cg
Squad Member
Posts: 279 
|
Post by cg on Oct 10, 2007 11:47:47 GMT
I look forward to parking my car across Mr Guy's driveway and trampling across his flowerbed when we kick the season off at the at Nunnery Way in 2009. NIMBY d*ckhead! St Modwen's might will crush you like the insignificant little toad you are. Steady on Dave - are you not a happy bunny today? Of course his flowerbed is probably a mile or so from the stadium so you may have walk. Can I be the first Doubting Thomas to put a shiny penny on us not playing their as soon as 2009-10? |
|
|
|
Post by dave on Oct 10, 2007 12:10:51 GMT
Even if we are still at St George's Lane, it would be worth the walk just to annoy the ignorant pr*ck.
10,000 all seater at St George's Lane indeed.
And as for sharing Sixways, if WRFC are not willing to have us or if primacy of tenure prevents it, then there is nowhere better than Nunnery Way to put a new stadium. You are fighting a losing battle Mr Git (sorry the "I" and the "T" are too close to the "U" and the "Y" on my keyboard and I slipped).
|
|
|
|
Post by stevebourne on Oct 10, 2007 12:18:04 GMT
I noticed that too, Wayne - wonder what it meant? Does anyone know anything about his background? I think, actually, he doesn't want St Modwen's to develop the land at all Wayne. He'd prefer it to stay 'green and pleasant' - which is fair enough - 'cept it backs onto the motorway so isn't 'pucker' green belt. Does anyone know if he also objected to the builidng and expansion of County Hall and St Richard's Hospice or the Countryside Centre or is it just football clubs he doesn't like? or the 50 acres of development on Green Belt at Sixways? He has no understand of primacy of tenure at all. The Guinness Premiership have changed their rules to make sure no further clubs groundshare. They are very clear on this, if Warriors did not have Primacy of Tenure at a ground and were relegated then they could NOT be promoted back to the Guinness Premiership It is not debateable www.guinnesspremiership.com/3910_1677.php?PHPSESSID=57d9e41510c39a7bfb740e97ee700ef4It is the reason that Leicester will end up having two stadiums if Leicester can no longer develop the 'in-town' Welford Road. He hasn't a clue |
|
|
|
Post by dave on Oct 10, 2007 12:25:53 GMT
Put simply Mr Git...
WCFC cannot enter the Football League unless they have primacy of tenure.
WRFC cannot re-enter the Guinness Premiership if relegated (which on recent form could well happen) unless they have primacy of tenure.
Therefore Ground sharing will not work for WCFC and WRFC who have ambitions to play in the football league and Guinness Premiership respectively. Only one side can have primacy of tenure, and WRFC will not give it up, and why should they?
Leicester is a very good example stevebourne.
|
|
|
|
Post by darrellbutler on Oct 10, 2007 14:31:19 GMT
Andrew Guy is a pillock.
He said in April 2007 that he was "reliably informed that 400 is considered a good gate."
I know it's only a simple one but it's evidence enough that the guy is an idiot.
|
|
cg
Squad Member
Posts: 279
|
Post by cg on Oct 10, 2007 14:54:53 GMT
Andrew Guy is a pillock. He said in April 2007 that he was "reliably informed that 400 is considered a good gate." I know it's only a simple one but it's evidence enough that the guy is an idiot. yeah and its like his endless mis-quoting of Gerry Boon from D&T and the glib suggestion that SGL could be a 10,000 all seater stadia..facts don't matter..actually I contacted the Queens Market campaign folks in East London and they want to make it clear their beef with St Modwens isn't remotely connected to opposition to the Nunnery Way development or NIMBY objections elsewhere so whoever linked the two in the comments response to the Worcester News piece is firing wide of the mark and not representing their campaign. Driving back from St Peters earlier - I clocked it, roughly, as a mile from the Swan at Whittington to Nunnery Way and far less into Warndon villages so quite why this is supposed to effect Whittington residents more than others in and around the city is geographical nonsense. Its would be the equivilent of town centre shops opposing developments at SGL. As for primacy of tenure - I do have some sympathy for Mr Guy there - the rules are daft and don't make sense and should be changed. If Saracens, London Irish or Wasps went down are they seriously saying they wouldn't be allowed back up to the Guinness Premiership unless they could become prime tenants of Vicarage Road, The Madjeski Stadium or Adams Park, where clearly the prime tenants are the football clubs ......but there is no way Cecil is going to risk being a test case because there is 'previous' between WRFC and the Guniness Premier League isn't there? |
|
|
|
Post by Bstander on Oct 10, 2007 14:55:19 GMT
|
|
cg
Squad Member
Posts: 279
|
Post by cg on Oct 10, 2007 15:08:16 GMT
What Mike says makes sense - but read the first reponse below it and you see the kind of ignorant pillocks your up against. At least this Labour government has done something to address obesity and social exclusion through sport - Lord knows I get invited to attend enough launches of schemes around the country that are tackling the porblems - previous Tory administrations did all they could to smash down playing fields and cause the sort of social disruption that we've now got. 'No such thing as society' anyone? Its like the old Likely Lads joke: Where's Shrewsbury? Division Three, I think. Having a Football League club raises a city's profile and prestige - and that is what Nunnery Way could give us. Worcester deserves a Football League club on population alone. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 15:26:44 GMT
Are we allowed to discuss, or doesn't anyone know, what the alleged interest Mr Guy has in this issue?
|
|
wh
Youth Teamer
Posts: 44
|
Post by wh on Oct 10, 2007 15:36:34 GMT
Are we allowed to discuss, or doesn't anyone know, what the alleged interest Mr Guy has in this issue? I would love to know, does anyone know the chap who posted the comments on Worcester News site (see link on last page) |
|
|
|
Post by colinlayland on Oct 10, 2007 15:52:37 GMT
Are we allowed to discuss, or doesn't anyone know, what the alleged interest Mr Guy has in this issue? I think its some thing to do with November 5th, they collect pennys for him,no sorry its the wrong bloke.  |
|
|
|
Post by Tim Munslow on Oct 10, 2007 17:27:31 GMT
Rather than trample on his flower beds (which is exactly the sort of thing he fears will be the outcome of having a football stadium) why don't we all write to the Worcester News airing the opposite point of view and showing up his general lack of knowledge.
That would be a far more positive reaction. We cannot let his letter go unanswered.
|
|
|
|
Post by darrellbutler on Oct 10, 2007 17:34:16 GMT
I hope a stray penalty smashes his greenhouse  |
|
|
|
Post by StopfordianWCFC on Oct 10, 2007 19:21:13 GMT
I hope a stray penalty smashes his greenhouse I hear Les Hines effort at Vauxhall Motors two seasons ago is due for re-entry in about 2010. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by darrellbutler on Oct 10, 2007 19:32:02 GMT
I hope a stray penalty smashes his greenhouse I hear Les Hines effort at Vauxhall Motors two seasons ago is due for re-entry in about 2010. ;D  |
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Oct 12, 2007 13:24:39 GMT
Andrew Guy is a pillock. He said in April 2007 that he was "reliably informed that 400 is considered a good gate." I know it's only a simple one but it's evidence enough that the guy is an idiot. Robson's Golden Rule Of Debating "Never argue with an idiot" . Believe me I know ... no-one argues with me! On a serious note comments on a pubic website about trampling down dahlias and blocking mondeos although meant in a light hearted way do nothing for the promotion of the club as a good neighbour and can easily be quoted out of context.
Can I suggest that the moderators remove these posts |
|
|
|
Post by dave on Oct 12, 2007 13:33:34 GMT
Or better still I can retract them.
People don't trample Mr Guy's flowerbeds or park across his driveway, that would be silly and childish. I hang my head in shame for ever suggesting such a thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Oct 12, 2007 15:30:32 GMT
Amazing - I've just been able to log in after five weeks! Not that Ive tried for the past four.
I've been called beneath 'utter contempt', 'ignorant' and not averse to plying 'wicked deceit' on the Worcester News thread about Mike Foster's support to the ground move. No need for anyone to react on my behalf, though. I have in in hand in my own way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Oct 12, 2007 15:45:43 GMT
I've sent an email letter into the WN summarising some of the points from this thread in response to this Guy character's stance about the Tenure and such.
It's about time we start to put across our side of the story - half the battle will be fought out in the press
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2007 17:40:54 GMT
Good work all you non-exiles.
|
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Oct 13, 2007 17:17:13 GMT
Where Ane? Though u lived in ealing (or acton if you fail to wake up on the toob)
|
|
|
|
Post by armchair on Oct 26, 2007 22:27:52 GMT
I have been doing some research on our friend Mr Guy. From what I can ascertain from freely available information on the internet:
He has lived in his current property in Whittington since 02/02/2001 - wasn't this after the new stadium became part of the local plan ??
It is only approx 200 yards from Swinesherd Way and 400 yards from the A44 and M5
As CG points out, the proposed location is alot nearer to Warndon Villages than Whittington.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bstander on Nov 9, 2007 9:21:49 GMT
ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW FROM TODAY'S WORCESTER NEWS
SIR - Anyone familiar with the vicissitudes of Worcester City Football Club will know that its long-suffering supporters are all too familiar with false messiahs. The arrival of the latest saviour' in the form of St Modwen properties raises some serious questions not least about so-called regeneration and planning in and around Worcester.
St Modwen is a voracious and highly successful property development company and its of little wonder that the city ground, along with various greenfield sites close to the M5, have excited other interest. Yet a little homework reveals a disturbing pattern, one which warrants due diligence from all who care about Worcester and its future.
St Modwen has already had not altogether happy associations with Swindon Town and Stoke City football clubs. At the company's shareholders AGM earlier this year concerns were raised about St Modwen's methods with regard to genuine consultation and the wishes of local communities.
I trust that Worcester councillors are aware of the issues over what has happened at Queen's Market, Upton Park. Have they been down to Queen's Market or the development at Edmonton Green on a fact-finding mission?
Central government may well be putting the squeeze on councils with regard to housing, but we all have a right to expect our elected representatives to know the facts and not fall prey to the influence of big business. The people of Worcester matter far more than shareholders. I for one as someone who was born in Worcester will watch developments' with interest.
MARK T JONES, Maidstone, Kent.
9:00am today
|
|
|
|
Post by colinlayland on Nov 10, 2007 10:00:36 GMT
Having reading some of the comments on here,I some times fear for peoples Democratic right not to agree with the other mans veiws right or wrong,I have read a lot of letters and e-mails about St Modwens and I am starting to here some alarm bells ringing in my ears,it may well be all above board,and I hope the City board are looking at the paper work very closely,because I for one will be keeping a close eye on what is going on ontil it as all been siqned sealed and delivered.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Nov 10, 2007 21:57:08 GMT
I'm interested to hear the objections (some of which must surely become issues upon which to hold consultations, and in some cases to take action during the move). But I dislike some of the terms in which they are couched.
I'm a long-term supporter, but is it right to describe me as a long-suffering supporter? There have been several, of the generic form 'Anyone with the mentality of a gnat can see that ...'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2007 9:44:13 GMT
Having reading some of the comments on here,I some times fear for peoples Democratic right not to agree with the other mans veiws right or wrong,I have read a lot of letters and e-mails about St Modwens and I am starting to here some alarm bells ringing in my ears,it may well be all above board,and I hope the City board are looking at the paper work very closely,because I for one will be keeping a close eye on what is going on ontil it as all been siqned sealed and delivered. Which is why it would be folly to select a manager based on what he could achieve in a new ground, or base budgets on being in a new ground in 2010. I think it is fair to consider longterm supporters as "long-suffering" After all supporting WCFC fanatically is no cakewalk, particularly if the expectation is promotion. Interestingly the expectation level seems to have diminished in recent years, I can't remember the last time anyone felt we were capable of winning the league, the expectation level being set no higher than play-off lucky loser!! Maybe that reduces the suffering some what. |
|
|
|
Post by DazaB on Oct 9, 2009 21:36:05 GMT
we hope to kick off the XXXX/XXXX season in the new stadium.' Trevor Owen on BBC H & W just said it is hoped it would be ready for the 2009/10 season. Ohhhhhhhhhhh, that must be where Georgie Dragon is. The dopey f**k*r thinks we've moved. |
|
