My response to the anti-falmer letter in today's Argus

[Buzzer]

Okay chaps. Wouldn't mind a 2nd opinion on this before I send it.

I must take issue with R Walker’s letter regarding the Falmer stadium.

Anyone who has been following the debate in the Argus letters will see that rather than puerile put-downs, it is the Pro-Falmer brigade that have repeatedly put forward solid reasonable assertions as to why Falmer is the right place and why those who oppose it are so, so wrong. The anti-brigade has repeatedly been shown to be ignorant of the reasons why Brighton currently has no stadium, blind to the benefits of having a community stadium and ill-informed as to why other sites just are not practical.

Yes, the replies are laden with sarcasm but this is completely understandable when the anti-brigade have relied so much on the spurious half-truths and stupid, stupid technicalities that are preventing us from having our stadium built.

Mr Walker’s letter is a prime example of this muddled thinking. We, in this city, were given a referendum as to where the Albion site should be. We, Brightonians, overwhelmingly voted for Falmer as best for the club and the city. What more proof does he want that the people of this city do overwhelmingly support Falmer?

He goes on to claim that everyone who has a car will use one. On what basis is this substantiated? This is so illogical as to be farcical. I should think that the fact that buses and a train station will stop right by the ground is very relevant.

Finally, he is wrong to say that the choice of site is much more important than football. It is AS important as the football. I suggest he looks at all the work in the community that BHA do for the people of Sussex.

Quite simply no Falmer, no Brighton and Hove Albion. Is that a cost that he is willing to pay?

 

[bhaexpress]

Okay chaps. Wouldn't mind a 2nd opinion on this before I send it.

I must take issue with R Walker’s letter regarding the Falmer stadium.

Anyone who has been following the debate in the Argus letters will see that rather than puerile put-downs, it is the Pro-Falmer brigade that have repeatedly put forward solid reasonable assertions as to why Falmer is the right place and why those who oppose it are so, so wrong. The anti-brigade has repeatedly been shown to be ignorant of the reasons why Brighton currently has no stadium, blind to the benefits of having a community stadium and ill-informed as to why other sites just are not practical.

Yes, the replies are laden with sarcasm but this is completely understandable when the anti-brigade have relied so much on the spurious half-truths and stupid, stupid technicalities that are preventing us from having our stadium built.

Mr Walker’s letter is a prime example of this muddled thinking. We, in this city, were given a referendum as to where the Albion site should be. We, Brightonians, overwhelmingly voted for Falmer as best for the club and the city. What more proof does he want that the people of this city do overwhelmingly support Falmer?

He goes on to claim that everyone who has a car will use one. On what basis is this substantiated? This is so illogical as to be farcical. I should think that the fact that buses and a train station will stop right by the ground is very relevant.

Finally, he is wrong to say that the choice of site is much more important than football. It is AS important as the football. I suggest he looks at all the work in the community that BHA do for the people of Sussex.

Quite simply no Falmer, no Brighton and Hove Albion. Is that a cost that he is willing to pay?

 

[Man of Harveys]

Magnificent stuff - send it in

 

[Publius Ovidius]

that is certainly going to sway people's argument

Oh hang on...its not up to anyone now apart from Ruth Kelly is it?


Why do people not just laugh at what the anti's say in the same way as they laugh at our letters and just wait for the announcement. Its not as if Ruth Kelly is reading the Argus is it?




get a grip you silly old sod

 

[hans kraay fan club]

My recent experience is that the Argus may sit on your response for weeks, by which time everyone will have forgotten what was in the original letter, to which you are responding.

As, such you are dead right to highlight at each point, what Mr Walker has stated.

I would beef up the transport line.

"Mr Walker speculates that the A27 will be gridlocked by traffic on each match-day, and rather oddly states that the proximity of Falmer railway station to the site is 'irrelevent'. In fact there will be no parking at the stadium whatsoever, meaning that all spectators will be forced to use public transport or park and ride schemes. I hope this allays Mr Walker's fears on this matter."

The rest is great.

 

[KPTF]

We, Brightonians, overwhelmingly voted for Falmer as best for the club and the city.

I don't think we were given the option to vote for where the stadium should be sited. It was Yes/No for a community stadium and Falmer or nothing. Had there been a list of sites to vote for, I very much doubt that Falmer would have received the most votes (I would have voted for Waterhall for along with the vast majority of fans I've ever discussed this with).

 

[sully]

I have had a car since I was 18 (a mere 26 years) but have regularly used the train - and more recently the bus - to get to home games. In fact, I've also had spells where I've cycled or walked to the Goldstone and Withers. I did drive every time to Gillingham, however.

Where on earth does this pillock get his "facts"?

 

[sully]

Re: Re: My response to the anti-falmer letter in today's Argus

I don't think we were given the option to vote for where the stadium should be sited. It was Yes/No for a community stadium and Falmer or nothing. Had there been a list of sites to vote for, I very much doubt that Falmer would have received the most votes (I would have voted for Waterhall for along with the vast majority of fans I've ever discussed this with).

I think that's why there were two questions and you highlight the reason why more voted yes to a stadium than did for Falmer specifically.

I didn't live in Brighton at the time, though, so don't know exactly how it was worded.

 

[Curious Orange]

Re: Re: My response to the anti-falmer letter in today's Argus

I don't think we were given the option to vote for where the stadium should be sited. It was Yes/No for a community stadium and Falmer or nothing. Had there been a list of sites to vote for, I very much doubt that Falmer would have received the most votes (I would have voted for Waterhall for along with the vast majority of fans I've ever discussed this with).

Er, the referendum was two part, if memory serves (and bearing in mind I didn't get to vote). The first question was along the lines of should there be a stadium, and secondly should the stadium be at Falmer. So people were given the opportunity to vote AGAINST Falmer as the preferred site.

 

[bhaexpress]

I have had a car since I was 18 (a mere 26 years) but have regularly used the train - and more recently the bus - to get to home games. In fact, I've also had spells where I've cycled or walked to the Goldstone and Withers. I did drive every time to Gillingham, however.

Where on earth does this pillock get his "facts"?

Like so many NIMBYs this bloke probably made most of it up and assumed he was right. The fact that R Walker has ignored the recommendations of professionals would tend to indicate that he hasn't any idea of what the truth is.

 

[KPTF]

Re: Re: Re: My response to the anti-falmer letter in today's Argus

Er, the referendum was two part, if memory serves (and bearing in mind I didn't get to vote). The first question was along the lines of should there be a stadium, and secondly should the stadium be at Falmer. So people were given the opportunity to vote AGAINST Falmer as the preferred site.

Which is completely different from saying that Falmer was overwhelmingly voted for as the best for club and the city as Buzzer mentions. As a fan, I had to vote for Falmer as it was the only option on the voting sheet; the alternative was to vote No to Falmer with the possibility that the Club would lose the 'referendum'.

 

[Buzzer]

So what do you suggest? Something along the lines of:

When we had the referendum, us Brightonians voted 84% when asked 'do they wish to see a permanent home for the Albion in B&H' and 64% when asked 'should that home be at Falmer'. What more proof does he want that the people of this city do overwhelmingly support what the club are trying to do?

 

[KPTF]

Yep, that's fact-based and can't be disputed (although I'd use 'we' Brightonians).

 

[Buzzer]

Righto. Taken on board what people have said and this has just been emailed to the Argus. Let's hope it gets in promptly:

I must take issue with R Walker’s letter regarding the Falmer stadium.

Anyone who has been following the debate in the Argus letters will see that rather than puerile put-downs, it is the Pro-Falmer brigade that have repeatedly put forward solid reasonable assertions as to why Falmer is the right place and why those who oppose it are so wrong. The anti-brigade has repeatedly been shown to be ignorant of the reasons why Brighton currently has no stadium, blind to the benefits of having a community stadium and ill-informed as to why other sites just are not practical.

Yes, the replies are laden with sarcasm but this is completely understandable when the anti-brigade have relied so much on the spurious half-truths and stupid, stupid technicalities that are preventing us from having our stadium built.

Mr Walker’s letter is a prime example of this muddled thinking. When we had the referendum, we Brightonians voted 84% when asked 'do they wish to see a permanent home for the Albion in Brighton and Hove' and 64% when asked 'should that home be at Falmer'. What more proof does he want that the people of this city do overwhelmingly support what the club is trying to do?

Mr Walker speculates that the A27 will be gridlocked by traffic on each match-day, and rather oddly states that the proximity of Falmer railway station to the site is 'irrelevant'. In fact there will be no parking at the stadium whatsoever, meaning that all spectators will be forced to use public transport or park and ride schemes. I hope this allays Mr Walker's fears on this matter

Finally, he is wrong to say that the choice of site is much more important than football. It is AS important as the football. I suggest he looks at all the work in the community that BHA do for the people of Sussex.

Quite simply no Falmer, no Brighton and Hove Albion. Is that a cost that he is willing to pay?


I know it's tiresome to have to do this but we can't let the LDC think that they are winning the argument or have the moral high ground:

 

[KPTF]

Nice one

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Righto. Taken on board what people have said and this has just been emailed to the Argus. Let's hope it gets in promptly:

I must take issue with R Walker’s letter regarding the Falmer stadium.

Anyone who has been following the debate in the Argus letters will see that rather than puerile put-downs, it is the Pro-Falmer brigade that have repeatedly put forward solid reasonable assertions as to why Falmer is the right place and why those who oppose it are so wrong. The anti-brigade has repeatedly been shown to be ignorant of the reasons why Brighton currently has no stadium, blind to the benefits of having a community stadium and ill-informed as to why other sites just are not practical.

Yes, the replies are laden with sarcasm but this is completely understandable when the anti-brigade have relied so much on the spurious half-truths and stupid, stupid technicalities that are preventing us from having our stadium built.

Mr Walker’s letter is a prime example of this muddled thinking. When we had the referendum, we Brightonians voted 84% when asked 'do they wish to see a permanent home for the Albion in Brighton and Hove' and 64% when asked 'should that home be at Falmer'. What more proof does he want that the people of this city do overwhelmingly support what the club is trying to do?

Mr Walker speculates that the A27 will be gridlocked by traffic on each match-day, and rather oddly states that the proximity of Falmer railway station to the site is 'irrelevant'. In fact there will be no parking at the stadium whatsoever, meaning that all spectators will be forced to use public transport or park and ride schemes. I hope this allays Mr Walker's fears on this matter

Finally, he is wrong to say that the choice of site is much more important than football. It is AS important as the football. I suggest he looks at all the work in the community that BHA do for the people of Sussex.

Quite simply no Falmer, no Brighton and Hove Albion. Is that a cost that he is willing to pay?


I know it's tiresome to have to do this but we can't let the LDC think that they are winning the argument or have the moral high ground:

 

[Barnham Seagull]

Think you will find that there will be parking at Sussex Uni and Southern Water, you may want to check that first before saying there will be no parking at all.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Top stuff Buzzer

 

[Rangdo]

Re: Re: My response to the anti-falmer letter in today's Argus

I don't think we were given the option to vote for where the stadium should be sited. It was Yes/No for a community stadium and Falmer or nothing. Had there been a list of sites to vote for, I very much doubt that Falmer would have received the most votes (I would have voted for Waterhall for along with the vast majority of fans I've ever discussed this with).

Thats because there aren't a choice of sites. The last inspector cleared that one up a long long time ago.

 

[Everest]

Don't forget...

PS Nick Weir and Mark Curry were nowhere near as good as you on Catchphrase.