The chairman and chris need backing on this they want whats right for the club city and fans they have my backing totally and thats even if it means the club going down and starting again hes always done what he believes his right for this club financially and put a bloody good team on the park for us on a tight budget how anyone can not believe hes not doing what he feels is right in standing up against this council is beyond me in carter we trust

I don't have a problem in trusting M C . the clubs looking in good shape. I don't understand how he could be forced out so maybe someone could explain. The whole sagas been a complete mess and I don't see it improving any time soon.
The club should have responded to the first press release legally and that would have set the agenda out in a more structured form. To let the council make statement 2 seems ill advised and only adds to the confusion.
What the hells going on.

They did respond they stated they were making no further comment and seeking legal advice before responding. Leave it to those that know about this mess!

Just to clarify in case I have misunderstood your comment.

There is no infighting between the Club and Trust.

Can't agree with that statement about if we have to go down and start again so be it. That just means we've bloody well rolled over and let them win NEVER.
If Michael has had enough that has to be his decision but I hope he wouldn't consider that he's done well for us . If he did I would be gutted but I wouldn't be going with him we must still support our club and fight for our rightful place in Super league and our right to play in a stadium that was promised. Surely there is a compromise somewhere.

If he was to walk away, It would be a shame, as I think having him at the helm has been the best thing to happen to this club for a long time.

He has my back all the way in what is decided.

That said though, I will always support this great club.

Wimbledon or MK Dons it is then?

Because Matchday income alone is not enough to run and sustain a viable business.
The club need to be able to run their business from the stadium 52 weeks a year, not just on 15 or so matchdays. If the club don't have the ability to generate income from conferences, parties, weddings etc then they cannot grow the business.

Do you think Cas would be accepting moving into a new stadium (if/when it ever gets built) with no facility to generate income from it on anything other than on matchdays??? They know that their deal provides them with a long term arrangement to grow their business. That is what Trinity have always said was required for us, so why should we accept anything less?

+1

Why then are we not willing to pay a commercial rent or do we we want all the income with no financial input other than the name Wakefield Trinity.