Hope you guys get it sorted. MC seems like an honest guy and us Bulls fans would have killed for someone as honest and intergal as him instead of our corrupt owners.

If you moved to Dewsbury it is a tidy ground with potential for development. The pitch would need work as there wasn't a blade of grass a couple weeks back. Having 2 teams on it would make it unplayable most weeks. Especially in Winter. But as a viewing experience for rugby, it is very good IMO.

I can't see Trinity moving to Newcastle, Bristol, Coventry etc. Surely you would ground share with Cas before then? I know it was massively unpopular to share with Cas, but surely it would be better than seeing your club go to Newcastle. Steve Gill and MC are 2 honest guys and seem to get on, so i don't think you would be screwed over like Wigan do with the football team. Has opinion softened on this or is it still a red line?

Hope you get it sorted anyways.

After many years of a non-competitive Trinity side, it wouldn't be right to do nothing re the stadium whilst the team flourishes (or at very least, stops making up the numbers. Its only clear the status quo cant continue. Fingers crossed!

Does anyone know what the financial penalties will be now stadium standards have been brought back?
Its a bit like being kicked in the balls twice when you think of the cost of just keeping the place open

I wish it wasn't so but yes i am cynical as to a positive outcome and i can promise you i'm not alone there. I've spoken to many who think whoever happened to win in court the result would ultimately be the same- i.e. no new stadium. Whilst giving Mackie and Box a bloody nose, (both metaphorically and physically!) would be nice what i want is a club playing in the city and i don't see how that will happen without somebody new rocking up with £20 million along with probably a new site and saying here you go. Then we would need the council again, the one we have just right royally pee'd off.

As for the second point we don't need the finer details of a legal case but it us hardly putting all our cards in the table to say what offences we are actually accusing them of. They'll know that as soon as the papers are served anyway so once that happens, assuming we are going to go down that route, then its time to get it out into the open and try and build the support needed. And i guess that time is close hence yesterdays announcement, the clock is now ticking. MC says we will know which of the options we will be playing next year in 4-6 weeks. I'd guess when that deal is signed and the departure from the city confirmed then the action ramps up.

Apparentlyit's potentially between 30k and 100k, although not all that is ground related.

Though clearly something has to be done, I'm not sure what people think the end game to legal action would be?

A possible and indeed probable outcome may be a ruling that WMDC miss-handled a portion of the planning process. In that the Newcold site should have counted towards the trigger point for the stadium. So with that ruling in hand, what then?
A massively cash strapped council would be landed with a legal bill. This bill would be payed by the public who, unfortunately for us, for the most part couldn't care less about Trinity. We find it hard to drum up any sympathy or support as it is.

Even if the Newcold development was retrospectively added, which I don't think it would be, then what? We are still not at the trigger point. YC would either build up to just below the trigger point and then stop or sell the land option and dump the liability to another party for a discount on the land.

I read somewhere that we have been told we should take legal action. Presumably that advice came from a lawyer. Asking a lawyer if you should take legal action is a bit like asking a greengrocer if you should eat more fruit and veg.

As Castleford have found out, when you don't hold any cards and you are relying on the generosity of strangers, you are completely at their mercy. It's not a nice place to be but we have to face facts. Without a benefactor, our only option seems to be a ground share. For the short term I don't really care where that is within reason. Going forward though it depends massively where it is. We don't have great support as it is. If people no longer feel it's their team because it's too far away, presumably that will dwindle even further.

I was reading in League Express this morning and in a few other places, people disgusted that the RFL deem our ground to be below the required standard. We can't really complain when our own CEO says publicly that he is no longer willing to stand the HSE liability as the ground is too dangerous. At some point you have to accept that a few tins of paint and some weed killer won't cut the mustard anymore.

We need a plan B. Or more realistically, plan S or T. If that sole plan is legal action then we will be in this exact same position in twelve months time. Moaning how everyone around us did nothing but also, doing nothing productive ourselves.

In my experience, when it comes to planning disputes, it's not necessarily about 'offences' in the traditional, legal sense; we're talking here about the fine details of planning law, and potentially, misconduct in public office type stuff. Hardly the stuff of exciting legal dramas, but serious enough to get the attention of respondents - because defending such action costs time, money and reputation.

I'm only speculating here - I have no inside knowledge of this case - but I have been involved in planning disputes on a number of occasions; I watched a specialist planning lawyer tear the representatives of a provincial Council to pieces recently, such that they withdrew part way through and accepted that they had an urgent need to redraft all of their planning guidance and documentation as an urgent matter.

Who knows - I could be totally wrong and this could be MC having a tantrum; but I doubt it very much.

I would move to Timbuktu before ground share with Cas. NO!

At last!

How many pages - it's called upping the anti, it's risky but something dramatic was needed to kick the issue forward.

It's very scary, but if people want to help the club start writing to the Wakefield Express shaming the council. Contact below.

Editor
John Kenealy
Email:editorial@wakefieldexpress.co.uk

I would reserve judgement re. share with Castleford until the 'terms ' of any such venture were known. Better have an open mind that just see Trinity 'written off'.

Wholeheartedly agree with this bit.

Nothing may come of it but, it just might. At least it's doing something constructive.

Such a shame it has come to this, I was really hoping the Belle Vue solution was the one. That said if the club wanted to relocate to Bedfordshire then they'd have one supporter here!

As I put on one of the other recent threads planning law is one of the most complicated laws out there and you are correct, sometimes councils get it wrong and decisions do get overturned. But those very same technicalities that can do that can also backfire and confirm a planning departments decision. I have seen on more than one occasion a lawyer claiming a cast iron case or a sure-fire win leave beaten with their tail between their legs as the endless technicalities backed the council up. It will be a potentially costly exercise, whatever the trust have been told it will cost, add at least 50% and keep it as a slush fund, chances are you'll need it as it drags on. The main winners here will be the legal teams, they will be the one that trouser the money.

Best case scenario that I can see is the Newcold build gets put back into the unilateral undertaking and counts towards the trigger point, although that won't solve a great deal in the long run. It will mean the development has been started so the permission deadline becomes irrelevent, but that also then removes any claim to just land banking by the developer moving forward which is something the government are wanting to crack down on. As for claims of deliberate misconduct then that is very hard to prove. what would be more likely is they would be deemed to have mis-interpreted the rules and regulations, which leads to a much lesser penalty and less damage to a reputation.

Without the full facts it's impossible to know how it would plan out but more challenges fail than are successful so if anybody has been told a win is a shoe-in, it's highly likely to be wrong, there is no such thing in this area. Just an awful lot of legal arguing over fine detail to come and then fingers crossed they did actuaally get it wrong. I would always say avoid going to court if at all possible, it is a big risk. But I have to agree with those that say it likely still won't lead to a stadium being built by Yorkcourt, if they ever had any intention of doing that it would be there by now. It might stop them making a bit of extra money money out of the site at a guess and it would certainly cause the odious toad that is Peter Box to get his knickers in a twist which would be nice as i can't stand the man but that is about it. I wish everybody involved good luck but please consider all options wisely as it really is a legal minefield.

Maybe that's not the aim?

Anyone sensible would have completely given up on Newmarket by now and instead, would be focusing all their energy on something much more realistic and achievable - such as, for example, the redevelopment of BV.

So - if there is a developer on board with plans for the commercial possibilities of BV, and an outgoing developer who has a large and troublesome planning condition stopping him making money on a much bigger industrial site - maybe the right thing to do is to try to leverage a contribution towards that redevelopment from the outgoing developer, so you can take a seat at the table with the new developer with a much stronger offer i.e cash money?

Just speculation - but that would be a win of sorts all round wouldn't it? YC get rid of the annoying fly in the ointment that is WT by paying them much less than the cost of a new stadium; WMDC don't have to waste any more time and money defending their actions, or lack of, around the community facilities; and 88M get a much more equitable arrangement around the BV site - i.e they don't have to pay for everything.

Sometimes the threat of legal action is sufficient motivation for all parties to find a way to move forwards.

By that logic, don't 88M achieve the same thing by watching Trinity voluntarily walk away without having to do anything for them? Allowing them to do whatever they originally intended before they got caught up in the horrifying mess that we are in. By the sounds of it, the guy at 88M is a very shrewd business man, he doesn't need all this does he.

To add some balance with a counter argument, I have no issue with us relocating to Cas if it means the survival of Trinity, plus the team being located somewhere I can access relatively easily to make as many home games as possible. (I don't have an anti-Cas emotion and from my perspective the future of Trinity overrides an "own stadium" sentiment.)

There is little doubt that MC is upping the ante.
However, serving notice on your home is, indeed, as far as one can go and IF he fails in forcing the hand of WMDC, Yorkcourt or new developer at BV, what then ?

Regarding the Wakefield Express, I'm not sure how favourably they view Trinity when compared to Box, who seems to have his ugly mug in the paper every week.
You get the impression that the Express either cant or dont want to take issue with this or, surely they would have been all over this before ?

As an open question and probably directed towards TRB or MC, is there anything that the fans can do to help (other than winning the Euro Millions and writing to the Express).

Well posted wildshot.I just cannot comprehend why people would rather see the club 'die' than share with Cas'. Better to give it a go there rather than just cease to exist.

You may be right but as the other option seems to be a brick through Box front window it's the best I have.

its like 8 miles away from bell vue. its nearly as far to the proposed newmarket site. i'm a leeds fan and travel 25 miles from Knottingingley ever week and allways have done.

So is Castleford stadium garrenteed now?, they seem to have been pouring concrete for 3years now

Apart from the fact that you are a Leeds fan in Knottingley (shame on you for not supporting your local team), perhaps you should think about the party politics that have been going on with both developments over the years and what appears to be some kind of forced merger before spouting such nonsense.
A shared ground would need to be 50/50 in capital/ownership and would need to be equidistance between Wakefield and Castleford for it to have any chance of working.
Normanton would be the right place but that, just isnt going to happen.

Personally i always thought that was the best course of action as i've never liked the Newmarket location but i'm pretty sure we've tried heading down that path and ultimately found a dead end there as well. I get the feeling all the trust and hope has gone between not only the council and Yorkcourt but also now 88m.

Quoting MC again in league weekly today he says ' We have given notice to quit and that has been aknowledged and accepted. Whatever happens to Belle Vue i've no idea. It's nothing really to do with us.' He also says when asked if there is any chance the decision could be reversed before the end of the season 'Not in my eyes', and is fed up of 'people making promises that are not kept'. if he could turn back the clock 6 months he would have gone to Dewsbury. He certainly comes accross as sick to the back teeth of it all and it is 'debatable' whether they'll ever be a route back into Wakefield. He is certainly cranking up the pressure and maybe it is a last hope that it spurs the powers that be into action but i also feel he has just thought enough is enough, to hell with you we are off. And i wouldn't be surprised if the first thing 88m do once we move out and taken what is ours is look to flatten the place. Sad times.

In his LW interview it states Mc has ruled out sharing with Cas.

Has cas ever offered to let you move in new ground if it's ever built.there is a world of difference between helping out on a temporary basis and being a permanent fixture

Just out of interest how much input will there be from Cas in financial terms?