8 Page Falmer Special In Argus Today

[GUNTER]

Very good. Looks at the alternative sites in detail, rubbishes inspector although puts the NIMBY point across. One of the Nimbys says there were "champagne corks popping yesterday and people in Falmer are very pleased".

 

[Braders]

i fooking hate NIMBYS


seriously a HUGE party in falmer if/when we get it !

 

[Marshy]

My brother said it showed the nimbys popping champagne on the news yesterday.....let them celebrate for now if they think they have won, but i know we will win the war.

 

[Wardy]

My brother said it showed the nimbys popping champagne on the news yesterday.....let them celebrate for now if they think they have won, but i know we will win the war.

I saw that and was quitly laughing at them

 

[westdeneite]

Have any of the National papers covered the story at all this morning?

Peaked at someones Daily Mail in office but as expected no mention. Just pages on that idiot Sven:

 

[Mr Popkins]

Have any of the National papers covered the story at all this morning?

Peaked at someones Daily Mail in office but as expected no mention. Just pages on that idiot Sven:

most national papers couldnt give a shit about lower division clubs unless its leeds, west ham, sunderland. etc.

some of the broadsheets may carry the story, but as you say Sven is more important to the majority of the public!. it was headline news yesterday but i was more interested in York Ccity making a profit for the fist time in years, a story whixh got one line!!!

 

[Josky]

There's a story in the Times.

 

[Scoffers]

My brother said it showed the nimbys popping champagne on the news yesterday.....let them celebrate for now if they think they have won, but i know we will win the war.

The NIMBY's certainly did win IMHO. We didnt get Falmer, and I am very nervous that Prescott didn't give a full yes or no for political reasons. The backlash of a full NO would have been immense, so lets fudge the issue with a reopening of the Inquiry.

 

[Comedy Steve]

Maybe it's a cover for the Nimby's to sell their houses?

They know they've lost
They pretend they've won
They then sell their houses to people who think they're not getting a stadium built

Weirder sh!t has happened

 

[Dancin Ninja BHA]

From the Times (the author is a massive Albion fan btw!!!)

July 28, 2004

Brighton cautious at Prescott verdict
By Nick Szczepanik

BRIGHTON & Hove Albion have been waiting all year for John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, to say “yes” or “no” to their plans for a new stadium. When he gave his answer yesterday, it was a frustrating “maybe”, as he ordered the reopening of the public inquiry to consider other sites.
Prescott called in the club’s plans for a 22,500-seat stadium at Falmer, in the east of the city, last year, despite overwhelming support for the scheme from Brighton & Hove City Council. He has decided that more consultation is needed for the planned site, next to the University of Brighton.


“Mr Prescott has given us an amber light,” Dick Knight, the Brighton chairman, said. “He has accepted our arguments that there is a vital need for a community stadium in this city, or he would have said ‘No’ already.”

The club believe that the seven other named sites are demonstrably unsuitable for reasons of planning, land ownership or expense. “We have heard our opponents say often that there is another site,” Martin Perry, the chief executive, said. “It is time for them to put up or shut up.”

A new ground is seen as essential to the future of Brighton, who have been without a permanent home since the sale of the Goldstone Ground in 1997. Brighton play at Withdean Stadium, with a capacity of less than 7,000, a ground that is seen as inadequate considering that 30,000 fans travelled to Cardiff to see Mark McGhee’s team win last season’s second division play-off final at the Millennium Stadium.

 

[pasty]

Nothing in the Telegraph. Thought there might've been as I believe Paul Hayward is a Brighton man ?

 

[Gwylan]

Nothing in the Guardian; very disappointing.

Bet there'll be something in Private Eye next week. One of the journalists there is a Falmer NIMBY and will relish covering this.

My bet is something along the lines of "Prescott knows that the inspector's right but is too fearful of the political consequences to rule out Falmer totally".

 

[Biscuit]

Nothing in the Telegraph. Thought there might've been as I believe Paul Hayward is a Brighton man ?

Haywood's a top bloke yeah.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Its frustrating as the Guardian gave a small paragraph to Kinsella moving to Walsall but did not even mention us.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

Hayward is quite heavily involved in the proposals, I believe he's down as an "interested party" and as such is in the same position as our beloved Lord B.

 

[London Irish]

Nothing in the Guardian; very disappointing.

Bet there'll be something in Private Eye next week. One of the journalists there is a Falmer NIMBY and will relish covering this.

My bet is something along the lines of "Prescott knows that the inspector's right but is too fearful of the political consequences to rule out Falmer totally".

To write that story, you would have to know nothing about local and national politics. Nobody in the New Labour hierachy is wasting a second thought about the Brighton seats, they don't have to. Caplin is gone anyway, he's in a Tory seat and any half-decent Tory performance would see him go - it's no sweat to him, he'll be found a safer seat anyway for services rendered where he can concentrate on his government career.

Des Turner has been a constant pain in the arse to New Labour and the idea that they give two shits whether he lost his seat is ridiculous, Blair and Co. would probably laugh.

Lepper is a more credible figure with respect on all sides, but he still places himself outside the New Labour project. But the overriding thing here is that demographics and boundary changes mean Pavillion is a rock solid Labour seat and nothing will dislodge him, Tory revival or any kind of masochistic Seagulls Party wheeze.

This idea that the Falmer process is being affected by electoral considerations is a fanciful theory that oddly enough both Falmer villlagers and Albion fans buy into. I think they are both wrong.

 

[Safeway]

This idea that the Falmer process is being affected by electoral considerations is a fanciful theory that oddly enough both Falmer villlagers and Albion fans buy into. I think they are both wrong.

I agree totally.

 

[Gully]

I believe Nick Szczepanik might just be an Albion fan, hence all his reports on us in the Times are well written and accurate.

 

[glasgull]

Damn the scottish editions! Got the times this morning and not a mention!

 

[balloonboy]

To write that story, you would have to know nothing about local and national politics. Nobody in the New Labour hierachy is wasting a second thought about the Brighton seats, they don't have to. Caplin is gone anyway, he's in a Tory seat and any half-decent Tory performance would see him go - it's no sweat to him, he'll be found a safer seat anyway for services rendered where he can concentrate on his government career.

Des Turner has been a constant pain in the arse to New Labour and the idea that they give two shits whether he lost his seat is ridiculous, Blair and Co. would probably laugh.

Lepper is a more credible figure with respect on all sides, but he still places himself outside the New Labour project. But the overriding thing here is that demographics and boundary changes mean Pavillion is a rock solid Labour seat and nothing will dislodge him, Tory revival or any kind of masochistic Seagulls Party wheeze.

This idea that the Falmer process is being affected by electoral considerations is a fanciful theory that oddly enough both Falmer villlagers and Albion fans buy into. I think they are both wrong.

Labour needs to worry about all it's seats, whether Blair & Co like the MP or not - to suggest that just because Turner is "Old Labour" means Blair doesn't give a shit is not credible in my view. And in any case, if the decision was not political, then why the hell was it not a straight No?