Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Falmer Antis Lie Machine – Still Peddling Frantically!



Gilliver's Travels

Peripatetic
Jul 5, 2003
2,926
Brighton Marina Village
The Falmer Antis have learnt nothing. They continue to peddle lies and distortions on their website, even after they have lost!

Read this and explode. Then pause, think where we are now... and enjoy a good, long, last laugh.



" In 2004, the government’s senior planning inspector John Collyer refused planning permission for a football stadium at Falmer. He said there were ‘overwhelming’ objections to it. Both John Prescott and Hazel Blears ignored their inspector’s advice, overturned his decision and granted planning permission. Having taken legal advice, it is now clear that the government is utterly determined to grant planning permission for the stadium despite the acknowledged damage it will do to the landscape and the environment of Falmer Village.

It has undoubtedly become a political decision. Granting planning permission for the stadium goes against long adopted national and local planning policies but we now have to accept that the government will continue to grant planning permission if we continue to challenge. We do not have a limitless stream of money to support a continued fight.

Therefore, reluctantly, we have decided not to challenge the Secretary of State’s decision. It is going to be a very hard future. There can be no doubt that a stadium will have a huge impact on Falmer. Our greatest fear is that once development begins where will it end? The football club have already been investigating a 130 bed hotel development.

Our thanks must go to all our friends and supporters. We would like to especially thank Lewes District Council, the South Downs Society, the CPRE and the South Downs Joint Board, and Rottingdean Parish Council who also fought so hard to save Falmer. "

:angry:

THOSE LIES IN FULL

1 So, Collyer himself ‘refused’ planning permission, did he? The Inspector actually had the power of decision, not the Secretary of State?

2 And Prescott and Blears merely overturned that man’s ‘decision’, did they? Without any further evaluation or enquiry by any other planning inspectors? Extraordinary!

3 ‘Our greatest fear is that once development begins where will it end?’ Answer: where there’s no planning permission, that’s where. Durr...

4 The club’s evil 130 Bed Hotel Plot gets in one, final appearance. Funny the Nimbys couldn’t quite locate that hotel anywhere in the stadium planning application’s small print, eh?



The moral? Some Nimbys will never learn. They still don’t realise they would have got a lot more sympathy and support by just being honest. They didn’t want the stadium at the Falmer site because... they didn’t want it! They just desperately hoped it might be stuck somewhere else instead. End of.

Were the villagers genuinely descendants of long-established Sussex families going back generations, you might have some sympathy. But since most seem to be just northerners and polyversity lecturers, who cares? They certainly won’t, when their houses sell at inflated prices to genuine Albion fans. :thumbsup:
 




dougdeep

New member
May 9, 2004
37,732
SUNNY SEAFORD
I hope they wont use the nice new roads we are going to build for them, or appreciate the parking restrictions that will cut down on the parking of cars around the sacred pond on Saturdays.
 


Marc

New member
Jul 6, 2003
25,267
it BEGGARS belief does'nt it......."you can stick your f***ing bridges up your ASS!"
 








withdeanwombat

Well-known member
Feb 17, 2005
8,760
Somersetshire
I think we should allow them a free weekend on full board in our hotel when it is built.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
'Fought so hard to save Falmer...' From what - the bubonic plague? Crass stupidity? A repugnant tide of squirrel sperm? Themselves? Sorry, what part of Falmer is going to be affected here?

Point is, this has always been their line, and all the while they dished up their fantasy-led scare stories, the government were never going to take them seriously. They have to put up with this bullshit all the time from various myopic NIMBY factions.

The club might have been in a bit more trouble if they had fought a serious, well thought out, constructive argument against the stadium, and, even if the decision had been the same, the bridges which need to be built would be done so far more easily. With this sort of stuff, however, you wonder why the club would bother its arse to do so. It's getting quite pathetic now.

Having said that, it does need to 'build bridges', figuratively and literally, so good luck Martin when talking to these NIMBYs.
 






Mr Banana

Tedious chump
Aug 8, 2005
5,505
Standing in the way of control
It is going to be a very hard future.

Yeah, really hard for the tens of thousands of people in Sussex who will be able to enjoy a proper major sporting facility at bloody last.

I'm sure we have all slagged off the NIMBYs at some point out of frustration (see some posts above) but you don't see the club or the fans gloating about getting the stadium. If they were willing to act like adults rather than the spoilt brats they have probably been all their lives we could work with them to see that everyone benefits. Ask the people who lived around the Goldstone and Withdean (I know first hand because I lived in the closest house to the South Stand for a year) and 99% of them say they really enjoyed having the football club around. If anyone from Falmer is bothering to read this, try looking on the bright side for once. If you make it a hard future for yourselves then it will be, you miserable gits.
 


Colbourne Kid

Member
Sep 19, 2003
351
The report about the hotels looked at three potential stadium sites Falmer, Sheepcote and Toads Hole to see whether hotels were viable and could add to the package. The consultants view was that whilst a hotel at Sheepcote was a viabvle proposition, there was no value in building a hotel at either Falmer or Toads Hole.

Why don;t they quote the report correctly.
 


Yorkie

Sussex born and bred
Jul 5, 2003
32,367
dahn sarf
The report about the hotels looked at three potential stadium sites Falmer, Sheepcote and Toads Hole to see whether hotels were viable and could add to the package. The consultants view was that whilst a hotel at Sheepcote was a viabvle proposition, there was no value in building a hotel at either Falmer or Toads Hole.

Why don;t they quote the report correctly.

Because it doesn't suit their purpose which is to misinform, tell lies and half truths in desparate attempt to derail the stadium plans.
 




tedebear

Legal Alien
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
17,300
In my computer
What I don't understand is how it could be a "political" decision. A request was submitted based on permissable planning laws, opposing views were requested, a ruling was issued, an appeal pointed out a few errors, more submissions requested and a final decision issued. At what point was anything other than planning decision? If any politican has bent the rules or been swayed by underhand dealings then we'd have been laughed out of Sussex...

I just don't follow their logic with that one...
 


Yorkie

Sussex born and bred
Jul 5, 2003
32,367
dahn sarf
What I don't understand is how it could be a "political" decision. A request was submitted based on permissable planning laws, opposing views were requested, a ruling was issued, an appeal pointed out a few errors, more submissions requested and a final decision issued. At what point was anything other than planning decision? If any politican has bent the rules or been swayed by underhand dealings then we'd have been laughed out of Sussex...

I just don't follow their logic with that one...

I think it was a political thing. The Lewes Lib Dems and their dinner party circuit were behind all the objections.
 


tedebear

Legal Alien
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
17,300
In my computer
I think it was a political thing. The Lewes Lib Dems and their dinner party circuit were behind all the objections.

So they are complaining they were beaten by the politics, when it was them doing the skull duggery politics all the time? :laugh:
 






Leave the Donkeys alone, stick the bridges up the NIMBYs ARSES instead!!

:clap2::clap2::clap2:

Well said, but it would be a nice site on a match day watching a Nimby getting his arse kicked by an ass over the bridge into whatever stretch of waterway it passes over :lolol::lolol:
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,638
Location Location
What really grinds my crank is how those wankers managed to set us back ANOTHER two years after the initial YES was given. And for what ? We should have been embarking on our final season this year at the shitpit, and looking forward to stepping into our new stadium next August. Instead, we are now consigned to at least another another three seasons, another three winters to sit in the pissing rain at that embarrassing dump.

Building bridges ? As Marc so eloquently said earlier, they can stick it up their f***ing ARSES. The only thing those inbred cackbadgers will ever get from me is the FINGER.
 








The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
What I don't understand is how it could be a "political" decision. A request was submitted based on permissable planning laws, opposing views were requested, a ruling was issued, an appeal pointed out a few errors, more submissions requested and a final decision issued. At what point was anything other than planning decision? If any politican has bent the rules or been swayed by underhand dealings then we'd have been laughed out of Sussex...

I just don't follow their logic with that one...
It was political insofar as the government's policies on urban re-generation and social inclusion are quite high in their list of priorities, and the Falmer Stadium project ticks many of those boxes.

In that sense, I agree with the cackbadgers that it was political, but not in the sense they mean.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here