Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
I should remove that address. It does our cause no good. All she has done is express her opinion. We may not like it - but we would fight to allow her to do it.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
That women who wrote into the Argus from the Drive in Hove.....
bhaexpress
New member
Quite so DKM however, if she's in the phone book anybody who reads the Argus could send her a rude letter. Quite pointless obviously because her high horse would get six inch extentions on each leg.
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
Address removed, although it is still referenced in a quote. And if you go to www.bt.com you can still track her down.
Free country, if people want to write to her after the decision is made, then I am sure they are more than capable of doing so. If she makes her opinion public then she should expect some comeback.
Free country, if people want to write to her after the decision is made, then I am sure they are more than capable of doing so. If she makes her opinion public then she should expect some comeback.
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 72,330
trueblue said:
Not sure. But people from The Drive should be called Drivellers.
Wardy
NSC's Benefits Guru
Lord Bracknell said:
When did Croydon become part of Sussex?
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,286
What did the letter say?
eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
DAMANCLAY said:
Exfuckingactly!
bhaexpress
New member
Letter: Poor argument
Ian Slater (Letters, October 3) might do well to remember that the majority of people who voted "yes" for a stadium at Falmer in the ballot he quotes were a small proportion of the residents of Brighton and Hove.
Those who didn't want a stadium at all were not even given a chance to vote on this ludicrous plan to build a stadium for a tuppenny ha'penny team which struggles to stay where it is, let alone rise up the league.
If they had been given a chance to vote, I am sure a resounding "no" would have been delivered.
If anything should be built on this site, it should be housing, a commodity this city needs far more than a stadium which will be under-used (by Mr Slater's own admission) and which, ultimately, the residents, via Brighton and Hove City Council, will ultimately pay for because this team hasn't got two ha'pennies to rub together and never will.
-Angela Rowland, Hove
Ian Slater (Letters, October 3) might do well to remember that the majority of people who voted "yes" for a stadium at Falmer in the ballot he quotes were a small proportion of the residents of Brighton and Hove.
Those who didn't want a stadium at all were not even given a chance to vote on this ludicrous plan to build a stadium for a tuppenny ha'penny team which struggles to stay where it is, let alone rise up the league.
If they had been given a chance to vote, I am sure a resounding "no" would have been delivered.
If anything should be built on this site, it should be housing, a commodity this city needs far more than a stadium which will be under-used (by Mr Slater's own admission) and which, ultimately, the residents, via Brighton and Hove City Council, will ultimately pay for because this team hasn't got two ha'pennies to rub together and never will.
-Angela Rowland, Hove
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Not any more.HampshireSeagulls said:
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
When we get the "yes", I am going to package up a pair of halfpennies and post them to the bitch, with a little note explaining that we can afford to rub them together.
eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
bhaexpress said:
So the days I spent walking round Brighton and Hove delivering referendum leaflets to all and sundry was designed to LIMIT the turn-out, was it Ms Rowland?
You stupid f***ing bitch
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
Her ignorance is actually quite embarrassing for her. I am getting to the stage of not caring anymore what the nimby's say as they are getting more and more desperate and telling more and more lies.
Chill out , the man from the ministry, he say YES !.
Chill out , the man from the ministry, he say YES !.
Dave the OAP
Well-known member
It was also well publicised at the time of the local elections so if Ms whatchaface could have been arsed, she could have voted
eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
Oh dear, I'm still seething from that letter. Gotta go and have a lie down 
Dave the OAP
Well-known member
I feel like writing to the argus on this.
As far as I remember it was 63k said yes, 19k said no wasn't it.
if so that is 81k who voted.
does anyone know what the electoral figures for Brighton and hove is...I know the population is 265k, but that includes children and foreign devils.
Someone once quote turnout as 24%....24% turnout = 1/4 ish
therefore 81 x 4 = 326k
shomemishtakeshurly
As far as I remember it was 63k said yes, 19k said no wasn't it.
if so that is 81k who voted.
does anyone know what the electoral figures for Brighton and hove is...I know the population is 265k, but that includes children and foreign devils.
Someone once quote turnout as 24%....24% turnout = 1/4 ish
therefore 81 x 4 = 326k
shomemishtakeshurly
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
Can't have noticed that the Albion were Champions of Divisions Three and Two in successive seasons (and Champions of both for about two days) then?!
About what about the 29k people who invaded Cardiff to watch us get promoted last year!!!
Last edited:
bhaexpress
New member
As I said earlier I wouldn't lower yoursleves into getting into a slanging match with somebody who's either a complete liar or otherwise retarded.
33057 Seagull
New member
Have just e mailed the letters page at the Argus with a counter to Eskdalle's & Rowland's ill informed diatribe. Hopefully they will publish in full tomorrow or Friday.
Ex Shelton Seagull
New member
Here's my response (taken from an earlier post about Angela's somewhat confused viewpoint)
I think Angela Rowland may be getting a little confused. In her letter (5/10) she claimed that those who didn't want a stadium were not given the chance to vote in the referendum on the subject.
The referendum was held in May 1999 alongside elections for the local council, suggesting that those who voted in the referendum possessed some sort of link to Brighton & Hove. The results (in case Angela has forgotten) were 56,701 (83.5% of voters) in favour of a stadium for Brighton & Hove Albion, with 44,985 (67.6% of voters) then stating their support for a stadium located in the field opposite the A27.
Whilst it may have taken me a number of years to obtain an GCSE in mathematics, I do have sufficient knowledge of the subject to know that 84.5% and 67.6% of 100% cannot be accurately described as a "small proportion".
These results would also suggest that 32.4% of voters managed to locate and mark the box that was headed by the word "NO". The existence of this box would suggest that there was an option available to those residents who would rather not see a stadium constructed on a muddy field next to a railway line, two University sites and a dual carriageway to register their disapproval.
It would seem obvious to me that the existence of a box that enabled a person to vote NO to Falmer means that an outlet for disapproval was indeed present. As far as I can recall I do not remember any uniformed heavies present outside the polling booths intimidating voters into voting YES. Nor do I recall and Mugabe style vote rigging. I can only come to the conclusion that there are more residents of this city that would like a stadium to be built at Falmer than there are of those who do not.
I can only assume that you were unable to identify the word "NO" or that you didn't take part in the referendum.
Now why don't you stick your f***ing ugly dog face back up the U-bend you syphilitic old bitch.
Yours respectfully,
Mr Thomas Charles Edwards BA (Hons)
I think Angela Rowland may be getting a little confused. In her letter (5/10) she claimed that those who didn't want a stadium were not given the chance to vote in the referendum on the subject.
The referendum was held in May 1999 alongside elections for the local council, suggesting that those who voted in the referendum possessed some sort of link to Brighton & Hove. The results (in case Angela has forgotten) were 56,701 (83.5% of voters) in favour of a stadium for Brighton & Hove Albion, with 44,985 (67.6% of voters) then stating their support for a stadium located in the field opposite the A27.
Whilst it may have taken me a number of years to obtain an GCSE in mathematics, I do have sufficient knowledge of the subject to know that 84.5% and 67.6% of 100% cannot be accurately described as a "small proportion".
These results would also suggest that 32.4% of voters managed to locate and mark the box that was headed by the word "NO". The existence of this box would suggest that there was an option available to those residents who would rather not see a stadium constructed on a muddy field next to a railway line, two University sites and a dual carriageway to register their disapproval.
It would seem obvious to me that the existence of a box that enabled a person to vote NO to Falmer means that an outlet for disapproval was indeed present. As far as I can recall I do not remember any uniformed heavies present outside the polling booths intimidating voters into voting YES. Nor do I recall and Mugabe style vote rigging. I can only come to the conclusion that there are more residents of this city that would like a stadium to be built at Falmer than there are of those who do not.
I can only assume that you were unable to identify the word "NO" or that you didn't take part in the referendum.
Now why don't you stick your f***ing ugly dog face back up the U-bend you syphilitic old bitch.
Yours respectfully,
Mr Thomas Charles Edwards BA (Hons)