I thought Martyn Sadler was a Wakey fan ?

Ok i'll bite one last time. I've not 'trolled' this subject whatsoever, i've offered my opinion based on my professional experience and just because that differs from yours and as such you don't like it, does not make it trolling. And as it happens so far I have been correct, nothing has happened regarding the stadium, hence there is about to be a need for a call to arms. Not my problem if you can't handle that and as i've said the fact that anyone with an alternative view is the victim of name calling from yourself is more of a reflection on you than me. So it's not faux anger, I just don't like how you try and talk down to people, it's not big and it certainly isn't clever.

So anyway my supposed negative is I don't think protests alone will have an effect, but my positive is that the judical/legal route might well do so. It could at the very least scare the interested parties to be a little more forthcoming with their negoiations and at that point then a show of public support may mean people take notice. If that's the plan great, go for it on the proviso that legal advice has been sought and it is seen as a viable option. But a march to the town hall with a few placards is unlikely to cut the mustard by itself, it needs some meat behind it. Yorkcourt have shown their hand already and politicians are fluent in telling you what you want to hear and then doing nothing. Hopefully a threat of action will spur them into life, if not it will have to be all out attack. Wakefield needs new facilities and I will be as happy as anyone to see them built, it is why I signed the petition in the first place.

I think there are some good points raised to be honest and slagging people off isn't helpful. Would a protest make any difference at this point in the election? Do enough people give a damn anymore? If we take legal action, who pays? What is the likelihood of BV being sold from under our feet? Also would relegation effect anything should it happen? Questions, questions....

He is.

The points raised or there validity are not the issue. I for one believe that much and possibly all of what Sixtogo says may turn out to be correct.

But I've said it before and I'll say it again why does he feel the need to voice it on what is clearly a SWAG orientated etc thread. Why does he not start his own, he'll get plenty of takers. SWAG's job as is in the name Stadium Wakefield ACTION Group is to be positive and carry on fighting as it see's fit.

Why is that so difficult to understand. Why derail every thread we ever put on here with his negative spin. Start his own thread, start his own group if he wish that's his choice but give us a break we are fully aware of all the negatives - we are not as stupid as he thinks.

Its puzzled me as well as I'm sure the media would love to get their teeth into some thing like this with all the suspicious sub plots. I get the feeling that SWAG have been reluctant to go down this road while ever there was a chance of an amicable agreement with Yorkcourt. If this meeting signals the end of any hope of a peaceful settlement I would expect/hope that this will be one of the actions taken.

Vastman stop being a bullyboy again let fans have their say .. Zip it.!!

Bump!

There are things going on in the background relating to this meeting which we will update on Wednesday.

I think our biggest problem is the massive amount of information we have.

There will be a Q&A session on the night.

Looking forward to this meeting hopefully everything will be out in the open truths will be said and we can all battle for a stadium for our Club and City.

We have certainly brought out the haters on Twitter! One in particular who just seems incapable of stopping himself - and I don't mean the Armadillo!

If you think that our Stadium, our City and our identity is worth fighting for, please come to the meeting!

A month ago I wrote to MP Mary Creagh expressing my individual concern re: lack of progress with the Community Stadium Development.
To be fair to her she did contact the council and received a letter from Andrew Wallhead(Corporate director Regeneration and Economic growth), a copy of which she forwarded to me.
In it he goes through all the usual stuff about council supporting the 'Trust', acting as advisors, attending meetings etc etc.
He then goes on to concede the S106 imposes a positive obligation on the developers.
Then says the 'positive 'agreement is ' subject to timings of development and the economic climate at the time'.
Which of course may be never.
Which in my view means the council are doing nothing to accelerate developments.
Apologies to those who are obviously working their 'butts' off ' to push thing forward as you will be fully aware of the above.
Just wanted to let the council know as an individual I was not just lying down and letting things 'slither' away.
Perhaps, allied to the great work already going on, individuals bombarding MPs and council may help a little.

The article in the this week's WE does little to help; it totally fails to mention the developers obligation under the S106 agreement, or the loss of community sports facilities that their skulduggery represents; two important points that could have got the non WTW supporting public interested in the story.

I'm guessing that the WE ether didn't research it properly, or just weren't fussed enough about the story to do a decent job.

The WE article was exactly what we did want. Not many understand the whole picture, but there wouldn't be much a need for a meeting if we just put it all in the paper first!

It should be a good evening, whatever it is we know by then!

As I now live 70 miles away from Wakefield I am still a life long supporter over 55years now
Will someone post an account of the public meeting on here please
Thanks in anticipation