Scarlet Fever Llanelli Rugby Sport Wales Tickets Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > RUGBY > SCARLETS GENERAL
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login


Here we go again!!!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
Message
Mike View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Cardiff
Status: Offline
Points: 21598
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 12:07pm

I know the maximum they are looking to get out of this is a week or two delay on the development, but it really does take this biscuit.

These people, quite simply, have no shame whatsoever.

They say they aren't against the Scarlets and they said prior to inquiry that all they wanted was a fair trial at the WAG inquiry - they've had it all and fairly and squarely there is no reason for the development not to go ahead.

They should have the good grace to accept that and make the best of the situation.

The Village Green stuff is just beyond the pale and pure spite. It's private land that the club have had the good grace to allow people to walk on and kick a ball around on when they haven't been using it for training and other Scarlets activities.

The VG application has been made by Alun Davies of Denham Avenue and he and his supporters in the SRAG should be utterly ashamed of this action, driven by pure spite and bitterness to throw a small spanner in the works.



Edited by Mike
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
John View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 August 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 4149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 1:31pm
Originally posted by Mike Mike wrote:

These people, quite simply, have no shame whatsoever.

The Village Green stuff is just beyond the pale and pure spite. It's private land that the club have had the good grace to allow people to walk on and kick a ball around on when they haven't been using it for training and other Scarlets activities.

The VG application has been made by Alun Davies of Denham Avenue and he and his supporters in the SRAG should be utterly ashamed of this action, driven by pure spite and bitterness to throw a small spanner in the works.

They made their position clear at the start, they are dead set against the whole procedure. I dont think shame comes into it.

The village green aspect is a potential nightmare because the club did not close off access for a day a year, Then they can clame that they had use of the rough parts of the carpark. I would imagine that the tarred parts, delineated clearly with car parking spaces might well be different. One snag that the protestors might come up against is that they did not protest that part of "their village green" was being removed when the club built the training barn a year ago. The bottom line is that this legal situation may well be complicated, even though everyone- including me_ thinks they are talking rubbish and chancing their arm.  

Back to Top
SA14 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Don't blink

Joined: 15 August 2004
Location: Pemberton
Status: Offline
Points: 19809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SA14 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 2:09pm
I sent them a polite e-mail a few days ago to ask them about the main points on here, haven't had an answer.
Back to Top
Slider View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 03 March 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 768
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Slider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 3:54pm
If CCC rule ageinst them do they have an avenue of appeal? I mean, how long can they potentially string this out?
Back to Top
jonescnnr View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 02 September 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3251
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jonescnnr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 5:14pm
Looking at the age of the protesters I would imagine they could stretch it out so they wouldnt see the houses built in their lifetime,probably about a week.
jonesy
Back to Top
Gary Coleman View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar
Who are we?

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Lao People?s Dem. Rep.
Status: Offline
Points: 5359
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gary Coleman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 5:50pm

Originally posted by jonescnnr jonescnnr wrote:

Looking at the age of the protesters I would imagine they could stretch it out so they wouldnt see the houses built in their lifetime,probably about a week.

I would imagine that they will have invited a shortened lifespan, dispensed by a lot of Llanelli natives after this lark!

Back to Top
multinational View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 14 August 2006
Location: Here
Status: Offline
Points: 10287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote multinational Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 9:34pm

Will this 'new' objection cause any serious delay - it is something that has been mentioned a number of times before so surely the WAG and CCC were aware of the objection previously.

The S9 probably have a list of individual, petty claims that they can continue to bring against the development, is there any legal process the Scarlets can follow to shut them up once and for all?

Perhaps it would be wise to engage them in an expensive court case, perhaps the cost to them would be a serious deterrent from any further complaint?

History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 9:55pm
Originally posted by multinational multinational wrote:

Will this 'new' objection cause any serious delay - it is something that has been mentioned a number of times before so surely the WAG and CCC were aware of the objection previously.

The S9 probably have a list of individual, petty claims that they can continue to bring against the development, is there any legal process the Scarlets can follow to shut them up once and for all?

Perhaps it would be wise to engage them in an expensive court case, perhaps the cost to them would be a serious deterrent from any further complaint?

Too right, make it so expensive they'd have to put up serious capital to engage the club, we'd soon see a complete collapse of any objection if they knew they'd have to shell out big bucks.

Can the club look to regain the legal costs of the last farce or is it now too late?

 

Back to Top
Vulcan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Charente M
Status: Offline
Points: 5423
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vulcan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 10:16pm
I have heard that the club are more concerned with the Right of Way through the car park than the VG thing. However rumour also has it that SRAG have got a load more delaying ploys in the pipeline. Probably time for action from those who want the move instead of the continual sniping from the Nimby's who don't.
Back to Top
multinational View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 14 August 2006
Location: Here
Status: Offline
Points: 10287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote multinational Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 August 2007 at 10:16pm

The WAG identified NO reason for the development to be rejected and they were presented with the strongest part of the S9's objections, surely CCC (who had originally approved the new stadium in the first place) won't see any problems either.

The Scarlets need to be brave and force some sort of legal wrangle upon these people just to keep them occupied enough to keep them from these farcical objections.

History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again.
Back to Top
supertaf View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 17 August 2004
Location: Down the Parc
Status: Offline
Points: 7658
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote supertaf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2007 at 12:45am
In fact, one bit of useful arguement could be the change of ownership. WRU owned the ground until recently and only since we bought it back could we have allowed anyone to do anything on the pitches as they weren't ours until then officially. Therefore the most that can be claimed is since then and thats only last year isn't it? - Not long enough...
Scarlets - Suppliers of fine rugby since 1872
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2007 at 10:13am

I still think they should make the srag put up or shut up by starting an expensive legal case, and let them know in no uncertain terms that this time costs WILL be liable. They won't be so quick to look for delaying tactics if they have to risk losing their houses to cover legal fees.

What makes them think people would actually want to live by them anyway? For example, if there was someone living down there with a criminal record or had been arrested for something that would give me cause for concern, then I wouldn't want to live there or have my children near there. Especially as the residents obviously support what such a person did, they are not bothered about it to such an extent they allowed him to be a spokseman. And people would want to live in a community where they openly condone such behaviour? That is of course merely my opinion and not necessarily that of the forum......

 

Back to Top
Mike View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Cardiff
Status: Offline
Points: 21598
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2007 at 12:11pm

This is going to cause some delay and it's also going to cost the club more money.

It's time for everyone to play hardball with these people.

Back to Top
Druss View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar
...

Joined: 18 July 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 116
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Druss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2007 at 12:34pm

in what way do you mean hardball mike?

they have a right to do this, sad as it is and totally misguided, they still have a right.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2007 at 1:08pm
Originally posted by Druss Druss wrote:

in what way do you mean hardball mike?

they have a right to do this, sad as it is and totally misguided, they still have a right.

Just an observation and it's not a criticism, but I notice since you've joined the forum you've made many anti club (management) comments and now seem to be sympathising with the srag? You probably don't know but i've been a vociferous critic of the club in the past and I was just wondering what your stance actually is on the move to Pemberton? I'd also be interested in what basis you have for a seemingly still lingering anti management outlook? I say this a someone who's accepted there have been great strides and recruitment in the off field personnel.

No criticisms, just get the feeling you don't like sg and don't want to move. Say hello Saturday, i'm always up for meeting forum members in a social setting for a friendly debate, even Scarletrover:)  

Back to Top
SA14 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Don't blink

Joined: 15 August 2004
Location: Pemberton
Status: Offline
Points: 19809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SA14 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2007 at 2:35pm
Originally posted by no.6 no.6 wrote:

I still think they should make the srag put up or shut up by starting an expensive legal case, and let them know in no uncertain terms that this time costs WILL be liable. They won't be so quick to look for delaying tactics if they have to risk losing their houses to cover legal fees.

What makes them think people would actually want to live by them anyway? For example, if there was someone living down there with a criminal record or had been arrested for something that would give me cause for concern, then I wouldn't want to live there or have my children near there. Especially as the residents obviously support what such a person did, they are not bothered about it to such an extent they allowed him to be a spokseman. And people would want to live in a community where they openly condone such behaviour? That is of course merely my opinion and not necessarily that of the forum......



There's also the overseas person factor if you know what I mean. Something I know for a FACT is a leading cause for their opposition to the development.

With regards legal fees, Bungle gave his services for free (and it showed) so it proves they haven't got the money. Saying that they may have a tidy sum in their pension funds!)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.