|
FORUMS > Wakefield Trinity > New stadium |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 35 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2010 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2012 | Jul 2012 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Fully "Diddums.'"
Thats par for the course for some of the Cas posters that contribute to the Wakey forum. They come on here as the epitome of moderation then go and spout their real feelings trying to whip up anti-wakey trash talk on the other scumbag forum they post on.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 15521 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2010 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2020 | May 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Trinitarian "Thats par for the course for some of the Cas posters that contribute to the Wakey forum. They come on here as the epitome of moderation then go and spout their real feelings trying to whip up anti-wakey trash talk on the other scumbag forum they post on.'"
Indeed they do and Fully is one of the prime movers; his perfidiousness has been exposed several times recently by myself, G Price FC and others and as a result, he has zero credibility.
Every cloud has a silver lining though - since his multiple personalities were revealed, he posts here far less often, which is a boon.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 8487 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2020 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: bren2k "Indeed they do and Fully is one of the prime movers; his perfidiousness has been exposed several times recently by myself, G Price FC and others and as a result, he has zero credibility.
Every cloud has a silver lining though - since his multiple personalities were revealed, he posts here far less often, which is a boon.'"
And yet your immaturity still knows no bounds.
You've exposed nothing; only what you like to believe and more often than not construed to support your own bitter, twisted, boring arguments.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4259 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
May 2007 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2020 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: bigalf "The revised Travel Plan is something that should have been dealt with at the original submission. It is only one part of the Inquiry terms of reference.'"
Quite possibly but it has been dealt with now and two statutory objections have been removed by resolution. These things do take time as you know... so, how are Opus getting on with the Travel Plan for Tesco on Wheldon Road? The application goes in, in just a few weeks does it not? Do you think there travel plan will be 'dealt with' prior to submission?
Quote: bigalf "I doubt that the fact that Leeds City Region ( A partnership bringing together the eleven local authorities of Barnsley, Bradford, Calderdale, Craven, Harrogate, Kirklees, Leeds, Selby, Wakefield, York and North Yorkshire County Council) announcing that “Aire Valley” ( Stourton) is their preferred location for the Enterprise Zone will have much bearing on the Leeds City Council submission to PI.
- It could even bolster the position of Leeds City Council who will want to attract as much development to that area rather than seeing it lost to NM.'"
Well you know what thinking does for you mate... you still think that Wheldon Road has not been allocated for housing in the LDF, despite it being in black and white in the housing land supply table of the site specific LDF document. Yes, it was indeed removed as a specific housing site (as Cas and Ben Bailey originally wanted!) in favour of the whole Wheldon Road area been given SPA status but if you look in the table, right there in the housing section under 'Housing Land Supply' it says - SPA N9; Site Name, N101 Castleford Tigers Ground, Wheldon Road; Total Identified Housing Capacity, 105; 2008/09 to 2015/16, 21; 2016/17 to 2021/22, 84.
Don't forget this bit either - "The special policy areas will help meet the requirements for both housing and employment land, as shown in the housing land supply table in chapter 6, Housing Proposals and the employment land supply in chapter 7, Employment Proposals."
You are right, an SPA gives more flexibility to move this allocation elsewhere within the SPA, so where do you suggest they build those 105 houses instead then? Don't ask Nestle and Aeternum Capital for it to be moved to their sites because they are very likley to be leading the objections to the supermarket application... because they both want a Supermarket as well... and to be honest, I feel Aeternum Capital might have a very good case!
Quote: bigalf "So, enlighten me as to any other "developments".'"
I feel that the days for enlightening you about anything to do with Newmarket are long gone... you have shown your true colours recently (which is a shame, because I thought you where above them) and it resides with the small 'hypocrites are us' bunch of Cas supporters who only see flaws in the Newmarket plan (which is far from perfect, but as you know I feel the positives outweigh the negatives reasonably substantially) but think that the Opus plan for Wheldon Road is perfect in every detail (despite having not actually seen it yet) and without any problems or issues at all... if only development and regeneration was that simple!
| | | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4259 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
May 2007 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2020 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Fully "And yet your immaturity still knows no bounds.
You've exposed nothing; only what you like to believe and more often than not construed to support your own bitter, twisted, boring arguments.'"
You are priceless Fully, you really are... lets looks at what you say here eh - rlhttps://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f... and you don't consider this even slightly bitter and twisted, despite everything and Cas almost certainly (and rightly so) being in SL next year?
As for what you like to believe, well I KNOW you only choose to believe what you want to believe while you are quite happy to ignore any information, no matter how black and white, that contradicts this belief in any way... never mind being a journalist... you should join a cult... you would be a perfect member of any cult!
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 8487 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2020 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Inflatable_Armadillo "You are priceless Fully, you really are... lets looks at what you say here eh - rlhttps://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f... and you don't consider this even slightly bitter and twisted, despite everything and Cas almost certainly (and rightly so) being in SL next year?
'"
That has nothing to do with being bitter. That is me stating my opinion that the article has an imbalance against licensing without offering an alternative argument. Care to differ and say it does? I am an avid believe that the licensing system does work in circumstances; it needs tweaking. As you will note, I state quite clearly that TRB makes some valid points. I then go onto make a suggestion as to how the situation could be improved to have the best of both worlds so to speak. My decision to consider not purchasing the said paper is my own beliefs based on purchasing it over the course of the last few months (and yes, I buy it every Monday religiously).
| | | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4259 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
May 2007 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2020 | Feb 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Fully "That has nothing to do with being bitter. That is me stating my opinion that the article has an imbalance against licensing without offering an alternative argument. Care to differ and say it does? I am an avid believe that the licensing system does work in circumstances; it needs tweaking. As you will note, I state quite clearly that TRB makes some valid points.'"
Whooosh... over you head yet again and you fail to see any irony and hypocrisy in your argument or position.
You are such a numpty and claim to be a trainee journalist, yet you don't have any idea about how print media actually works!!! The article is not a NEWS piece, it doesn't need to have any balance or even an alternative argument, because it is an OPINION based piece... this is not the BBC! Newspapers are full of them... every morning... I am sure a budding journalist like you occasionally reads a quality paper?
You fail to even understand the concept of arguing about the inclusion of the piece, which you are actually doing in this thread, which is childish and bitter at best, versus actually presenting and arguing against the points raised in TRB's opinion based article and then castigating others for being bitter and twisted in this thread!
You are genuinely unbelievable and the worst things is... you clearly and wholeheartedly think you are being balanced and reasoned in your posts, while everyone else is clearly biased!!!
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 8487 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2020 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| To avoid any further avoidance of doubt just so you can be happy and don't have to write long winded-replies and so I am not wasting your time or any other person's for that matter. You are right, I am wrong. Everything I say, have ever said and will say will be wrong. There, everybody happy. And yes, that is me saying that I simply cannot be d any more. It's getting beyond petty; I am entitled to my opinions, I am entitled to disagree with comments and I am entitled to state what I believe. If you disagree, fine.
| | | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 7665 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2003 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Jun 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Inflatable_Armadillo "Quite possibly but it has been dealt with now and two statutory objections have been removed by resolution. These things do take time as you know... so, how are Opus getting on with the Travel Plan for Tesco on Wheldon Road? The application goes in, in just a few weeks does it not? Do you think there travel plan will be 'dealt with' prior to submission?
Well you know what thinking does for you mate... you still think that Wheldon Road has not been allocated for housing in the LDF, despite it being in black and white in the housing land supply table of the site specific LDF document. Yes, it was indeed removed as a specific housing site (as Cas and Ben Bailey originally wanted!) in favour of the whole Wheldon Road area been given SPA status but if you look in the table, right there in the housing section under 'Housing Land Supply' it says - SPA N9; Site Name, N101 Castleford Tigers Ground, Wheldon Road; Total Identified Housing Capacity, 105; 2008/09 to 2015/16, 21; 2016/17 to 2021/22, 84.
Don't forget this bit either - "The special policy areas will help meet the requirements for both housing and employment land, as shown in the housing land supply table in chapter 6, Housing Proposals and the employment land supply in chapter 7, Employment Proposals."
You are right, an SPA gives more flexibility to move this allocation elsewhere within the SPA, so where do you suggest they build those 105 houses instead then? Don't ask Nestle and Aeternum Capital for it to be moved to their sites because they are very likley to be leading the objections to the supermarket application... because they both want a Supermarket as well... and to be honest, I feel Aeternum Capital might have a very good case!
I feel that the days for enlightening you about anything to do with Newmarket are long gone... you have shown your true colours recently (which is a shame, because I thought you where above them) and it resides with the small 'hypocrites are us' bunch of Cas supporters who only see flaws in the Newmarket plan (which is far from perfect, but as you know I feel the positives outweigh the negatives reasonably substantially) but think that the Opus plan for Wheldon Road is perfect in every detail (despite having not actually seen it yet) and without any problems or issues at all... if only development and regeneration was that simple!'"
Thanks IA,
Maybe Big Alf will come back and accept what I wrote was factually correct.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1347 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2022 | May 2018 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: The Clan "Thanks IA,
Maybe Big Alf will come back and accept what I wrote was factually correct.'"
Where in this thread?
Only "Sesquipedalian" has claimed to have written facts.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 11580 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2007 | 17 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Sep 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Fully "To avoid any further avoidance of doubt just so you can be happy and don't have to write long winded-replies and so I am not wasting your time or any other person's for that matter. You are right, I am wrong. Everything I say, have ever said and will say will be wrong. There, everybody happy. And yes, that is me saying that I simply cannot be d any more. It's getting beyond petty; I am entitled to my opinions, I am entitled to disagree with comments and I am entitled to state what I believe. If you disagree, fine.'"
When are you ever going to learn? once again IA has made you look,to use his term a numpty, and a right one at that, so much so that you have had one almighty hissy fit and rivalled him as to who made you look more stupid, him or you, your problem is that your opinions are based on other peoples and look ridiculous against people like IA who deals in facts and experience mainly, and fwiw your the one showing petulance nobody else, the good thing for you is you hopefully you will grow out of it with maturity hth.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1347 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2022 | May 2018 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Inflatable_Armadillo "Quite possibly but it has been dealt with now and two statutory objections have been removed by resolution. These things do take time as you know... so, how are Opus getting on with the Travel Plan for Tesco on Wheldon Road? The application goes in, in just a few weeks does it not? Do you think there travel plan will be 'dealt with' prior to submission?
Well you know what thinking does for you mate... you still think that Wheldon Road has not been allocated for housing in the LDF, despite it being in black and white in the housing land supply table of the site specific LDF document. Yes, it was indeed removed as a specific housing site (as Cas and Ben Bailey originally wanted!) in favour of the whole Wheldon Road area been given SPA status but if you look in the table, right there in the housing section under 'Housing Land Supply' it says - SPA N9; Site Name, N101 Castleford Tigers Ground, Wheldon Road; Total Identified Housing Capacity, 105; 2008/09 to 2015/16, 21; 2016/17 to 2021/22, 84.
Don't forget this bit either - "The special policy areas will help meet the requirements for both housing and employment land, as shown in the housing land supply table in chapter 6, Housing Proposals and the employment land supply in chapter 7, Employment Proposals."
You are right, an SPA gives more flexibility to move this allocation elsewhere within the SPA, so where do you suggest they build those 105 houses instead then? Don't ask Nestle and Aeternum Capital for it to be moved to their sites because they are very likley to be leading the objections to the supermarket application... because they both want a Supermarket as well... and to be honest, I feel Aeternum Capital might have a very good case!
I feel that the days for enlightening you about anything to do with Newmarket are long gone... you have shown your true colours recently (which is a shame, because I thought you where above them) and it resides with the small 'hypocrites are us' bunch of Cas supporters who only see flaws in the Newmarket plan (which is far from perfect, but as you know I feel the positives outweigh the negatives reasonably substantially) but think that the Opus plan for Wheldon Road is perfect in every detail (despite having not actually seen it yet) and without any problems or issues at all... if only development and regeneration was that simple!'"
Wow!!
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 7665 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2003 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Jun 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: bigalf "Where in this thread?
Only "Sesquipedalian" has claimed to have written facts.
He seems fairly chilled and rational to me - can't you handle the truth?
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 12504 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2002 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Dec 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| Quote: vastman "He seems fairly chilled and rational to me - can't you handle the truth?'"
My thoughts too.
Finally getting to him is it?
| | |
| |
|
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2024 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
3.8798828125:10
|
|
POSTS | ONLINE | REGISTRATIONS | RECORD | 19.65M +2 | 1,815 | 80,156 | 14,103 |
| LOGIN HERE or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
|
RLFANS Match Centre
Mens Betfred Super League XXVIII ROUND : 1 | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
Wigan |
29 |
768 |
338 |
430 |
48 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Hull KR |
29 |
731 |
344 |
387 |
44 |
Warrington |
29 |
769 |
351 |
418 |
42 |
Leigh |
29 |
580 |
442 |
138 |
33 |
Salford |
28 |
556 |
561 |
-5 |
32 |
St.Helens |
28 |
618 |
411 |
207 |
30 |
|
Catalans |
27 |
475 |
427 |
48 |
30 |
Leeds |
27 |
530 |
488 |
42 |
28 |
Huddersfield |
27 |
468 |
658 |
-190 |
20 |
Castleford |
27 |
425 |
735 |
-310 |
15 |
Hull FC |
27 |
328 |
894 |
-566 |
6 |
LondonB |
27 |
317 |
916 |
-599 |
6 |
Betfred Championship 2024 ROUND : 1 | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
Wakefield |
27 |
1032 |
275 |
757 |
52 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Toulouse |
26 |
765 |
388 |
377 |
37 |
Bradford |
28 |
723 |
420 |
303 |
36 |
York |
29 |
695 |
501 |
194 |
32 |
Widnes |
27 |
561 |
502 |
59 |
29 |
Featherstone |
27 |
634 |
525 |
109 |
28 |
|
Sheffield |
26 |
626 |
526 |
100 |
28 |
Doncaster |
26 |
498 |
619 |
-121 |
25 |
Halifax |
26 |
509 |
650 |
-141 |
22 |
Batley |
26 |
422 |
591 |
-169 |
22 |
Swinton |
28 |
484 |
676 |
-192 |
20 |
Barrow |
25 |
442 |
720 |
-278 |
19 |
Whitehaven |
25 |
437 |
826 |
-389 |
18 |
Dewsbury |
27 |
348 |
879 |
-531 |
4 |
Hunslet |
1 |
6 |
10 |
-4 |
0 |
YOU HAVE RECENT POSTS OFF
|