Jump to content

Wakefield Trinity plans submision


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Josef K said:

With not being up on the East, West, North, South parts of Belle Vue which stand is where the TV cameras go. Id be happy with just a bit of a corrugated tin roof to keep me dry and some decent terracing. 

The west is where the cameras go and the small roof was originally intended to go the whole length. Issues with sky wanting camera mountings and some height issue with planning meant that this never happened. 

The North terrace roof was done at the same time under momentum of the new Glover regime before it fell apart. It was a cheap effort which was seen as temporary (like all additions to BV at the time) as the new stadium at Newmarket was imminent. I'm sure it was just coincidental that the SL licensing renewals were progressing at the same time and they had to be seen to be doing something. 

The Carter regime has a different outlook and is very much focused on increasing revenue to establish long-term viability without a sugar daddy. This is the first time that BV has been seen as the permanent home for the club. The new all-singing, all-dancing west stand will provide income sources never previously available at BV.

Unfortunately,  spending money on the other sides will not generate the ROI possible from that development and hence put on hold until some future, indeterminate, date.

The focus is on bang for buck from a limited £12m budget. 

It will be interesting to see how much Cas manage to squeeze out of Axiom and what they decide to do with it. Their initial plans seem much more ambitious and will require significantly more cash. Axiom do seem a little more forthcoming and honest than Wakefield's developer, but it's early stages yet, so we will have to wait and see.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

Oh didums, you poor old thing.

I'm sure that most Trinity fans will survive under this 10 year old structure. Don't worry it's not meant for you, not that I believe you've ever been to BV in years.

Luckily we Trin fans love it On a sunny day you can stand in the front paddock and take the rays. On the two days it actually rains there is plenty of cover if you have the nouse to step back ten feet or so.

As for the stanchions, these TWO! very thin bits of metal have never caused a moment of complaint from any of the faithful a far as i'm aware. You see it's a beloved standing terrace and due to this the viewing is fluid. Added to this over many decades of evolution the Trinity faithful have developed the ability to move there head one inch to the left or the right to overcome any momentary blind spot that a very small number may experience, simples!

We love the North stand and didn't want it replacing, our only request was that the crumbing terracing be revived, literally that was it. The club has done exactly what the fans wanted.

The biggest reason we wanted it was because it does something none of the atmosphere vacuum new wonder stadiums have ever managed. IT ACTUALLY CREATES AN ATMOSPHERE and THAT HELPS US WIN GAMES. I can't think of a better reason to keep the North stand fundamentally as it is, just fit for purpose.

So please feel free to go away and stop making up non-issues for the sake of it, or in other words, trolling.

Oh goody, you’re back.

Sorry for wishing Wakefield would bring their facilities upto the 21st century 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cookey said:

Have the Wakefield works, kick started any activity at Castleford, beyond the usual talks and promises?

Still waiting on handouts from Axiom, which shows absolutely no hint of progress (except a motorway junction design that looks like it was drawn by a 3 year old and will cause absolute mayhem at the junction in question).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wholly Trinity said:

The west is where the cameras go and the small roof was originally intended to go the whole length. Issues with sky wanting camera mountings and some height issue with planning meant that this never happened. 

The North terrace roof was done at the same time under momentum of the new Glover regime before it fell apart. It was a cheap effort which was seen as temporary (like all additions to BV at the time) as the new stadium at Newmarket was imminent. I'm sure it was just coincidental that the SL licensing renewals were progressing at the same time and they had to be seen to be doing something. 

The Carter regime has a different outlook and is very much focused on increasing revenue to establish long-term viability without a sugar daddy. This is the first time that BV has been seen as the permanent home for the club. The new all-singing, all-dancing west stand will provide income sources never previously available at BV.

Unfortunately,  spending money on the other sides will not generate the ROI possible from that development and hence put on hold until some future, indeterminate, date.

The focus is on bang for buck from a limited £12m budget. 

It will be interesting to see how much Cas manage to squeeze out of Axiom and what they decide to do with it. Their initial plans seem much more ambitious and will require significantly more cash. Axiom do seem a little more forthcoming and honest than Wakefield's developer, but it's early stages yet, so we will have to wait and see.

You are pretty much spot on there. The only thing you got wrong was the height issue, there wasn't one. Both stands are actually temporary structures and as such are not part of the planning regime. The Sky thing is true, although it was a request not an order and one that was quite convenient for Glover as the money started to run out.

The truth is Trinity have received 12 million pounds of FREE money. We could either tart up all four sides to create a decent Championship stadium that would look ok but create ZERO revenue.

Or use the bulk of the cash to build a state of the art main stand that will produce revenue 24/7 (or close to).

Doing the latter was the only smart move. Remember this stand is FREE, we owe no repayments and as such it will create revenue from day 1. This revenue along with the the revenue from the new hybrid pitch and floodlights will then enable further development of the rest of the ground in time.

it's a win/win

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Josef K said:

Thanks for that PREPOSTEROUS at least i know it now. Id imagine when it’s raining it gets a bit cramped under that little roof. 
Do you think WAFC will ever move in, at this moment in time they seem quite happy at Fev. I have always thought Wakey have had  a lovely pitch to play football on. 

Rather than a hill ? 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, cookey said:

Have the Wakefield works, kick started any activity at Castleford, beyond the usual talks and promises?

Doesn't look like it,it's as if they don't care but we don't know what's going on behind the scenes. I've always said they should stay there ( and Wakefield there ground ) as they just need doing up and their history is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/08/2022 at 22:11, DoubleD said:

It doesn’t look it! 

Almost seems pointless, it doesn’t cover half the stand and obstructs views with the stanchions. I was hoping they were going to put in a proper external structure 

The roof of the North stand can/could only come down far down the terrace because the old lights "dropped" on hinges down onto the lower terrace for service.

Th new lights are lower and are serviced by "picker".

That said, the new plans don't (yet), include replacing that roof as yet.

Edited by dboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/08/2022 at 23:02, dboy said:

The roof of the North stand can/could only come down far down the terrace because the old lights "dropped" on hinges down onto the lower terrace for service.

Th new lights are lower and are serviced by "picker".

That said, the new plans don't (yet), include replacing that roof as yet.

If I were you or anyone else I'd look at Trinity's decision to go with a hybrid pitch as a clue as to how this is going to go. It was nailed on as a 4G pitch until a month or so ago. The Football League have not yet approved 4G pitches as far as I'm aware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

The Football League have not yet approved 4G pitches as far as I'm aware.

Still banned by the Football League but approved in every division below.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

If I were you or anyone else I'd look at Trinity's decision to go with a hybrid pitch as a clue as to how this is going to go. It was nailed on as a 4G pitch until a month or so ago. The Football League have not yet approved 4G pitches as far as I'm aware.

They want a football club to come on board and take over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

If I were you or anyone else I'd look at Trinity's decision to go with a hybrid pitch as a clue as to how this is going to go. It was nailed on as a 4G pitch until a month or so ago. The Football League have not yet approved 4G pitches as far as I'm aware.

???

Don't think you meant to quote me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/08/2022 at 08:32, Spidey said:

They want a football club to come on board and take over?

Why would a non league football team take over?

 

I know where you are coming from and the issues with sharing, Hudds and Hull to name but two.

However Trinity own the stadium outright, other than effectively having a mortgage. So any team, not just a football team would be purely renting. I can't see any reason why Trinity would ever sell the ground or even share it tbh. However the rent from a tenant would go some way to paying said mortgage, or better still paying it off far quicker.

Let's use Wakefield FC as an example, who are currently renting at Fev. They are ambitious but I don't think they believe they will ever be a Premiership team. However if they reach the pinnacle of non League which is a more realistic aim they need a stadium and especially a pitch that will allow them to play top flight opposition, most notably in the FA cup, the real cash cow for such clubs.

No offence but Fev's pitch wouldn't be acceptable to any major football team or the professional leagues, so home advantage would be lost and no cup runs  or promotion etc.

Sure, Trinity would need to stay solvent and thus in control for the ground and not actually share for the best result. But in truth if Trinity failed the first club circling the BV would be WFC anyway, so it make no odds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

Don't think I did, by blob.

Well then you've lost me.

You replied to my post about the old floodlights/North Stand roof, with something about the new pitch.

Whatever point you are trying to make, you're not making it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

Why would a non league football team take over?

 

I know where you are coming from and the issues with sharing, Hudds and Hull to name but two.

However Trinity own the stadium outright, other than effectively having a mortgage. So any team, not just a football team would be purely renting. I can't see any reason why Trinity would ever sell the ground or even share it tbh. However the rent from a tenant would go some way to paying said mortgage, or better still paying it off far quicker.

Let's use Wakefield FC as an example, who are currently renting at Fev. They are ambitious but I don't think they believe they will ever be a Premiership team. However if they reach the pinnacle of non League which is a more realistic aim they need a stadium and especially a pitch that will allow them to play top flight opposition, most notably in the FA cup, the real cash cow for such clubs.

No offence but Fev's pitch wouldn't be acceptable to any major football team or the professional leagues, so home advantage would be lost and no cup runs  or promotion etc.

Sure, Trinity would need to stay solvent and thus in control for the ground and not actually share for the best result. But in truth if Trinity failed the first club circling the BV would be WFC anyway, so it make no odds.

Clubs aren't allowed to switch cup fixtures, they have to play at their league venue.

For what it's worth, if Wakefield AFC were to climb through the divisions - and I don't think people realise quite how far down the pyramid they actually are - then you'd expect them to invest in their pitch accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Clubs aren't allowed to switch cup fixtures, they have to play at their league venue.

For what it's worth, if Wakefield AFC were to climb through the divisions - and I don't think people realise quite how far down the pyramid they actually are - then you'd expect them to invest in their pitch accordingly.

They haven't got a pitch, they haven't even got a training pitch, they have nothing to develop. They are totally dependent on Featherstone at present. BV is there only avenue to any kind of higher future.

You are correct in regards to their position. I think it take them a decade of unbridled success to get to the top of the lower leagues let alone the pro game. However that doesn't stop them being a nice fit for BV, it is after all a community stadium.

I don't know the feasibility of it but personally I think Leeds United reserves returning to BV or their Ladies team would be a great option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dboy said:

Well then you've lost me.

You replied to my post about the old floodlights/North Stand roof, with something about the new pitch.

Whatever point you are trying to make, you're not making it.

No I'm saying you are correct, I don't know why I quoted you, that was meant to say my error, don't know what happened there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

I don't know the feasibility of it but personally I think Leeds United reserves returning to BV or their Ladies team would be a great option.

Think for now they are happy with York and Tadcaster respectively being used for those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/08/2022 at 12:12, Kirmonds pouch said:

Why would a non league football team take over?

 

I know where you are coming from and the issues with sharing, Hudds and Hull to name but two.

However Trinity own the stadium outright, other than effectively having a mortgage. So any team, not just a football team would be purely renting. I can't see any reason why Trinity would ever sell the ground or even share it tbh. However the rent from a tenant would go some way to paying said mortgage, or better still paying it off far quicker.

Let's use Wakefield FC as an example, who are currently renting at Fev. They are ambitious but I don't think they believe they will ever be a Premiership team. However if they reach the pinnacle of non League which is a more realistic aim they need a stadium and especially a pitch that will allow them to play top flight opposition, most notably in the FA cup, the real cash cow for such clubs.

No offence but Fev's pitch wouldn't be acceptable to any major football team or the professional leagues, so home advantage would be lost and no cup runs  or promotion etc.

Sure, Trinity would need to stay solvent and thus in control for the ground and not actually share for the best result. But in truth if Trinity failed the first club circling the BV would be WFC anyway, so it make no odds.

Ownerships can change - there's not a soccer club in this country I don't trust to try and swoop in and turf out a rugby club - its becoming a recurring theme over the past couple of decades.  Hopefully Wakefield keep control no matter what

Widnes get whinged about having the plastic pitch - but while that's in place I'm pretty confident a soccer club wont come in an turf us out

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

Ownerships can change - there's not a soccer club in this country I don't trust to try and swoop in and turf out a rugby club - its becoming a recurring theme over the past couple of decades.  Hopefully Wakefield keep control no matter what

Widnes get whinged about having the plastic pitch - but while that's in place I'm pretty confident a soccer club wont come in an turf us out

Sorry if I've missed the obvious, but I assume you are aware that Widnes already share with a soccer club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Sorry if I've missed the obvious, but I assume you are aware that Widnes already share with a soccer club?

Yes.... however as previously pointed out the limit for a 4g pitch is non-league football, so I doubt they're much of a threat (for now)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Think for now they are happy with York and Tadcaster respectively being used for those.

That's good.  We don't want a repeat of the gridlock that occurred around Belle Vue when Robbie Fowler made his debut for Leeds Reserves there.

This world was never meant for one as beautiful as me.
 
 
Wakefield Trinity RLFC
2012 - 2014 "The wasted years"

2013, 2014 & 2015 Official Magic Weekend "Whipping Boys"

2017 - The year the dream disappeared under Grix's left foot.

2018 - The FinniChezz Bromance 

2019 - The Return of the Prodigal Son

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Yes.... however as previously pointed out the limit for a 4g pitch is non-league football, so I doubt they're much of a threat (for now)  

I think you're completely safe with Widnes FC unless some godawful slave state is looking to make new inroads into Merseyside.

It was a bit more concerning when Liverpool (and Everton?) women were using the ground.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.