|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 7494 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2016 | Apr 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Mutts"i think your missing the point , its not about us its about our great/grandchildren who dont have any allegiance and if you think NO NEVER!!!!!!! who would of thought that people from fev would now be supporting leeds/cas/bulls at the start of super league???not me.
pressure power from kids is huge we may not like it but i ain't stopping my lads watching the greatest sport in the world just because my team play a few miles away.'"
But would there be a Club left for future generations to follow? The problem is that Castleford does not associate its self with Wakefield and vice versa. With all other ground shares, as far as I am aware, both teams are based in/have an affinity to the City/Town/area of the stadium this would not be true in this case and 1 set of fans would be alienated.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 10926 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Dec 2021 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="owiepob"sorry I don't buy this RL is different line. The examples from other sports suggest that ground shares = bigger crouds and better fnancial health for both clubs. I'm more comfortable working from evidence rather than conjecture.
I agree with you about the likely result of a poll. I do however feel that the opinions of the fans of 2009 is a very small consideration in the decisions about the ongoing sustainability of our 2 clubs. As I said before this decision is about attracting the next 4 or 5 generations of fans not just about us.
The cost of having 2 (or 3) grounds with a WF post code will be the best part of a hundred million (for 3 bog standard developments). Is our desire for our club to play within a walk of the pub worth that much?
I have to show my hand I already drive 80 miles for a home game so I recognise that our views will be different'"
FWIW I believe what Tigerman says - 100%
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 3192 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2022 | Sep 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Mutts made the point, its not just about now its about the future.
A ground share would alienate some fans from both teams, of course it would, just like the switch from winter to summer rugby did. I know of at least half a dozen people who refused to watch summer rugby and no longer watch Wakefield but our gates are up so we must have replaced those fans and more.
A ground share would be the same, you would lose some and you would gain some. I sincerley hope both us and Castleford get shiney new stadiums but equally I hope it doesn't all end in tears.
Just opinions but at the end of the day only time will tell.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4914 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2024 | Aug 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="tigerman10"we are not talking about other sports we are talking about rugby league, if you put a poll on this forum asking people from wakey if they would go to cas for there home games or vice versa people from cas i am sure the results would speak for themselves, and yes i do think a gound share would equal a merger, mybee not straight away but in say 5 years time i think it would be a cert.'"
agree..........
one ground one team and then let another club in.
wakeford sounds good to me.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 602 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2012 | Feb 2012 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="TRB"FWIW I believe what Tigerman says - 100%
'"
I know I'm in the minority. It just doesnt sit comfortably with me throwing many tens, possibly hundreds of millions of pounds at three seperate stadia in order to pamper to the fans of 2009 at the expence of a) all the other things that those millions could be spent on and b) the ongoing sustainability of all 3 clubs c) the next 2 /3 / 4 generations of fans.
Every course of action in this situation has risks and I accept that many believe that merger is a significant risk arising from ground share. Assessing that risk has to start in the eveidence from precident - and there aint any!
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4980 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Dec 2023 | Oct 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="owiepob"I know I'm in the minority. It just doesnt sit comfortably with me throwing many tens, possibly hundreds of millions of pounds at three seperate stadia in order to pamper to the fans of 2009 at the expence of a) all the other things that those millions could be spent on and b) the ongoing sustainability of all 3 clubs c) the next 2 /3 / 4 generations of fans.
Every course of action in this situation has risks and I accept that many believe that merger is a significant risk arising from ground share. Assessing that risk has to start in the eveidence from precident - and there aint any!'"
irrespective of the above do you not think it's now too late to be changing direction?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 122 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2014 | Jan 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I honestly can't see either of the teams having a brick layed towards their stadium come 2012, and I feel with the RFL's idea of expeanding Rugby League one of the WF teams will lose their franchise in order to "extend" rugby league- even though this is away from its routes.
They RFL don't really care where the hotbed of rugby league talent is produced, they just want to spread the game (although London, Wales, and France to an extent will never really take our game to their hearts)......to cut a long story short Castleford will lose their franchise which I can cope with because I would sooner watch my hometown club play in the lower leagues in my hometown, than have to either: -
A) travel 10 miles to watch an HOME game
or,
B) play under a merged name of "Calderford" or whatever the RFL choose.
(and deep down I'm guessing at least 60% of you feel the same).
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 10926 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Dec 2021 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="owiepob"*snip*'"
We've tried to talk to Cas about it. The council have tried to talk to Cas about it. The local MP's have tried to talk to Cas about it. All attempts have been rebuked by Cas.
I know I'm quite 'emotional' about this subject, but I am also acutely aware that to Cas, the Wakefield identity is a threat - just as the idea of a 'Greater Leeds' is to me. Whilst we can talk about 'corridors of acceptability' and joining forces in one venture, I do not believe that we can easily overcome the emotional ties that we have and the potential 'blocks' that would prevent us from calling Cas home or Cas calling Wakey home.
It would seem that the Stanley site is as geographically central as it could be, yet it is already tainted as being a 'Wakey' site. So, whilst it would make much sense financially and practically to centre on one proposal, I cannot fault the Cas folk for wanting to fight to keep their future on home soil. After all, I still think it possible that they can come to the Stanley table at a later date - if they are unable to fulfil their dream of their own accord. Good luck to 'em!
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 122 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2014 | Jan 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="TRB"We've tried to talk to Cas about it. The council have tried to talk to Cas about it. The local MP's have tried to talk to Cas about it. All attempts have been rebuked by Cas.
I know I'm quite 'emotional' about this subject, but I am also acutely aware that to Cas, the Wakefield identity is a threat - just as the idea of a 'Greater Leeds'
is to me. Whilst we can talk about 'corridors of acceptability' and joining forces in one venture, I do not believe that we can easily overcome the emotional ties that we have and the potential 'blocks' that would prevent us from calling Cas home or Cas calling Wakey home.
It would seem that the Stanley site is as geographically central as it could be, yet it is already tainted as being a 'Wakey' site. So, whilst it would make much sense financially and practically to centre on one proposal, I cannot fault the Cas folk for wanting to fight to keep their future on home soil. After all, I still think it possible that they can come to the Stanley table at a later date - if they are unable to fulfil their dream of their own accord. Good luck to 'em!
'"
Couldn't agree more with your post.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 602 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2012 | Feb 2012 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Look I have to be clear with you that I know none of the internal workings of any of the organisations involved. I am not a poster 'in the know'. So my comments are based upon a laymans observations.
I think it is extremely unlikely that a proactive planned stadium share will take place (and I'm of the opinion that this is a missed opportunity).
I fear however that one or both or all (if we include Fev) clubs will not find the funding they need and have to come to a pragmatic compromise of a stadium share. What I fear is that this delay will lead to missed franchise opportnities and or rushed / compromised stadium developments.
Those awarding the licences should take a grip on this situation and recognise the 'special' case relating to these 3 clubs all being in the same local authority. Failure to do this will result in money being drained from the sport because of the arbitrary re licencing date.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 602 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2012 | Feb 2012 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I think we are agreeing TRB.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 5392 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="TRB"
I know I'm quite 'emotional' about this subject, but I am also acutely aware that to Cas, the Wakefield identity is a threat - just as the idea of a 'Greater Leeds'
is to me. Whilst we can talk about 'corridors of acceptability' and joining forces in one venture, I do not believe that we can easily overcome the emotional ties that we have and the potential 'blocks' that would prevent us from calling Cas home or Cas calling Wakey home.
'" slightly o/t topic wasn't Wrenthorpe at one stage going to be classed as outer leeds (spit) as far as electoral wise, even though we are WF1
so I can understand castleford not wanting to share to keep their identity and good luck to them
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2107 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jun 2018 | Jun 2018 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| This can only happen on a Wakefield forum brilliant news regarding the the new Community trust stadium plans of how it will look, positive news put out to the media and on the club official website and what happens!!! some people decide they want to share stadiums now.
The shared stadium issue has been raised before and Wakefield were for it cas were against it and have decided to go alone and good luck to them. Trinity have agreed to be tennents at the community stadium which is to be built in the middle of the WMDC area.
The community trust own the stadium and it will be for the benefit of the whole community. Funding is in place, plans have been drawn, up planning pushed forward to september. The trust visited LSV last week to see how it was it was run council involvement etc but it won't be the same design as LSV.
All positives regarding the project Sir Rodney the club and York court are doing us proud and it's about time this CITY and district had sports facilities to be proud of.
Next season to be the last at Belle Vue.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 3192 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2022 | Sep 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="M62 J30 TRINITY"This can only happen on a Wakefield forum brilliant news regarding the the new Community trust stadium plans of how it will look, positive news put out to the media and on the club official website and what happens!!! some people decide they want to share stadiums now.
The shared stadium issue has been raised before and Wakefield were for it cas were against it and have decided to go alone and good luck to them. Trinity have agreed to be tennents at the community stadium which is to be built in the middle of the WMDC area.
The community trust own the stadium and it will be for the benefit of the whole community. Funding is in place, plans have been drawn, up planning pushed forward to september. The trust visited LSV last week to see how it was it was run council involvement etc but it won't be the same design as LSV.
All positives regarding the project Sir Rodney the club and York court are doing us proud and it's about time this CITY and district had sports facilities to be proud of.
Next season to be the last at Belle Vue.'"
I have no idea who you are, I may know you and then again I may not. I do know TRB as do most on here. You do seem from your comments to be "in the know" and if what you say about funding being in place and I have no reason to doubt you then the only obsticle to overcome is planning. This should not be a problem IF we have the FULL SUPPORT of the Council and they are prepared to "fast track" it within the rules.
My reasons for speaking in favour of a ground share was my concern over funding. Castleford have had a planning consent for I believe around 2 to 3 years but work has not started as they have not had the funding. Some have said its in place but if it had been the stadium would have been built by now. They may be nearer with funding now but my guess is that they are still a way off having all the funding needed to commence construction.
One stadium in the neutral venue of Stanley would be easier to fund than 2 but if Castleford feel that Stanley is Wakefield even though its eqi-distant from both Castleford and Wakefield then I can fully understand their feelings. I certainly feel that Glasshoughton is Castleford as its around 1m from Castleford and 7m from Wakefield.
If we have the funding in place and we feel that planning will not be a problem and Castleford are not interested in a ground share then lets go it alone.
I do however think that this matter is not over yet.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 27039 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2017 | Sep 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="TRB"We've tried to talk to Cas about it. The council have tried to talk to Cas about it. The local MP's have tried to talk to Cas about it. All attempts have been rebuked by Cas.
I know I'm quite 'emotional' about this subject, but I am also acutely aware that to Cas, the Wakefield identity is a threat - just as the idea of a 'Greater Leeds'
is to me. Whilst we can talk about 'corridors of acceptability' and joining forces in one venture, I do not believe that we can easily overcome the emotional ties that we have and the potential 'blocks' that would prevent us from calling Cas home or Cas calling Wakey home.
It would seem that the Stanley site is as geographically central as it could be, yet it is already tainted as being a 'Wakey' site. So, make much sense financially and practically to centre on one proposal, I cannot fault the Cas folk for wanting to fight to keep their future on home soil.whilst it would After all, I still think it possible that they can come to the Stanley table at a later date - if they are unable to fulfil their dream of their own accord. Good luck to 'em!
'"
Far too busy signing quota players to be bothered with this
Who could and i hope it works out for them.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 5320 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2004 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I am with the future mob on this one.
I am old enough to remember the days when Hunslet were in full swing. They had their own ground and were equal if not better than Leeds on crowds and results. Hunslet v Leeds was a derby as big as anything in the game today and the passion was just as great.
History has not been kind to Hunslet and they are just a ghost from the past. They have a few hangers on who probably still like to dream about past glories. However a generation has been and gone and all that talk about local identity has also gone. Leeds now draw loads of support from south of the river and the majority of them will not be aware of the old bitter rivalries. Likewise if there was a shared stadium or a merged WMDC side in 10/15 years a new generation would be supporting that team from all over the district and they would not give a #### about Cas,Wakey of Fev.
Also if we continue with weak teams in this district there will be more and more young kids walking around our area wearing Rhino shirts. To me that is the biggest threat to the future and thats why I have no problem with a ground share or even a merger with Cas Fev or both.
However I still believe Stanley will be the first stadium up and running in WMDC. once that happens things will get interesting
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 27039 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2017 | Sep 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Prince Buster"I am with the future mob on this one.
I am old enough to remember the days when Hunslet were in full swing. They had their own ground and were equal if not better than Leeds on crowds and results. Hunslet v Leeds was a derby as big as anything in the game today and the passion was just as great.
History has not been kind to Hunslet and they are just a ghost from the past. They have a few hangers on who probably still like to dream about past glories. However a generation has been and gone and all that talk about local identity has also gone. Leeds now draw loads of support from south of the river and the majority of them will not be aware of the old bitter rivalries. Likewise if there was a shared stadium or a merged WMDC side in 10/15 years a new generation would be supporting that team from all over the district and they would not give a #### about Cas,Wakey of Fev.
Also if we continue with weak teams in this district there will be more and more young kids walking around our area wearing Rhino shirts. To me that is the biggest threat to the future and thats why I have no problem with a ground share or even a merger with Cas Fev or both.
However I still believe Stanley will be the first stadium up and running in WMDC. once that happens things will get interesting
'"
Thats a hard one for me, we all think of ourselves and how it affects us, and you quite rightly point out the the future of RL in this area is under threat and that we must look to the future and maybe you are right.
No one can see into the future but we can all learn lessons from the past, so i suppose we may have to go with the flow on this one.
Having said that i hope and pray we can ALWAYS stand alone becuase thats half the fun of being a Wakey fan.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 602 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2012 | Feb 2012 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="M62 J30 TRINITY"This can only happen on a Wakefield forum brilliant news regarding the the new Community trust stadium plans of how it will look, positive news put out to the media and on the club official website and what happens!!! some people decide they want to share stadiums now.'"
Apologies about this mate but the reality is that debates have been going on on this forum for a couple of years about the wisdom of sharing. The fact that WTRLFC approach Cas about it suggests that they believed in this wisdom too. Discussing the merits of a share is in no way a critique of those who are progressing on the community stadium
It has been clearly stated above that if Cas don't want to share then we wish them good luck going ahead on their own and we are greatful for all the work those involved in the community stadium.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 5320 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2004 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Trintiy had a duty to invite Castleford along because even those anti share must admit that by doubling resources you can achieve a better stadium.At the time problems were all starting to crop up with Glasshoughton and its future looked in doubt so WMDC were also hoping that a ground share was the best solution. Strong pressure was put on Cas to come on board but they totally refused.
Like I said before I believe Stanley will be up and running first. If Glasshoughton is no way near completeion by then I can see WMDC loosing interest over there. If Labour loose control and Mr Box his seat then WMDC will definitly loose interest over there and Cas then may be forced into a ground share
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 13854 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2006 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The trouble in sharing is that both clubs represent different places and different communities. Most other organisations that share stadiums represent the one city or town which makes sharing that much easier. If Cas wanted to share the Stanley stadium then I wouldn’t have a problem, I would if Trinity needed to share with Cas at Glasshoughton, I imagine Cas fans would feel the same vice versa. Anyway the idea has being put to all parties and no agreement has been made so both clubs may as well just be left alone to get on with things on their own.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 3017 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2004 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Prince Buster"I am with the future mob on this one.
I am old enough to remember the days when Hunslet were in full swing. They had their own ground and were equal if not better than Leeds on crowds and results. Hunslet v Leeds was a derby as big as anything in the game today and the passion was just as great.
History has not been kind to Hunslet and they are just a ghost from the past. They have a few hangers on who probably still like to dream about past glories. However a generation has been and gone and all that talk about local identity has also gone. Leeds now draw loads of support from south of the river and the majority of them will not be aware of the old bitter rivalries. '"
Slightly O/T, but I knew an ex-Hunslet player/director who seemed to hold more bitterness towards Wakey than Leeds because he believed we did a con job in getting up where as Hunslet had been cheated out of their no doubt 'rightful place' in the top flight. Then again, I don't think he enjoyed his very brief stint in charge of Wakey.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2946 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Dec 2017 | Dec 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| If we do have a shared stadium, could I respectfully request that my seat is 'washed' prior to each Trinity home game.
Furthermore, would I have to move seats when we play Cas in the 'away' fixture?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 5392 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I find myself agreeing with nearly every single poster in turn on this thread, which seems to highlight the complexity of the problem and the fact that there is no one-size-fits-all solution.
As far as the stadium (or stadia) is concerned, IF we have secured the funding to build a new ground in Stanley, it seems fair to assume that a large proportion of the funding will have been secured by way of grants from public bodies. If we've already tapped into this funding, it also seems fair to assume that it'll be much harder for Cas to secure funding from the same sources for a similar project only a few miles away. The same could be true in reverse, of course. If the funding for the Cas project is in place, we would have the same difficulties raising the money required to fund ours. And if neither is in place, we may end up in a state of paralysis which sees neither project come to fruition, at least not within the required timescale.
Under those circumstances, a ground share would be the only sensible option for both parties. Of course, it may well be that both clubs have the necessary funding in place, but in the current economic climate, that seems very unlikely to me, though I hope I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 301 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2014 | Jan 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The community stadium is a shared staduim in essence that will be for the use of the whole district, were just tennents of the facility and it all sounds good from what I'm hearing
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 11181 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2015 | Jul 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Interesting thread (uncharacterisitic for these groundshare chats). FWIW I think I'm with the prevailing sentiment here - It's just not going to happen. I do think one or two in the pro-camp are missing an opportunity though. I've read that there are shining examples out there of sharing/merging (I don't believe for a second the two aren't different sides of the same coin) which have had a positive effect, but I'm yet to have one highlighted. Of all the examples I can come up with, to be honest I don't like the outcomes of any of them.
Maybe it's less important to Wakey fans as, in all probabilty, the team to emerge afterwards would be called (or at the very least start with) 'Wakefield'..? That's not acceptable to me I'm afraid though. In any joint venture Cas would - by the simple expedient of being perceived as 'small town' - end up being the poor relation. The Sheffield, the Gateshead, the Illawarra... the long since assimilated historical remnant that very few (if any at all) even recognise anymore. 'Wakefield/Castleford Trinity Tigers' would of course become Wakefield Tigers (or some such) in a very short space of time, and a fair chunk of the home support would still refer to them as "Trinity" too. This is why IMHO Cas have rebuked all advances, be they at Glasshoughton or at Stanley, and I applaud them for it. For Cas to share/merge is for Cas to sign their own slow death warrant.
Far better to take our chances alone than suffer such a fate, and if we end up in the lower leagues, well at least we'll still exist.
|
|
|
|
|