Jump to content

Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?


Recommended Posts

To reply in kind:

prehistoricrogerwrong (of no known gender)

First, you say you're done with commenting and then you comment. Then you say you don't have to justify your opinion. Then you attempt to. Finally, you demand I justify my opinion, which you describe as a rabid suggestion. Hyperbole in self-defence is a well-known plant action. Excuse me a moment whilst I work out what kind of plant you are. Ah, I have it. You're a Venus Fly Trap. Fortunately, I am not a fly.

Losing the Academy CAT A status is not an opinion. It is a matter of fact. I mentioned the facilities, not size. Were Freud around he'd probably ask you about your obsession with size. If the facilities that were used in the assessment are demolished that is an automatic loss of Academy status. There would for example be no classroom for the academy players to be taught in. The reduction in the number of coaches would reduce the number of hours they would be taught or other teams would go without coaching. Support for an academy or not does not depend on watching Blackburn Rovers play. You claim intent is sufficient. It is not. 

You claim we should support the residents of Brockhall village. They have 170 more houses to object to on an already overloaded infrastructure. We have the loss of the STC and the Academy to fight. I note that you don't mention the Rovers trust in your response.

In your nearly 19000 posts selling the STC has never come up. Your previous posts are of no-consequence. No forthe question you haven't answered.

Do you support the sale of the STC? Yes or No?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's reassuring to know we still have fans who care and put some pressure on Waggott and Co in various ways. Even a post on this message board will have helped so nobody should underestimate their inv

Joe, I mean this will all due respect, but Jack’s legacy isn’t Rovers winning the league. I would assume you’re too young to really remember what Jack did? Jacks legacy is putting Blackburn on th

With respect, you are talking absolute rubbish on this point and imo being extremely disrespectful to Jack Walker. I hope my post doesn't send you scurrying off to the moderators to complain as I woul

Posted Images

Re Accy Stanley, whatever the details it does seem that they are a club looking outwards and upwards and taking great care to identify with their community.

By contrast, ever since Venkys took over we have been pushing the fans away.

And that's the only thing they have been good at.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 47er said:

Re Accy Stanley, whatever the details it does seem that they are a club looking outwards and upwards and taking great care to identify with their community.

By contrast, ever since Venkys took over we have been pushing the fans away.

And that's the only thing they have been good at.

Completely agree 47 ..on that side theres no argument. The school kids shirts. etc ..simple but pro active. Rovers should take note.

But some trying  to  compare  Stanley with Rovers   doing this and that with training grounds in order highlight whats going on at Brockhall. No comparison.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HowieFive0 said:

But some trying  to  compare  Stanley with Rovers   doing this and that with training grounds in order highlight whats going on at Brockhall. No comparison.  

True. But as we used to say about Us and Burnley----"the gap is closing"!

We could be in the same league next season, one way or other, unthinkable once.

They have the momentum, we are in a permanent daze.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 47er said:

True. But as we used to say about Us and Burnley----"the gap is closing"!

We could be in the same league next season, one way or other, unthinkable once.

They have the momentum, we are in a permanent daze.

Yep . Unthinkable but hello reality ..who d have thought  Bournemouth could go all the way to the PL with a ground capacity of 12000 ? 

No gimmes any more 47!!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Richard Oakley said:

To reply in kind:

prehistoricrogerwrong (of no known gender)

First, you say you're done with commenting and then you comment. Then you say you don't have to justify your opinion. Then you attempt to. Finally, you demand I justify my opinion, which you describe as a rabid suggestion. Hyperbole in self-defence is a well-known plant action. Excuse me a moment whilst I work out what kind of plant you are. Ah, I have it. You're a Venus Fly Trap. Fortunately, I am not a fly.

Losing the Academy CAT A status is not an opinion. It is a matter of fact. I mentioned the facilities, not size. Were Freud around he'd probably ask you about your obsession with size. If the facilities that were used in the assessment are demolished that is an automatic loss of Academy status. There would for example be no classroom for the academy players to be taught in. The reduction in the number of coaches would reduce the number of hours they would be taught or other teams would go without coaching. Support for an academy or not does not depend on watching Blackburn Rovers play. You claim intent is sufficient. It is not. 

You claim we should support the residents of Brockhall village. They have 170 more houses to object to on an already overloaded infrastructure. We have the loss of the STC and the Academy to fight. I note that you don't mention the Rovers trust in your response.

In your nearly 19000 posts selling the STC has never come up. Your previous posts are of no-consequence. No forthe question you haven't answered.

Do you support the sale of the STC? Yes or No?

He has answered it. Several times. I'll do it in small words:

If Cat 1 deffo, then yes.

If Cat 1 not deffo, then no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, HowieFive0 said:

Yep . Unthinkable but hello reality ..who d have thought  Bournemouth could go all the way to the PL with a ground capacity of 12000 ? 

No gimmes any more 47!!

 

No, just takies at our club!

Accy Stanley bucking the trend aren't they? We're decidedly not.

Edited by 47er
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't want to post but:

I think it's about time we all stopped knocking spots off one another: we're all twitchy, angry, pissed off: I get that....

There are some, who undoubtedly should hang their heads in shame....but they are a few and bygones can be bygones.

If we are to reinvigorate this great club that we all love, WE need to be as one.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, darrenrover said:

I didn't want to post but:

I think it's about time we all stopped knocking spots off one another: we're all twitchy, angry, pissed off: I get that....

There are some, who undoubtedly should hang their heads in shame....but they are a few and bygones can be bygones.

If we are to reinvigorate this great club that we all love, WE need to be as one.....

Spot on but that needs to come from venkys, it needs waggott, venus and mowbray being removed from the club. It needs Venkys to be  made aware of the brockhall issues if they aren't already. We need bold senior managerial appointments and bold manager appointment. To have faith we need some sign those at the top are aware of the issues and will act 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Richard Oakley said:

You ought to have left defending yourself to others. They're doing a better job. Your reputation ain't worth a damn.

[...] 

the facilities that give us CAT A and we lose that status in an instant and our place in the PL2 top division vanishes overnight. The Academy would go soon after. You clearly don't value the Academy, Cat A status or Jack Walker's legacy. 

Did you know that the correct description is Category 1? There's nearly 2000 posts in this thread and only you and JH Rover who call it Category A 🤷‍♂️ 

And then there's this weird thing where you reply to JHRover in the first person... 

_20210317_234556.JPG

_20210317_234357.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ben Frost Yes I do know that. I was waiting  to see who would crawl out of the woodwork and call me on it.

@Mike E I'll keep this simple for you. All he's said to me is that he believes CAT 1 Academy status will be maintained. Even easier for you; I oppose the sale of the land on which the STC is built. I believe to do otherwise is to betray the legacy of Jack Walker.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A new low Ben.

Your contribution to this vitally important thread has reduced to baseless accusations that one of our most forensic, passionate fans on here is a fraud?

Look to the early pages and I’m probably saying Cat A, like JH I’m used to talking about ticket pricing, so an easy slip up to make... or am I secretly Stuart or Rev?

Though shows how difficult even you are finding being a contrarian on this issue...

Edited by Mattyblue
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Richard Oakley said:

@Ben Frost Yes I do know that. I was waiting  to see who would crawl out of the woodwork and call me on it.

@Mike E I'll keep this simple for you. All he's said to me is that he believes CAT 1 Academy status will be maintained. Even easier for you; I oppose the sale of the land on which the STC is built. I believe to do otherwise is to betray the legacy of Jack Walker.

He also said that IF Cat 1 is NOT maintained, he opposes the sale. You can't omit parts of what someone says just to have a go at them.

Edited by Mike E
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ben Frost said:

Did you know that the correct description is Category 1? There's nearly 2000 posts in this thread and only you and JH Rover who call it Category A 🤷‍♂️ 

And then there's this weird thing where you reply to JHRover in the first person... 

_20210317_234556.JPG

_20210317_234357.JPG

Has someone tasked you with the job of attempting to discredit anyone opposing the Brockhall scheme or are you doing it completely off your own batt?

You picked on the wrong poster with such an exceptional contributor as JH Rover frankly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike E said:

He also said that IF Cat 1 is NOT maintained, he opposes the sale. You can't omit parts of what someone says just to have a go at them.

The point is, it will be way too late to do anything about it if we get to the stage whereby Cat 1 status is refused. You can tweak a building design but you can't magic up space that doesn't exist.

I think Richard  Oakley makes some valid points. I don't think 1864 is "a plant" but nevertheless I find his stance on this extremely odd.

Still, as 1864 has said several times, he has his view, we have ours and we're all entitled to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

A new low Ben.

Your contribution to this vitally important thread has reduced to baseless accusations that one of our most forensic, passionate fans on here is a fraud?

Look to the early pages and I’m probably saying Cat A, like JH I’m used to talking about ticket pricing, so an easy slip up to make... or am I secretly Stuart or Rev?

Though shows how difficult even you are finding being a contrarian on this issue...

You don't reply to Stuart or Rev's posts and start the response with the words "I'd missed off .... "

Or for that matter (going back a couple of months) state as fact that the undersoil heating at Ewood has been left to rot. Shown up for the lie that it was when it transpires the undersoil heating has actually been on for weeks at a time this winter.

That's not forensic or passionate, it's making things up to fit a viewpoint.

As for contrarian - not correct. You yourself have often said how this site is not representative of the wider fanbase. It's an echo chamber, total silo mentality. Look at how some posters have treated 1864 and O2G on this thread - not for stating a view one way or the other on the actual plans, but just for pointing out flaws in some of the wilder arguments, or giving neutral information on the actual planning process.

It appears that some regular posters here just want a place where everyone thinks and says the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

So JH is Richard Oakley? Why would he bother?

This place isn’t representative, just like the LT comments or Facebook. However, there is rarely any nuance in your posts, just unflinching support of a regime that has turned us into a pathetic shadow of what they inherited.

Edited by Mattyblue
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

So JH is Richard Oakley? Why would he bother?

This place isn’t representative, just like the LT comments or Facebook. However, there is rarely any nuance in your posts, just unflinching support of a regime that has turned us into a pathetic shadow of what they inherited.

Again a distortion. I've already said I don't think these plans will get past Base 1. That's not unflinching support, it's an opinion that the planning process and RVBC will leave this dead in the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ben Frost said:

Did you know that the correct description is Category 1? There's nearly 2000 posts in this thread and only you and JH Rover who call it Category A 🤷‍♂️ 

And then there's this weird thing where you reply to JHRover in the first person... 

_20210317_234556.JPG

_20210317_234357.JPG

Not even sure if the point about RO referring to JHR in the first person is a valid one.

I certainly can't be bothered checking which thread it came from and looking it up but did RO not mean (in my other post on the subject which you replied to) "I'd missed out....."

Edited by RevidgeBlue
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ben Frost said:

Again a distortion. I've already said I don't think these plans will get past Base 1. That's not unflinching support, it's an opinion that the planning process and RVBC will leave this dead in the water.

That's not a reason why the plans are a good thing though, it's crossing your fingers and hoping for the best.

If you oppose the plans that is. You haven't really indicated what your stance is on them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 47er said:

True. But as we used to say about Us and Burnley----"the gap is closing"!

We could be in the same league next season, one way or other, unthinkable once.

They have the momentum, we are in a permanent daze.

We had momentum but it was lost the min Waggot and ToMo applied the brakes and their methods after promotion.

That should've been the catalyst to get the club really going again. Instead all they had was a 'job done' attitude.  It was discussed on here at the time the surprise they weren't going a bit more ambitious.

Somehow 7 million quid went into Brereton and they dished out contract extensions left right and center. To players who'd managed one good season in a league below most of their levels. Looking back now it was quite simply all about settling in and protecting everyone's position.

You even had Mowbray telling everyone he'd had to lower the owners expectations. WTF it was basically an admission of not being capable of anything else. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there were people out there oblivious to what was going on with the training ground, I’d have pointed them here immediately.

However, were you to do that now, anyone reading the past couple of pages would see all the squabbles and nonsense and likely dismiss any of the concerns previously raised.

This thread needs putting back on the rails pronto.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

If there were people out there oblivious to what was going on with the training ground, I’d have pointed them here immediately.

However, were you to do that now, anyone reading the past couple of pages would see all the squabbles and nonsense and likely dismiss any of the concerns previously raised.

This thread needs putting back on the rails pronto.

Some might say, job done, as they disappear back into the shadows

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

So JH is Richard Oakley? Why would he bother?

This place isn’t representative, just like the LT comments or Facebook. However, there is rarely any nuance in your posts, just unflinching support of a regime that has turned us into a pathetic shadow of what they inherited.

I disagree Matty, I believe it is representative..........of those that don't possibly have other motives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LDRover said:

Some might say, job done, as they disappear back into the shadows

No fecking chance, they can come on here all they want: WE'll take them on!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • J*B unpinned this topic
  • J*B pinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • 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.