theres a lot of banter on here, a lot of disagreements, but a huge pile of respect for all the people, especially TRB, who have got us to this point, we celebtate with them tonight and then we must regroup and promote the greatest rugby league team ever, with by far the best fans to grow and move forward as we hit newmarket, we need a bigger fans base and then we will have the club we deserve, but today is SWAGS day andI hope to a man they are drunk as happy skunks!

JC

Correct.

Yep ... that was her

just like to say what a good day it has been .To see so many supporters turn up today plus the players n coaching staff .To see the smile on john kears face was amazing lets get behind him and his young squad .Another thing diane maskill keeping the fans up to date on things while the meeting was going on never meet her before but she answered all the questions that people asked well done .

Trust me we have a massive amount of fans. Bigger than Cas/Fev could ever dream of. The amount of people who used to go (stretching back 50 years or more) or would go is unbelievable.

took a pic today that no one could of seen happening but its on my naff phone that has let me down lately, its still there but won't move from it

pic of the century

Well I am back from London now but got a text from TRB as soon as the decision was made this morning! I was in a seminar at the time and had to stop myself cheering out loud!

I am not sure what you were all worrying about anyway, I told you it was a formality!

I would just like to add to the chorus of thanks to TRB, I have got to know him quite well over the last few months and I know how hard he has worked and how much this means to him, because he loves the club and he loves his fellow fans. Well done TRB!

Also, to all my new mates at SWAG for all working so hard and having the commitment and faith to know that this day would come!

TRB told me on the phone earlier that they have had a whip round and bought me... a Trinity shirt! I might even have said, in my euphoria, that I would wear one the first time the Rhinos play Trinity at Newmarket!

That all said the NIMBY's are not going to give up making trouble and trying to force this to a public inquiry! I think that is highly unlikely to happen, especially as TRB told me it was quite obvious that our suspicions that the majority of the objections were being driven by a small group of NIMBY's from how they conducted themselves in the planning meeting. BUT we need to keep our ears to the ground and we could still have some work to do, so if you hear of see anything about or from the objectors and either of their faux groups, please let TRB, me or any members of SWAG know.

Cheers everyone, I really, really pleased for you all, the club and the city. Top Banana!

After a disapointing season this is the cherry on the cake that as brightened up the year for us, Well done to TRB and SWAG thanks for putting in all the hard work to make this possible.

Catwoman1 wrote:Yep ... that was her Did you notice that the graphic said she was from 'Wakefield Community Conservation Group' and not Methley Residents association... of which she is the Chairman! I suspect this is because she does not want to be seen as living in a different city, which of course she does! This is of course a faux group that has no issues with telling half-truth and lies and indeed clearly has no moral objection to registering their new domain address of http://www.wccg.co.uk falsely in Ted Richardson's name! It would not so bad if they were actual a real 'conservation' group but they don't give a fig about conservation, they only give a fig about themselves!

Catwoman1 wrote:Yep ... that was her Did you notice that the graphic said she was from 'Wakefield Community Conservation Group' and not Methley Residents association... of which she is the Chairman! I suspect this is because she does not want to be seen as living in a different city, which of course she does! This is of course a faux group that has no issues with telling half-truth and lies and indeed clearly has no moral objection to registering their new domain address of http://www.wccg.co.uk falsely in Ted Richardson's name! It would not so bad if they were actual a real 'conservation' group but they don't give a fig about conservation, they only give a fig about themselves!

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:Did you notice that the graphic said she was from 'Wakefield Community Conservation Group' and not Methley Residents association... of which she is the Chairman! I suspect this is because she does not want to be seen as living in a different city, which of course she does! This is of course a faux group that has no issues with telling half-truth and lies and indeed clearly has no moral objection to registering their new domain address of http://www.wccg.co.uk falsely in Ted Richardson's name! It would not so bad if they were actual a real 'conservation' group but they don't give a fig about conservation, they only give a fig about themselves! The councillors on the committee had her number I_A. She didn't come across well at all and was almost made to look foolish with her answers. She spoke about not enough bus services to the 'remote' area so was asked if when more regular services were provided (as will happen when site up and running) would resolve her problem .... to which she said 'No' (surprise, surprise ) And the Andrew Booth guy was even worse ...

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:Did you notice that the graphic said she was from 'Wakefield Community Conservation Group' and not Methley Residents association... of which she is the Chairman! I suspect this is because she does not want to be seen as living in a different city, which of course she does! This is of course a faux group that has no issues with telling half-truth and lies and indeed clearly has no moral objection to registering their new domain address of http://www.wccg.co.uk falsely in Ted Richardson's name! It would not so bad if they were actual a real 'conservation' group but they don't give a fig about conservation, they only give a fig about themselves! The councillors on the committee had her number I_A. She didn't come across well at all and was almost made to look foolish with her answers. She spoke about not enough bus services to the 'remote' area so was asked if when more regular services were provided (as will happen when site up and running) would resolve her problem .... to which she said 'No' (surprise, surprise ) And the Andrew Booth guy was even worse ...