Damned right and you take some beating, there is a word for people like you, Scab.

While we're talking about heritage, lets talk about Trinity's proud heritage as one of the founding members of the Rugby League, a proud working class sport that decided it had had enough of the fact that money, and not skill, decided whether you could play the game. This new code forged tremendous links with the working population in large parts of Northern England, on both sides of the Pennines but nowhere more intimately than the Wakefield area, where along with cricket it overshadowed all other sports to provide relief from the drudgery of everyday working life. It used to be said that if a team needed a classy half-back they could shout down any pit shaft in Wakefield and get a hatful of worthy contenders.

What better way to preserve this heritage than to build a new stadium on an abandoned pit! Re-form the old prize winning Newmarket/Silkstone Brass Band, have them playing on match days, and call the Stadium the 'Up Yours, Thatcher!' stadium.

Thats what I call Heritage - wildlife generally looks after itself, thats why some of the best places to see wildlife are derelict sites and railways!

That is NOT a word to be used in this debate, IMO. It should be reserved for those special people who really deserve it, and I object to it being used for everyday abuse.

He deserves it.

Really? In the context of this debate, or as part of a previous life?

Bit of both.

Quick, before that (naughty word here) Cameron gets in!

what a silly man.

Actually thinking about it, its quite funny... its going to be built on a old mining site.

amazing that a small word like can be so offensive, coming from a mining background my self I don't use that word lightly

the sooner the season starts the better

1st point, You would no doubt revel in this, 2nd point, do you have any proof of this?

I dont use the world lightly either, only used it once since the strike apart from this but i have my reasons.

I suggest we move on and quickly, Not really interested in Miners strikes or name calling

The irony of all of this is that I rely on Mr Box (or whoever will make the decision) to approve the scheme for the benefit of the city because of the way the Thornes Park project went.

My rationale for this is that Mr Box et al acted for how they thought the city was best served, regardless of how it affected those who would have benefited from a different decision. Even though it was contrary to what everyone on here wanted, I assume that they took into account the overall benefit to Wakefield when considering the cost, the traffic problems, the impact on local residents for what was in reality just a new home to the city's rugby club. They thought that the minuses outweighed the pluses, perhaps bouyed by the thought that the franchise decision had just bought them three years thinking time.

Compare this to the Newmarket scheme. In weighing up the pluses and minuses, there is no contest. Thornes Park wouldn't have provided hundreds of new jobs to the people of the district in the way that Newmarket will, and Newmarket will not affect as many residents. Also, the area can hardly be described as tranquil, on the edge of the motorway.

So if we look at the precedent of how those making the decisions have acted before, I can't see any other decision being reached than approval.

So to the residents, as someone has already said, get involved with the scheme to make sure your voices are heard in order to minimise its impact, and stop using arguments of residents in a residential area to strengthen the arguments for the project, as the video simply bolsters the argument to move the ground away from Agbrigg.

Well thought out post!