Won't make any difference right now. The only time it might become an issue is if nothing had happened at GH by the time the current FPP runs out in April 2014 and a renewal had to be submitted. Then it could be reviewed as part of the process.

Don't think i'm clutching at straws, because i'm not.

A few people have posted over time, Fully being one (and the one who my question was aimed at in particular) , that the there IHO is a strong possibility that only one stadium would get built.

IF NM gets the nod, and we will probably find out the answer to that before Cas announce they have a buyer for WR IMO, would the fact that NM wouldn't have been taken into account as an objection to the FPP being granted because of the PI, would that be taken into account retrospectively?

The financial difficulties, and better use for the land from a planning point of view etc, are these all issues that could retrospectively manifest themselves, or is that not possible legaly etc?

I don't know thats why i ask, i do kind of buy into the one ground for the district argument, purely from an economic point of view, but not from a continuation of two teams from the district continuing in SL thing.

Honest answer, I'd like to think not, but i think it could, on the grounds i have previously mentioned.

Who would be objecting to GH on these grounds?



Economically it makes far more sense for two grounds to be built, it brings a lot of money into the local economy from external sources (yorkcourt and opus) whats more it guarantees 2 sl clubs in the district which brings a lot of money into the district, not to mention concerts etc which can bring a huge amount of money into the local economy. Economically the district gains a lot from two stadiums being built, the district loses money if two aren't built.



I have never heard of a legal precedent of PP being altered because of another PP being granted.



Don't wtw still have to apply for PP if the PI is favorable too?

AFAIK we still have to secure FPP, which i think following a positive outcome to the PI would be a formality.

Others will know far more about it than me though.

sorry bad choice of word (re objecting), i meant would it make the FPP decision an answer to a now different question, if NM was actually happening, and would that mean the question would have to be re-asked taking into account any new or previous situations, i.e planning and economical?

The planning requirements now may not be the planning requirements then, was there a economical argument then that may now have diminished (or changed completely with if NM gets the go ahead).

The answer is is still no there are no factors created by NM being approved that will affect GH at all, whether wakefield got a ground built or not was not a factor in the planning for GH, hope that puts your mind at rest.

I should think the future of both clubs will be sorted at the end of March when NM either gets passed or rejected. If it's passed you will have a problem, if it fails we both will. I have kept clear of this debate for nearly a year but I can't see where Cas have moved on one inch in the pat two years. I have no idea whether NM will get the nod but at least the future will be definite one way or the other.



Personally I see no reason for the ludicrous over confidence of the likes of Fully and Cronk any more than I see why Trinity fans feel confident enough to come on here shouting the odds. As it stands we are both in the crapper.

Hell fire It must be the new year or something but i actually agree with Vastman

.......







Delboy66(aye of the Tigers fanzine)

Other than the "standing in the crapper bit" i do too, normally i would sit.

We will probably find that Opus submit their Planning Application before Spring first and foremost (at least I would hope!) And FWIW, we have a buyer for Wheldon Road. They are called Opus North (Ltd) in partnership with Palmer Capital and there is more than one supermarket operator interested in the site.



FWIW, I have never said only one stadium will get built as I believe both will get built in time. The real question remains in what timescales and neither party can be convinced of realistic timeframes, however, I remain confident that we will be building next season and we will be in the new stadium beginning of 2014 in full.



Newmarket wouldn't have been considered as an 'objection' because Wakefield cannot object against Glasshoughton or the Wheldon Road application as it has zero effect on them whatsoever. It would change nothing in the state of Glasshoughton whatsoever as has already been said and that is merely straw clutching. Similarly, we do not have financial difficulties as we still have full planning permission and an asset we can sell to fund it. Furthermore, we have agreed contractually to the land up at Glasshoughton.

Give over!



Cas are not even thinking about Newmarket, whatsoever. And no it doesn't have an impact on us, nor will you know about Newmarket by the end of March. It will be April earliest. Even if it is passed, there are absolutely no guarantees because of the potential conditions it could be hit with that YCP will have to satisfy.



If it fails, it strengthens the need for Glasshoughton and equally the Council can throw all their weight behind that including funding so will be even more of a necessity. In addition to that, I fully expect that Cas will know more about our position before Wakey even hear back in the Spring.



As for Cas not moving on one inch, I point out the fact we obtained full planning permission for GH last Spring. I point out that we have also found a new buyer for WR that will fully fund the new stadium is preparing an application that is going to be fast-tracked by being submitted in full first and foremost. Ultimately, they want to ensure it gets through at the first attempt.



You see no reason for the over-confidence because you don't know me personally, nor do you know who I speak to or what I know. Notwithstanding that fact, it's clear in your mind you've already made your mind up so it would be remiss really to argue with you.