Argus NIMBY-slaying

[Seagull73]

You are struggling big time. Go and find a dictionary.

Go away you insignifcant shit for brains.

However entitled you are to your opinions, they are wrong, and less welcome than you could possibly imagine. I find it woefully sad that one lone person would want to come on to an Albion messageboard to pick fights with people over the their future.

That makes you such an unbelievable cock-end - you should really start seeing a therapist.

 

[Silent Bob]

Bollocks

carbon footprint my arse.

In China they are opening 2 coal fired power stations a week, more cars are being sold in China than the US at the moment and the chinese cows fart more methane than hot air from LDC.

My car journey is the equivalent of a gain of sand on the sea bed of the Pacific Ocean.

Global warming ...PAH..

But they're not gonna do anything about it if "the west" doesn't. Besides which their emissions per head are still much lower than ours.

Oh well, at least the stadium is going to be on top of a hill.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Personally I cant wait till they concrete over the pond and put a massive stadium all over that lovely picturesque village.

Im all for progress me!

 

[Lord Bracknell]

and another thing........I want to park outside Cuttress's house

Feel free. There are double yellow lines already installed. If you don't have a residents' parking permit, you'll be fined £60 a time and the car will almost certainly be towed away.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Feel free. There are double yellow lines already installed. If you don't have a residents' parking permit, you'll be fined £60 a time and the car will almost certainly be towed away.

he he......

 

[NMH]

But they're not gonna do anything about it if "the west" doesn't. Besides which their emissions per head are still much lower than ours.

Oh well, at least the stadium is going to be on top of a hill.

Everything they do compares well 'per head'! They have so MANY heads in China.
They have had to come to terms with overpopulation too, by limiting parents to one child per household.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Poo. I always seem to arrive after the chief Gobshite has left the board...

 

[Icy Gull]

Poo. I always seem to arrive after the chief Gobshite has left the board...

Pretty impressive to get to 4 pages with his/her 1st post it must be said and I wager he/she will be back ( with a reasoned argument would be good)

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Pretty impressive to get to 4 pages with his/her 1st post it must be said and I wager he/she will be back ( with a reasoned argument would be good)

Actually I have to say I admire the blokes brass neck, comes on the NSC board, calls himself "Antifalmer" and fails to come up with any cogent argument whatsoever against the "Stadium of Dick" whilst correcting everyones grammar and spelling...Marvellous Scenes!

 

[B.W.]

Actually I have to say I admire the blokes brass neck, comes on the NSC board, calls himself "Antifalmer" and fails to come up with any cogent argument whatsoever against the "Stadium of Dick" whilst correcting everyones grammar and spelling...Marvellous Scenes!

Brave or ignorant? I favour the latter...

 

[Muhammed - I’m hard - Bruce Lee]

I wager he/she will be back ( with a reasoned argument would be good)

unlikely matey....












i doubt he/she HAS a reasoned argument

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Also Im looking forward to having a nice shit in the pond with all my lager swilling mates.

 

[Buzzer]

Quite pleased that my two-peenyworth carried some weight. The development seems to be in what is now universally called a 'grotty little field'.

Marvellous.

p.s. that septic geezer has opinions in inverse proportion to his knowledge of the subject.

 

[antifalmer]

Actually I have to say I admire the blokes brass neck, comes on the NSC board, calls himself "Antifalmer" and fails to come up with any cogent argument whatsoever against the "Stadium of Dick" whilst correcting everyones grammar and spelling...Marvellous Scenes!

Thanks for the compliment. I couldn't resist coming back for a look. If Easy 10 wants to invite all you guys over to the Argus message board, then I think he should expect me to come over for a look at you guys as well. I enjoy the sport of debating with the Brighton fans.. why not, it's good for a laugh!

I gave up on the Argus boards and its "replacement" as well as the one started by one of its members.. too boring, all the good posters who were up for an argument went long ago. But the stadium debate gets me going like one of Pavlov's dogs. The Argus has an incredibly one eyed view of the stadium saga, and fails to report with any balance IMHO. Given that it's really the only source of news, it's a disgrace really. Which is why I can't resist just making a few comments whenever the subject is brought up.

I have crossed swords on the board with Ed Bassford and numerous others over the last couple of years. The reason I do not want to go into the arguments is because I and many others have done them to death over the years. In summary:

1. The club sold their own ground. It was theirs to sell, not yours. You may not have liked it, but there it is. Whether you like it or not, you have a supplier / customer relationship. I know you will flame me and say it was an underhand deal, club belongs to the fans etc., but unfortunately, business is a murky world. Welcome to the world of corporate greed. You could always have bought it, of course - except you probably couldn't afford it. The sale was legal and above board.

2. The planning application is for a football stadium. The educational facilities are not location dependent, nor are they unique, many clubs provide them. The council could have provided them too, but of course they have spent more money than LDC on supporting the application. The jobs created are great - except of course that there are already a surplus of jobs in B&H that could be claimed by East Brighton residents. They don't want to take minimum wage jobs now, why will they want them in the stadium? Official figures show that the club going to Gillingham and then returning to the Withdean have made no difference to the economy of Brighton and Hove.

3. Many years ago when the club decided to go for building on the AONB, it must have known that getting planning permission would be difficult. Whether you like it or not, the area is AONB. It may not be in the future, but that is a long way off. If the stadium is given permission, which it almost certainly will be, it will pave the way for any development anywhere that creates a few jobs. Nonetheless, this is patently not in the national interest, it is a local matter only. It rarely, if ever, gets discussed outside of local circles.

4. So far, the scheme has been rejected by LDC, East Sussex County Council and two independent inspectors. I note that in any history of the struggle the club has had, the independent inspectors reports have now been airbrushed out. Prescott's report leant heavily on the fact that the stadium was in the built up area of the local plan, but of course it never was. He agreed effectively that it would otherwise have failed, except for the jobs etc. It will be interesting to see how the politicians spin this. I have no doubt that it will be a political decision.

5. The issue of the referendum always makes me laugh. You are very lucky that one of the conditions wasn't that the plan be supported by in excess of 50% of the electorate. Not doing it this way guaranteed a victory for the Falmer "Yes" campaign - after all, there was nowhere else to vote for. Had it been 50%+, you wouldn't have come even close. No wonder the only people that give this vote credence are the people who want it built.

6. LDC have won two elections since the stadium saga started. Sure, some politicians have lost their seats, but some change is to be expected. The fact is, if LDC residents really thought their money was being wasted, they would have been voted out like the B&H Labour politicians were.

You will of course disagree with all this, but I will not go into detail any further, because I can't be bothered. My view is held in good faith based on all the details I have read. Whilst you may "hate" the Falmer residents for opposing this (I'm not one of them), you can be sure, wherever the stadium were to be proposed in B&H, it would be vigorously opposed. The inspectors reports clearly stated that the stadium would be detrimental to the Falmer residents, and the users of Stanmer Park.

Good night and God bless.

 

[Easy 10]

p.s. that septic geezer has opinions in inverse proportion to his knowledge of the subject.

He seems to have had a change of heart.

 

[The Oldman]

Thanks for the compliment. I couldn't resist coming back for a look. If Easy 10 wants to invite all you guys over to the Argus message board, then I think he should expect me to come over for a look at you guys as well. I enjoy the sport of debating with the Brighton fans.. why not, it's good for a laugh!

I gave up on the Argus boards and its "replacement" as well as the one started by one of its members.. too boring, all the good posters who were up for an argument went long ago. But the stadium debate gets me going like one of Pavlov's dogs. The Argus has an incredibly one eyed view of the stadium saga, and fails to report with any balance IMHO. Given that it's really the only source of news, it's a disgrace really. Which is why I can't resist just making a few comments whenever the subject is brought up.

I have crossed swords on the board with Ed Bassford and numerous others over the last couple of years. The reason I do not want to go into the arguments is because I and many others have done them to death over the years. In summary:

1. The club sold their own ground. It was theirs to sell, not yours. You may not have liked it, but there it is. Whether you like it or not, you have a supplier / customer relationship. I know you will flame me and say it was an underhand deal, club belongs to the fans etc., but unfortunately, business is a murky world. Welcome to the world of corporate greed. You could always have bought it, of course - except you probably couldn't afford it. The sale was legal and above board.

2. The planning application is for a football stadium. The educational facilities are not location dependent, nor are they unique, many clubs provide them. The council could have provided them too, but of course they have spent more money than LDC on supporting the application. The jobs created are great - except of course that there are already a surplus of jobs in B&H that could be claimed by East Brighton residents. They don't want to take minimum wage jobs now, why will they want them in the stadium? Official figures show that the club going to Gillingham and then returning to the Withdean have made no difference to the economy of Brighton and Hove.

3. Many years ago when the club decided to go for building on the AONB, it must have known that getting planning permission would be difficult. Whether you like it or not, the area is AONB. It may not be in the future, but that is a long way off. If the stadium is given permission, which it almost certainly will be, it will pave the way for any development anywhere that creates a few jobs. Nonetheless, this is patently not in the national interest, it is a local matter only. It rarely, if ever, gets discussed outside of local circles.

4. So far, the scheme has been rejected by LDC, East Sussex County Council and two independent inspectors. I note that in any history of the struggle the club has had, the independent inspectors reports have now been airbrushed out. Prescott's report leant heavily on the fact that the stadium was in the built up area of the local plan, but of course it never was. He agreed effectively that it would otherwise have failed, except for the jobs etc. It will be interesting to see how the politicians spin this. I have no doubt that it will be a political decision.

5. The issue of the referendum always makes me laugh. You are very lucky that one of the conditions wasn't that the plan be supported by in excess of 50% of the electorate. Not doing it this way guaranteed a victory for the Falmer "Yes" campaign - after all, there was nowhere else to vote for. Had it been 50%+, you wouldn't have come even close. No wonder the only people that give this vote credence are the people who want it built.

6. LDC have won two elections since the stadium saga started. Sure, some politicians have lost their seats, but some change is to be expected. The fact is, if LDC residents really thought their money was being wasted, they would have been voted out like the B&H Labour politicians were.

You will of course disagree with all this, but I will not go into detail any further, because I can't be bothered. My view is held in good faith based on all the details I have read. Whilst you may "hate" the Falmer residents for opposing this (I'm not one of them), you can be sure, wherever the stadium were to be proposed in B&H, it would be vigorously opposed. The inspectors reports clearly stated that the stadium would be detrimental to the Falmer residents, and the users of Stanmer Park.

Good night and God bless.

Top Post and well done for stating your views so clearly. However you miss out one important fact. Prescott asked a 3rd inspector to look at the alternatives to Falmer. Everyone had their say at that inquiry. In the end that independent inspector came to the conclusion that Falmer was the only site that had a realistic chance of securing planning permission ; being affordable; met planning policies re access and sustainable transport;etc ; etc; etc.

God Bless You too.

 

[Yorkie]

We know the Falmer site isn't perfect. The club know the Falmer site isn't perfect. It probably rates about 7/10.
All the other sites available only rate about 2/10. That is why we are going for it and as has been quite rightly said, the second public inquiry proved that to be the case.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

For you, there will be no killer argument against Falmer. How could there be?

Don't take our word for it, why not ask a random Withdean resident how inconvenienced they are of a match-day, or how their property prices have been affected (ask a NORMAL one mind, not that looney that took us to the High court on Legal Aid and got shown the door). Why, the Albion even pick up litter after the fame in the surrounding area and enforce 'Residents Only' parking zones.

What is it you actually SCARED of? The unknown?

And please spare us that AONB crap. Falmer's only an AONB if you've never been further afield in your entire life than Croydon. And you know it.

 

[FalmerforAll!**]

Fair play to antifalmer with his last post.

But I think at the end of the day we've played by the rules and LDC haven't.Simple as.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Septic me old fruit - you are missed on the other forum (The Martlet), there is a lot of speculation in there, particularly point 2.

I would be interested to see those figures re: Gillingham and the return to Brighton - does it take into account other factors? Plus, we are a small club until we have a stadium to be proud of - our impact will be relatively small until then. Although I guess these figures do not measure the benefits of Albion in the Community.

As for LDC winning two elections, surely they can't lose? The Liberal Democrats have managed to stay in control, but I think you are ignoring the fact that a lot of the residents are ambivalent to it. Did we see a mass uprising demanding the council object to the stadium? The only people that have asked the electorate are the Seagulls Party (28% of the available vote) and the Falmer4All team who managed to collect 5,000(?) signatures in a weekend.

As I am sure many will agree, Falmer is not the perfect site, but it is deemed to be the best one thus far. The fact that the Stadium Site is still deemed to be an AONB just goes to show how old and decrepit the system is. I really don't think there is a danger of further development on the Downs or on AONB. A part brownfield/farmland is surely a small price to pay for the benefits that the stadium will bring.