actually showing progression, shouldn't that be satisfactory enough for them to ensure we can move on to the other licencing factors?

If it was St Helens in this boat, would the RFL have promised to promote one side? I doubt it. Would they kick them out? I doubt it.

So frustrating the way the RFL is pushing reform on the league structure, with us going to Stanley and putting new footings on the boundary of Wakefield area we have excepted this as we
1 wouldn't of survived,
2 see this as a ideal place to settle down without too much upset to the community,
both stadiums are placed on the M62 corridor in which the RFL wanted to break away from still doesn't make us safe if we both get our stadiums

When it's built and we're in we can be like those annoying Huddersfield supporters who chant "Fartown". We can chant "BelleVue" or "Agbrigg" or "Doncaster Road"

Wouldn't bother me too much as I'm a Leyther , but if it was dual club stadium in Hindley for us and you lot , I'd go watching East and Miners in LEIGH

No what we are saying is that at the very least one of the clubs will die if not both if we ground share.

[uAt least [/uone sl licence will be lost if we share.

Have you answered my question would you play at saints new ground and what effect do you think you it would have on your club if you did?

I don't think a ground share at Stanley would kill off Cas if their supporters still backed them and were loyal enough to watch them there. After all they go to other grounds to watch them every other week so why not 3 mile up the road in Stanley. In fact I bet quite a few would find it easier and quicker to get to Stanley than it is to get darn't lane.

I know Glasshoughton is by far the best option but Stanley as a short term move or worse still a permenant move would not be the end of the world.

Ultimately that would be the key, and would be the same for Trinity if they were to share at Glasshoughton. The move would require all support to remain loyal and not boycott out of protest. If they did then any stadium share would be a success, unfortunately we are all a parochial lot and the geographical boundary’s dictate what we’re willing to accept.

If Cas came to play at Stanley they would be playing in a community stadium built for the clubs what come under WMDC, and as such would have as much right to be there as anybody else not to mention the fact that its equal distance for both clubs. On the other hand if we had to go to G/hougton we would more than likely be playing in Cas's new ground and imo it would diminish our status as a SL side with us not having a ground of our own, and to a large extent we would be governed by them.

2 clubs / 1 stadia - it WILL result in the loss of one club - full stop!

2 clubs / 2 stadia - a chance of preservation of each identity.

I'm fed up of the 'Milan' - this is bloody Wakefield, not Milan - it's like comparing a cat with a brick!

The only benefit each club can offer the other is as a bridging facility until the other has it's new ground - and in my view, you could only sell that if there was 100% certainty about the delivery and timing of the second new ground.

Yes here,

Quote ="spener"statement from fev... www.featherstonerovers.net/2009/news120.htm'" Fair play to Fev they firmly confirmed their position and I wish them the best. The interesting thing now is will Dick Wright do the same thing. If Cas are 100% behind the Jnc 32 project I would expect a similar statement from them.

Quote ="spener"statement from fev... www.featherstonerovers.net/2009/news120.htm'" Fair play to Fev they firmly confirmed their position and I wish them the best. The interesting thing now is will Dick Wright do the same thing. If Cas are 100% behind the Jnc 32 project I would expect a similar statement from them.