Toads Hole Valley - Argus Letters Page

[perseus]

Can someone please explain just what exacly this means. This is complete gobbledygook.

Policing costs WTF are you on about?

Best bet would be to ask the Chairman of Wigan

 

[Curious Orange]

Re: Re: Toads Hole Valley - Argus Letters Page

Gonna get slaugtered for this Curious but how would you know about the suitability regarding TVH as a recreational area for Hove residents.............do tell

I don't, obviously. But I do know that the land is only "free" if planning permission for a business park is granted and the Albion fork out £24 million for the infrastructure. I can't remember the last time that business parks were considered a "recreational area for Hove residents"?

 

[Easy 10]

Perseus, why do you always completely ignore the SPECIFIC points people make in reply to your various assertions ? Its like having a conversation with a small shrub.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Best bet would be to ask the Chairman of Wigan

WHAT

The chap in the Argus who wrote the letter said that we should look at THV because the land was given free...he never even mentioned policing, why should he, he wasnt presenting a fully costed plan was he you dipstick

I take it the land at Falmer was free wasn't it?

Anyway, he was not right as it is in fact £500,000 per hectare.

 

[Curious Orange]

Anyway, he was not right as it is in fact £500,000 per hectare.

That being the non-"free", no business park, but you still pay for the infrastructure option.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

If the hack runs off with inadequate information, the Albion could have pressed an easily understood press statement in his hands. There is no guarantee he would have read it, and the Albion may have already done this for all I know.

How do the club prepare a press statement to hand to somebody, who leaves the enquiry, BEFORE the club become aware of the true facts of the offer that have to go in said press statement?

Do they have access to a flux capacitor and a 1985 DeLoren capable of speeds of 88 miles an hour?

 

[Easy 10]

Bet you a Red Hot Pepperami he doesn't answer that.

 

[perseus]

Here's one for the pot:

A Public Inquiry is like a football match.

In the final judgement it could be just the result that matters?

We could kick lumps out of the opposition, have a dodgy Inspector/referee on our side and win 1-0.

But that is no guarantee that the Argus will write a glowing report (he may be a closet Stoke supporter, or leave before the end) or that the public will turn up for the next match.

The summing up bit could be the Cup Final.

Performance and PR are both factors. Just how much they mean compared to the result, depends on the circumstances

 

[The Large One]

So if I've got this right, acoording to Judas Horton, it's the side who has the best handling of the media who gets to decide where, if anywhere, a stadium gets built.

Expect to see a last-minute appearance for the Albion by Max Clifford at the Public Inquiry then.

 

[enigma]

Perseus, why do you always completely ignore the SPECIFIC points people make in reply to your various assertions ? Its like having a conversation with a small shrub.

Because he is an absolute tit.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Horton, how about you answer the questions that have been put to you in reply to points you have made in this thread, instead of posting just more waffle and BS.

 

[Easy 10]

joey_jo_jo_jr_shabadoo

You owe me one Red Hot Pepperami

 

[London Irish]

Could it be that the ArseGas has taken a new direction with new people in charge? Maybe they are now bordering on being anti Falmer but haven't got the balls to say so-I mentioned some time ago that they've taken off the banner along the bottom of the back page that supported the Falmer campaign. That was quite significant for me-why remove it at the most crucial phase of the campaign? Just a thought!

An organised campaign would be good-maybe we should keep track of who writes in verses who gets their letter published? As it stands, I've never believed the ArseGas was 100% behind us getting Falmer-it (in my mind) has only ever been a ploy to keep Albion fans buying their shit paper-an appropriate term if ever I saw one!

Well, under Simon Bradshaw's editorship, I was 100% confident that the Argus was behind us. He's an incredibly bright guy, he's a big football fan and was totally convinced of the pro-stadium case.

The trouble is, he's gone now. Under him, the Argus was a bit of a one-man show and I don't have similar confidence in the calibre of editorial management that are now left behind.

I didn't see the Argus article that Lord B and TLO are complaining about, but I've been gritting my teeth waiting for something shit like this to happen. It's not a sign that the Argus has changed editorial direction, it's just a sign that, after Bradshaw, the newpaper is just not as competent a journalistic product.

It's one of the oldest hack f***-ups in the book believing a developer's words at face value without doing the research. What the Argus did wrong was to treat the inquiry business as a court of law where it is usual to just report the side of the case that the reporter is present for. But of course the issues are not sub judice in the same way so the Argus SHOULD have sought a balancing comment to the developer's PR exercise, which would have given readers both sides of the story.

The new editor Michael Beard has yet to arrive and you've just got the paper treading water at the moment led by mediocre hacks who've never had the guts to go to the nationals to work.

Writing letters to the Argus is a very good idea because it will show Beard the strength of feeling of the issue among Albion fans (I think he's due to arrive very shortly). He is coming from the Hastings paper, so should be familiar with Sussex issues, but you never know. Before that he was at Plymouth, where it's fair to say he was not universally popular among his fellow hacks, according to what I picked up at the weekend. Graduate of charm school he ain't, but let's hope he refocuses the Argus behind the pro-stadium fight.

The letters' page thing is a red herring, the NIMBY idiot is entitled to his view and the Argus letters editor doesn't have time to append explantory footnotes to that definition of the word "free" or any of the other thousands of dubious opinions that appear on the letters' page. But there are no such excuses for the reporter, news editor and subs who let through a misleading account of the THV situation. The Argus do an editorial feedback column every Friday and they should be called to account for their THV coverage there.

 

[Easy 10]

Here's one for the pot:

A Public Inquiry is like a football match.

In the final judgement it could be just the result that matters?

We could kick lumps out of the opposition, have a dodgy Inspector/referee on our side and win 1-0.

But that is no guarantee that the Argus will write a glowing report (he may be a closet Stoke supporter, or leave before the end) or that the public will turn up for the next match.

The summing up bit could be the Cup Final.

Performance and PR are both factors. Just how much they mean compared to the result, depends on the circumstances

I've read, and written, plenty of utter bollocks on this site in my time. But THIS post.....well. It takes "gibberish" on to a whole new level I never knew existed.

 

[perseus]

Bet you a Red Hot Pepperami he doesn't answer that.

On reflection, it was premature. The important time to get the Press Statement out is at the summing up stage.

I think the Argus would want the information from the Albion.

If you put information in a letter to the Argus, the sub-editors may want to verify any details (cost of land) and they may edit this bit out (even if you include the sources for them to verify).

The recreational bit, I am not sure of. I have played football a long time ago at Toad's Hole until the mist came down and we couldn't see. Unlike Sheepcote, it is not public open space. I think it is described in the Local Plan as benign trespass land. Therefore, it is not protected by the planning guidelines for open spaces like Sheepcote. It is still an AONB though.

The reporters could conceivably interview anybody appearing at the Public Inquiry for their views.

 

[enigma]

Horton you geek stop peddling your rubbish on this site and you traitor. When someone asks you a question, try and give an answer insteed of just spouting off at random.If not,leave us all in peace

 

[Curious Orange]

Interesting as all this discussion is, I feel we have perhaps drifted a little off topic. I was not referring to the original Argus article, but to the letter of D.Higgins.

What I suggest is that we write to the Argus in response to that letter and point out exactly what "free" means in this case. I have already done this.

 

[perseus]

So if I've got this right, acoording to Judas Horton, it's the side who has the best handling of the media who gets to decide where, if anywhere, a stadium gets built.

Expect to see a last-minute appearance for the Albion by Max Clifford at the Public Inquiry then.

We have gotta do both.

Have a sound case and PR machine to back it all up. The strong case is the most important bit.

 

[The Large One]

On reflection, it was premature. The important time to get the Press Statement out is at the summing up stage.

I think the Argus would want the information from the Albion.

If you put information in a letter to the Argus, the sub-editors may want to verify any details (cost of land) and they may edit this bit out (even if you include the sources for them to verify).

All the necessary information is now in the public domain - it was discussed in the inquiry. The Albion doesnt have to justify its planning stance to the Argus - it has to do it to the Planning Inspector. Aside from the closing statements, all that is left in this inquiry is for the Albion to rip to shreds what is left of THV's owners' supposed evidence.

 

[The Large One]

We have gotta do both.

Have a sound case and PR machine to back it all up. The strong case is the most important bit.

FFS You brainless bellend. The 'strong case' is contained in the evidence supplied at the Inquiry - not in what the Argus peddles in order to sell its papers.

Easy 10 - you were a wee bit wrong there, it's not like talking to a small shrub - they can grow in to something pretty and nicely-scented. It's like talking to a bowl of turgid cat sick.