In clarity to the above comments:

Our firend 'rugbyball' is a Featherstone fan who appears to wish to de-rail the campaign to influence the planning process in favour of the proposals submitted.

5 years ago it seemed that WMDC would do little, if anything, to assist in the building of new sporting facilities for rugby league. We have come along way since then, not through what SWAG has done, but through the what the fans have done - once they had a campaign to support. We are quite possibly approaching the point where our use will be no longer required, but I have no desire to end up like the South African cricket team (sorry Al) and end up 1 winning ball short of getting what we set out to achieve.

We are NOT there yet - please do not be swayed otherwise by some of the comments on here!

I've always said that I will not believe the new ground will happen until I am stood in it watching a game - there have been plenty of ideas, plans, let downs, over the years. We are now getting close towards it being reality but as TRB says, we are NOT there yet. It still needs the support of the fans and the community of Wakefield and others.

I'm on the wrong side of the M62 in Rothwell (owned by Leeds ) but probably closer to the new site than many in Wakefield. There have been a few letters of support for the stadium in the local press and I will support the plans for the stadium and other stuff as much as I can.

About 10 or so years ago before everything went ga-ga for Leeds United, they were looking at having a new ground just of J45 of the M1 - this would have been about half a mile away from my house. Immediately a number of locals turned NIMBY and wrote to the press saying it would bring loads of fans to Rothwell to get drunk, fight and cause damage like had never been seen. I never agreed with them and would have supported the stadium & and retail park / industrial area around it - if it came back as an option I would support it again.

Cas aren’t funding the stadium for themselves, they need outside investment, like Trinity, otherwise it would’ve been built already. Part of the sale of BV is going towards the new stadium. So one could say both clubs have invested heavily into making their stadiums happen.

Rugbyball. All forums feature posters who take extreme views and are very prejudicial attitudes regarding the activities of their own and other clubs. Our board is no different. I think however that your propensity to talk about our club and our fans as being a hermogenous group with identical values and attitudes is unjustified and, on the Wakefield forum, not in the best spirit of dialogue (sure I know others have done it from a Wakefield perspective too and whilst this doesn't make this right at least they are doing it on their own forum).

I don't know if you are in posession of all the facts, or if you have ever worked in a role as a community activit tring to influence local authorities.
Taking on such a role, as activists at SWAG have done, is somewhat like committing to negotiating with the wind about how the sand should be blown about. You have very few cards in your hand to play, you often only get access to the monkey firing the organ grinders bullets and you are subject to the vagaries of decision makers who are in position because they have won popularity contests rather than because they have the capacity to act strategically in the best interests of the community.

The worse part of this, in my experience, is having to play politics with adversaries for whom polotics is their day job. This often involves them spreading information which doesn't always have a robust evidence base. Once such information gets into local media it takes a herculean effort to change public perception.

Consequently I think the activists at SWAG are perfectly entitled to defend their position and encourage those who so wish to write to the local rag singing the praises of the proposed communit stadium. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone with the best interests of RL at heart would seek to discourage them from doing so.

I totally agree.

are we putting up some cash, but going to pay a reduced rent for a period of time?? I think I heard!!!!

Not sure, but it makes sense not to overprice the rent, something the LSV has suffered from with Leigh Genesis.

And in all fairness, we should pay less if we have contributed initially. It would be unfair to charge all tennants the same if they have not given the same level of financial support to the development.

I would've thought there will be some sort of scale, professional teams will obviously pay more then semi-pro, but a fine balance has to be struck in keep the facility financially viable and ensuring sports team are not priced out of operating from there.