How is that post not directed at me, when you quoted me and I don't have to insinuate anything bud, it clear what you've put.

I wish it was the end of July....another 4 months of this

I qouted you as you insinuated, intentionally or not that i rubbished wakeys plans and was desperate for wakey to fail by posting 'pot, kettle, black' (or words to that effect).

And the qoute does not refer to you it refers to those pathetic enough to be obsessed with constantly rubbishing the other clubs plans.

Read it again, properly.

c'mon lads, give ag a chance he's taken the club on when nobody else wanted to know,even with the knowledge we could be out of superleague.The rfl seem to be dragging there feet at every turn overseas paperwork,fit n proper persons test after all this he still gets stick.As for cas ground if uv sold wr good get on with building it then and leave us alone we've enough on.

Not the RFL's fault that, it's to do with a new business being set-up, whether a rugby league club or anything else.

I agree. Far too many people were 'in the know' when Ted was in charge. Trouble is they probably weren't in the know at all but were fed bull crap that they wanted to hear rather than the truth. Andrew Glover owns this club, he has no obligation to tell anyone anything until its concrete. Let him get on with his job of turning this once great club around, after all in the short time he's been here he's improved the club dramatically. I think it will take time for the ones who used to be part of the clique to get used things being run this way, but for me it's the right way to run things. I'm sure once everything is finalised we will be shouting it from the roof tops. Until then sit tight and put your trust in the man at the helm, I'm confident he knows what he's doing.

That

The parking is no worse than Headingley Odsal Warrington to name 3
I never have a problem parking or getting away and why do we need a pub we have bars at the club and the profit goes to the club
Belle Vue could be developed given the will and the money

All that is correct IMO.

I think Newmarket is a better option in purely business terms I have no doubt about that. However I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bath water where BV is concerned. I think that Ted and Di were very blinkered where BV was concerned, that said they were working under very tough financial restraints whether people like it or not. AG has far more room to move on this one.

Have to say though there is no way BV could be brought up to the standard of a new build, it's just not possible both in cost and build terms. That said it doesn't mean it wouldn't be just fine for us and RL if the RFL would be realistic and stop pretending it's a big sport rather than a well supported and much loved regional one!

As far as the decision makers at the RFL are concerned, Belle Vue will always be Belle Vue no matter how much it's tarted up. Staying at Belle Vue is admitting defeat regarding a Super League Franchise.

Think you're probably right there, it's unfortunate.

Dont think anyone is suggesting staying there any longer than getting a new build sorted out, so its important that we tidy it up to as good as possible until the time we move to better premises.

Can I just say that Newmarket very much remains Plan A and that much effort and focus is being put in to ensure a successful outcome, that we as certain as we can be, will indeed be successful. Plan B is just that and everyone hopes it is not needed but nothing is certain, but not planning for the worst would be foolish!

I think we will have updates for you very soon... watch this space!

As an aside, the quote below is from a newsletter I just received from a good contact at an Architects Practice in the area.

Whilst attention is understandably focused on the Parliamentary progress of the Localism Bill (likely to be enacted towards the end of 2011), things on the ground remain uncertain.

"One might normally commend a politician for getting on with things once in power, but in the world of planning “taking stock” is often the wiser first step.

Last summer the Government probably thought it was being very smart when it removed ‘garden land’ from the definition of previously developed land found within PPS3 ”Housing” (you can view a copy of the June 2010 version on the Communities and Local Government website). However, 9 months on, the consequences have been neither predictable nor particularly welcome (for developers and planning authorities alike). Whilst in Yorkshire and Humberside, some Councils have used these textural changes as cover for putting a stop to development comprising ‘garden grabbing’, others have sensibly sought a pragmatic accommodation enabling well designed infill proposals to secure approval. The trouble is the view of officers at some Councils would necessarily be influenced by the agenda of their political masters. If “nimbyism” holds sway, there is probably little prospect of pragmatism rather—’refuse!’ and let the Inspectorate pick up the consequences.

The trouble is this sort of policy limbo only adds to the air of uncertainty currently bedeviling the development industry."

I could not have put it better myself!