AFC Wimbledon

[the brentforder]

So to clarify Markybee, you are against the move because you would rather see dog racing than football at Wimbledon stadium?

 

[Markybee]

Without getting into a P**ing contest with you, do you seriously not think I know all about Galliard Homes, Risk Capital etc????



Galliard Homes have no interest in greyhound racing and are trying to build houses at Oxford Stadium too, closed down a couple of years ago despite being popular and profitable. To date, though a decision was expected over Xmas, they had initially been. turned down quite unanimously.

The current operators of Wimbledon are doing very well despite the place being run down, it would be extremely successful if Pascal Taggarts plans come to fruition. A far better solution and the residents are (to date) anti the stadium for football.

GRA have not looked after greyhound racings interest for decades IMHO, any greyhound enthusiast would suggest the same.

By the way, before you dismiss the Greyhound Derby, William Hill are sponsoring a £250,000 first prize next year!

 

[Newport Pagnell Bee]

Without getting into a P**ing contest with you, do you seriously not think I know all about Galliard Homes, Risk Capital etc????



Galliard Homes have no interest in greyhound racing and are trying to build houses at Oxford Stadium too, closed down a couple of years ago despite being popular and profitable. To date, though a decision was expected over Xmas, they had initially be turned down quite unanimously.

The currently operators of Wimbledon are doing very well despite the place being run down, it would be extremely successful if Pascal Taggarts plans come to fruition. A far better solution and the residents are (to date) anti the stadium for football.

GRA have not looked after greyhound racings interest for decades IMHO, any greyhound enthusiast would suggest the same.

Dear old Ealing Bee. He does like a good old row. Reminds me of the old Monty Python sketch.......Is this a 5 or 10 minute argument? :

 

[Ealing Bee]

Without getting into a P**ing contest with you, do you seriously not think I know all about Galliard Homes, Risk Capital etc????

That's my whole point - you know infinitely more about this probably than any of us, yet you (conveniently) ignore the facts, since they don't suit your argument against AFC Wimbledon.

The key facts being these:
1. It was the Greyhound Racing Association which sold the stadium to Galliard.
2. Of course Galliard Homes have "no interest in greyhound racing" - the clue is in their name.
3. AFC Wimbledon have every right to seek a home in Wimbledon and as a football club, they have no more responsibility towards Greyhound Racing than eg the GRA had towards Speedway.
4. Without AFC Wimbledon, there is every chance that Kingstonian would have ceased to exist years ago.

All the rest - "currently profitable", "locals anti-football", "£250k Prize Money" etc - may be important to you and other racing fans, but should have no influence over AFC Wimbledon's pursuit of their own interests.

 

[Markybee]

You might have all day EB.I don't lol

..and the popcorn can stay in the cupboard.

 

[Salford Bee]

You might have all day EB.I don't lol

..and the popcorn can stay in the cupboard.

You'll be accused of attacking the poster, not the post soon.

Can anyone sum up Ealing Bee's latest diatribe?

 

[Holysmit]

Some did - namely those with no interest in the facts or the history of the matter.

K's would have been dead 10 years ago if Wimbledon hadn't have come along.

Isnt that what Winkleman said about Wimbeldon?

 

[sonofabee]

You'll be accused of attacking the poster, not the post soon.

Can anyone sum up Ealing Bee's latest diatribe?

Think along the lines of- I happen to be an expert on this subject as well because I've been on wiki and once saw a greyhound. I've a couple of hours spare so stand by for lots of expert opinions to try and show I'm more in the know and cleverer than people like Hobbsy or Markybee.

Blah blah blah blah

 

[Markybee]

That's my whole point - you know infinitely more about this probably than any of us, yet you (conveniently) ignore the facts, since they don't suit your argument against AFC Wimbledon.

The key facts being these:
1. It was the Greyhound Racing Association which sold the stadium to Galliard.
2. Of course Galliard Homes have "no interest in greyhound racing" - the clue is in their name.
3. AFC Wimbledon have every right to seek a home in Wimbledon and as a football club, they have no more responsibility towards Greyhound Racing than eg the GRA had towards Speedway.
4. Without AFC Wimbledon, there is every chance that Kingstonian would have ceased to exist years ago.

All the rest - "currently profitable", "locals anti-football", "£250k Prize Money" etc - may be important to you and other racing fans, but should have no influence over AFC Wimbledon's pursuit of their own interests.

This will be my last post on it as I don't wish to get in any protracted, long winded stuff.

Having been to all WWW meetings (We want Wimbledon) ie that is to STAY as a greyhound track (apart from the one meeting in Dublin) I am well aware of the necessity that Plough Lane must retain a sporting interest, which is where AFC's eyes lit up and you have a "marriage of convenience".

Having heard from one of their founders, who had absolutely no idea I had any interest or knowledge of greyhound racing, of their plans, earlier this year, that "greyhound racing is finished", It was only when I asked him a few questions, which he couldn't answer, that he stopped spouting his mouth off.

There's a lot that has gone on behind the scenes which doesn't sit comfortable with me but I do come in from a different interest.

The fact that Greyhound racing is there ,being profitable IS important. If it was completely dead and losing money no one would complain.

Pascal Taggarts plans to redevelop, retain racing etc are more in keeping with the environment and benefit to the residents.

It may well be that the football club currently playing at Kingstonians get to go back there and the Council that f**ked up years ago, increase their incompetence by trying to "right a wrong" and doing it again.

Yes, its obvious the people involved with AFC couldn't give a monkeys about what they are doing.

As I said before EB - which you avoided - anywhere but the greyhound stadium at Plough Lane!!! :shrug:

For a Club that has tried to build itself from scratch, moaned about MK Dons, I just find it incredibly sickening that they are trying to capitalise on another industry's situation, without any thoughts whatsoever.

 

[South Acton Bee]

Afc and there fans come across a we hate what mk dons are. But will use the same ways as the mk to move forward.

Plus there fans in non league acted the big bullocks and was very dislike by most

 

[vcmazz]

Not the case!

I know it isn't.

 

[vcmazz]

Agreed. Perhaps vzmazz can tell us why he thinks that regeneration of a run-down part of the borough should be put on-hold forever to let people hold on to ransom strips. Very odd.

I can't. Because I don't. And have never said I do. :shrug: I don't know the first thing about our own CPO's that appear to be delaying things a tad. I don't know what land or property is involved, who it belongs to or how those owning it feel about having a CPO on it. That's why I asked for info from others and their views on the morality of the thing. I don't have any myself at this stage.

 

[sonofabee]

This will be my last post on it as I don't wish to get in any protracted, long winded stuff.

Having been to all WWW meetings (We want Wimbledon) ie that is to STAY as a greyhound track (apart from the one meeting in Dublin) I am well aware of the necessity that Plough Lane must retain a sporting interest, which is where AFC's eyes lit up and you have a "marriage of convenience".

Having heard from one of their founders, who had absolutely no idea I had any interest or knowledge of greyhound racing, of their plans, earlier this year, that "greyhound racing is finished", It was only when I asked him a few questions, which he couldn't answer, that he stopped spouting his mouth off.

There's a lot that has gone on behind the scenes which doesn't sit comfortable with me but I do come in from a different interest.

The fact that Greyhound racing is there ,being profitable IS important. If it was completely dead and losing money no one would complain.

Pascal Taggarts plans to redevelop, retain racing etc are more in keeping with the environment and benefit to the residents.

It may well be that the football club currently playing at Kingstonians get to go back there and the Council that f**ked up years ago, increase their incompetence by trying to "right a wrong" and doing it again.

Yes, its obvious the people involved with AFC couldn't give a monkeys about what they are doing.

As I said before EB - which you avoided - anywhere but the greyhound stadium at Plough Lane!!! :shrug:

For a Club that has tried to build itself from scratch, moaned about MK Dons, I just find it incredibly sickening that they are trying to capitalise on another industry's situation, without any thoughts whatsoever.

Check mate

 

[vcmazz]

This will be my last post on it as I don't wish to get in any protracted, long winded stuff.

Having been to all WWW meetings (We want Wimbledon) ie that is to STAY as a greyhound track (apart from the one meeting in Dublin) I am well aware of the necessity that Plough Lane must retain a sporting interest, which is where AFC's eyes lit up and you have a "marriage of convenience".

Having heard from one of their founders, who had absolutely no idea I had any interest or knowledge of greyhound racing, of their plans, earlier this year, that "greyhound racing is finished", It was only when I asked him a few questions, which he couldn't answer, that he stopped spouting his mouth off.

There's a lot that has gone on behind the scenes which doesn't sit comfortable with me but I do come in from a different interest.

The fact that Greyhound racing is there ,being profitable IS important. If it was completely dead and losing money no one would complain.

Pascal Taggarts plans to redevelop, retain racing etc are more in keeping with the environment and benefit to the residents.

It may well be that the football club currently playing at Kingstonians get to go back there and the Council that f**ked up years ago, increase their incompetence by trying to "right a wrong" and doing it again.

Yes, its obvious the people involved with AFC couldn't give a monkeys about what they are doing.

As I said before EB - which you avoided - anywhere but the greyhound stadium at Plough Lane!!! :shrug:

For a Club that has tried to build itself from scratch, moaned about MK Dons, I just find it incredibly sickening that they are trying to capitalise on another industry's situation, without any thoughts whatsoever.

Mark, when it comes to the Plough Lane Stadium you clearly know your stuff so perhaps one more post mate if you will as I have been Googling this a bit today, trying to get me head round it.

Paschal Taggart is apparently the man behind the scheme and Galliard Homes want to redevelop there. Galliard Homes own the site from what I understand because the Greyhound Racing Association sold it to them. Why did they do that? And what is the Paschal Taggart connection? I don't understand his role here. He seems pro-greyhounds and anti-football but as Galliard own the site, surely it's down to them what happens to it as long as they adhere to the provisos?

As for Wimbledon's involvement - I really don't see what this has to do with them? It seems Mr Taggart has no interest in them, Galliard has no interest in them and I don't see that they have any claim on it at all so what exactly are they doing to try and jump on board?

Is there a possibility that this development could house the greyhounds and the football club? Surely this is something that must have been discussed at some point? Wimbledon still wouldn't own their ground of course, but they'd be back in town and presumably have a larger home so they could look to move forward? Two out of three ain't bad. :shrug:

 

[Fleet John]

It's not just the greyhounds at Plough Lane, it's also the spiritual home of Banger Racing. World Championship was held there every year from 1974 - 2008. It's the last oval left in the capital. Used to have a cracking atmosphere on world final night, not so much now as half the stadium is shut and a rundown dump. Surely there must be another site in Wimbledon somewhere? Another option would be to get rid of the greyhounds and have a combined football and banger racing venue like Cowdenbeath.

 

[Markybee]

Mark, when it comes to the Plough Lane Stadium you clearly know your stuff so perhaps one more post mate if you will as I have been Googling this a bit today, trying to get me head round it.

Paschal Taggart is apparently the man behind the scheme and Galliard Homes want to redevelop there. Galliard Homes own the site from what I understand because the Greyhound Racing Association sold it to them. Why did they do that? And what is the Paschal Taggart connection? I don't understand his role here. He seems pro-greyhounds and anti-football but as Galliard own the site, surely it's down to them what happens to it as long as they adhere to the provisos?

As for Wimbledon's involvement - I really don't see what this has to do with them? It seems Mr Taggart has no interest in them, Galliard has no interest in them and I don't see that they have any claim on it at all so what exactly are they doing to try and jump on board?

Is there a possibility that this development could house the greyhounds and the football club? Surely this is something that must have been discussed at some point? Wimbledon still wouldn't own their ground of course, but they'd be back in town and presumably have a larger home so they could look to move forward? Two out of three ain't bad. :shrug:

http://www.merton.gov.uk/environmen...policies_plan/site_37_r031_hume_statement.pdf

Pascall Taggarts statement. Luke Johnson, you might recall, was behind Pizza Express.

The site at Wimbledon is worth a mint BUT has flood plain issues.

Its a total mess, what it really needs is to be run by pure greyhound promoters, with an interest for the sport itself, which GRA clearly are not.

(Don't get me started on selling the jewel that was "Slough Stadium" for £1m in the 80's) :mad2:

Unfortunately due to becoming quoted as WEMBLEY years ago and inheriting debts from US interests it's been a total, directionless mess.

In the meantime AFC circle like vultures, the class reject desperately looking for a date to The Prom, Galliard the smug and ruthless benefactor as this unsavoury "arranged marriage" looks likely to get the go ahead from the council that are still haunted by the MD Dons debacle, allegedly keen to think they can now make amends.

This is my "one last post" a la the "wafer thin mint"!

 

[vcmazz]

http://www.merton.gov.uk/environmen...policies_plan/site_37_r031_hume_statement.pdf

Pascall Taggarts statement. Luke Johnson, you might recall, was behind Pizza Express.

This is my "one last post" a la the "wafer thin mint"!

Fair dos. I'll have a read.

 

[SpiderBee]

Mark, when it comes to the Plough Lane Stadium you clearly know your stuff so perhaps one more post mate if you will as I have been Googling this a bit today, trying to get me head round it.

Paschal Taggart is apparently the man behind the scheme and Galliard Homes want to redevelop there. Galliard Homes own the site from what I understand because the Greyhound Racing Association sold it to them. Why did they do that? And what is the Paschal Taggart connection? I don't understand his role here. He seems pro-greyhounds and anti-football but as Galliard own the site, surely it's down to them what happens to it as long as they adhere to the provisos?

As for Wimbledon's involvement - I really don't see what this has to do with them? It seems Mr Taggart has no interest in them, Galliard has no interest in them and I don't see that they have any claim on it at all so what exactly are they doing to try and jump on board?

Is there a possibility that this development could house the greyhounds and the football club? Surely this is something that must have been discussed at some point? Wimbledon still wouldn't own their ground of course, but they'd be back in town and presumably have a larger home so they could look to move forward? Two out of three ain't bad. :shrug:

See the old Stamford Bridge, Vicarage Road, The Shay etc etc. Would be like a poor man's Olympic Stadium wouldn't it?
Turn Kingsmeadow into a dog track? perfect size I reckon! op

 

[vcmazz]

See the old Stamford Bridge, Vicarage Road, The Shay etc etc. Would be like a poor man's Olympic Stadium wouldn't it?
Turn Kingsmeadow into a dog track? perfect size I reckon! op

Is that why Chelsea want it dya reckon? To replace their old dog track? :suspect:

 

[jlove]

I've thought long and hard about it for the last 30 seconds and come to the conclusion that I still don't like AFC Wimbledon and it's fans. Thank you.

 

[Downbeat Bee]

Loving this thread. Dogs, bangers, aggro, a real education. Can't help thinking there are few disagreements. Boils down to do you like AFC Wimbledon and Do you care more about greyhound racing in Wimbledon than getting AFC to take over the stadium. Has the world of greyhound racing been as badly governed as it appears?

 

[Markybee]

Loving this thread. Dogs, bangers, aggro, a real education. Can't help thinking there are few disagreements. Boils down to do you like AFC Wimbledon and Do you care more about greyhound racing in Wimbledon than getting AFC to take over the stadium. Has the world of greyhound racing been as badly governed as it appears?

Sadly, yes.

Surging property prices have seen the number of licensed UK Stadia gradually decrease from over 80 to 24, until Towcester opened on 6th December. (Well worth a visit but might be best in Spring, it gets cold there!)

 

[Hullbee]

Sadly, yes.

Surging property prices have seen the number of licensed UK Stadia gradually decrease from over 80 to 24, until Towcester opened on 6th December. (Well worth a visit but might be best in Spring, it gets cold there!)

Did greyhound racing have to sell stadia to survive?? As they don't seem to have invested any of the money improving what stadiums remain]

 

[Judio1999]

Obviously Kinsgmeadow is not fit for them

Have a look at what matches you have to have attended to get a ticket in the Liverpool End !!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Only season ticket holders who attended ALL 13 of the following FA Cup away games
will be allowed to watch Liverpool take on AFC Wimbledon on January 5:
Burnley: January 18, 2005
Luton: January 7, 2006
Portsmouth: January 29, 2006
Birmingham: March 21, 2006
Luton: January 6, 2008
Preston: January 3, 2009
Everton: February 4, 2009
Reading: January 2, 2010
Man Utd: January 9, 2011
Mansfield: January 6, 2013
Oldham: January 27, 2013
Bournemouth: January 25, 2014
Arsenal: February 16, 2014

 

[Ealing Bee]

This will be my last post on it as I don't wish to get in any protracted, long winded stuff.

Having been to all WWW meetings (We want Wimbledon) ie that is to STAY as a greyhound track (apart from the one meeting in Dublin) I am well aware of the necessity that Plough Lane must retain a sporting interest, which is where AFC's eyes lit up and you have a "marriage of convenience".

Having heard from one of their founders, who had absolutely no idea I had any interest or knowledge of greyhound racing, of their plans, earlier this year, that "greyhound racing is finished", It was only when I asked him a few questions, which he couldn't answer, that he stopped spouting his mouth off.

There's a lot that has gone on behind the scenes which doesn't sit comfortable with me but I do come in from a different interest.

The fact that Greyhound racing is there ,being profitable IS important. If it was completely dead and losing money no one would complain.

Pascal Taggarts plans to redevelop, retain racing etc are more in keeping with the environment and benefit to the residents.

It may well be that the football club currently playing at Kingstonians get to go back there and the Council that f**ked up years ago, increase their incompetence by trying to "right a wrong" and doing it again.

Yes, its obvious the people involved with AFC couldn't give a monkeys about what they are doing.

As I said before EB - which you avoided - anywhere but the greyhound stadium at Plough Lane!!! :shrug:

For a Club that has tried to build itself from scratch, moaned about MK Dons, I just find it incredibly sickening that they are trying to capitalise on another industry's situation, without any thoughts whatsoever.

All of that is no doubt true, but you miss my point (or choose not to address it).

Which point is this. In decrying what you consider to be an unacceptable situation - Football replacing Racing at Wimbledon Stadium - you seem determined to cast AFC Wimbledon as the Bad Guys in all this.

Whereas the real villains must be the GRA - who sold out to what was obviously a consortium of Property Developers - and/or the local Council, who may not be representing the best interests of the Borough.

That being the case, unless AFC Wimbledon are doing something illegal, how can you blame them for spotting an opportunity to relocate to their home area? Remember, Wimbledon FC were in Wimbledon long before Dog Racing was even heard of, and were playing at their own stadium at Plough Lane years before the dogs moved into the other end of the road.

And as for the criticism that AFC Wimbledon are squeezing out another sport, I doubt Speedway fans would be too impressed by that....

P.S. As for your "anywhere but Plough Lane Stadium" argument, I would have thought that Brentford's search for a suitable site in our local area would demonstrate how something like that is easier said than done.

 

[Markybee]

Did greyhound racing have to sell stadia to survive?? As they don't seem to have invested any of the money improving what stadiums remain]

Some yes, others no.

The surge is property values left no choice to some.

Walthamstow was a brilliant place, always buzzy & popular, it had a very modern restaurant (Ascot ), the rest of the place was quite "Art Deco" but still clean and tidy. It was run by the Chandler family, Victor is a brother and together with the family daughter, Annie, they treated the place like a member of the family. They were great people to deal with.

The trouble was, there was no one to come through and run it. They could either sell as a going concern OR as a property sale, they chose the latter.

White City was under used and the offer to sell to BBC too much to refuse.

Catford was closed and, to my knowledge, although demolished there's nothing new on this site. It was losing money as far as I know. For people who watch RPGTV, Phil Donaldson was working there as asst racing manager.

Others were closed as before the 1960's betting shops weren't around (as far as I know) so live betting was all the rage and attendances were huge.

Harringay and Portsmouth also closed (for money), whereas Oxford didn't for the same reason, thats just Galliard leading to the next step....or trying to and failing.

Towcester is a breathe of fresh air as they have modern facilities as it is...but London needs a flag ship stadium, a new Wimbledon.

 

[Banana]

Obviously Kinsgmeadow is not fit for them

Have a look at what matches you have to have attended to get a ticket in the Liverpool End !!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Only season ticket holders who attended ALL 13 of the following FA Cup away games
will be allowed to watch Liverpool take on AFC Wimbledon on January 5:
Burnley: January 18, 2005
Luton: January 7, 2006
Portsmouth: January 29, 2006
Birmingham: March 21, 2006
Luton: January 6, 2008
Preston: January 3, 2009
Everton: February 4, 2009
Reading: January 2, 2010
Man Utd: January 9, 2011
Mansfield: January 6, 2013
Oldham: January 27, 2013
Bournemouth: January 25, 2014
Arsenal: February 16, 2014

Nobody under-30 then!

 

[ruislip bee]

Obviously Kinsgmeadow is not fit for them

Have a look at what matches you have to have attended to get a ticket in the Liverpool End !!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Only season ticket holders who attended ALL 13 of the following FA Cup away games
will be allowed to watch Liverpool take on AFC Wimbledon on January 5:
Burnley: January 18, 2005
Luton: January 7, 2006
Portsmouth: January 29, 2006
Birmingham: March 21, 2006
Luton: January 6, 2008
Preston: January 3, 2009
Everton: February 4, 2009
Reading: January 2, 2010
Man Utd: January 9, 2011
Mansfield: January 6, 2013
Oldham: January 27, 2013
Bournemouth: January 25, 2014
Arsenal: February 16, 2014

Bloody hell is this serious? Who'd even keep the ticket Stubbs to these games? Only really sado collector types!

 

[hobbsy]

Bloody hell is this serious? Who'd even keep the ticket Stubbs to these games? Only really sado collector types!

I'd assume they've had electronic ticketing for some time. FWIW I do still have my Barrow stub.

 

[ruislip bee]

I'd assume they've had electronic ticketing for some time. FWIW I do still have my Barrow stub.

Oops! Sorry Hobbsy I didn't have you down as a collector! Mind you I still have my Cardiff & Hull away tickets from 71! I know-----

 

[hobbsy]

Oops! Sorry Hobbsy I didn't have you down as a collector! Mind you I still have my Cardiff & Hull away tickets from 71! I know-----

I knew one day I might need it (Champions League match or something hopefully !)

 

[Markybee]

Oops! Sorry Hobbsy I didn't have you down as a collector! Mind you I still have my Cardiff & Hull away tickets from 71! I know-----

:laugh:

 

[Newport Pagnell Bee]

This will be my last post on it as I don't wish to get in any protracted, long winded stuff.

Having been to all WWW meetings (We want Wimbledon) ie that is to STAY as a greyhound track (apart from the one meeting in Dublin) I am well aware of the necessity that Plough Lane must retain a sporting interest, which is where AFC's eyes lit up and you have a "marriage of convenience".

Having heard from one of their founders, who had absolutely no idea I had any interest or knowledge of greyhound racing, of their plans, earlier this year, that "greyhound racing is finished", It was only when I asked him a few questions, which he couldn't answer, that he stopped spouting his mouth off.

There's a lot that has gone on behind the scenes which doesn't sit comfortable with me but I do come in from a different interest.

The fact that Greyhound racing is there ,being profitable IS important. If it was completely dead and losing money no one would complain.

Pascal Taggarts plans to redevelop, retain racing etc are more in keeping with the environment and benefit to the residents.

It may well be that the football club currently playing at Kingstonians get to go back there and the Council that f**ked up years ago, increase their incompetence by trying to "right a wrong" and doing it again.

Yes, its obvious the people involved with AFC couldn't give a monkeys about what they are doing.

As I said before EB - which you avoided - anywhere but the greyhound stadium at Plough Lane!!! :shrug:

For a Club that has tried to build itself from scratch, moaned about MK Dons, I just find it incredibly sickening that they are trying to capitalise on another industry's situation, without any thoughts whatsoever.

Best back off completely Mark. This is the full 30 minute argument although I suspect 30 mins is only the starting point.

 

[Ealing Bee]

Dear old Ealing Bee. He does like a good old row. Reminds me of the old Monty Python sketch.......Is this a 5 or 10 minute argument? :

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "15."Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

 

[Ealing Bee]

You'll be accused of attacking the poster, not the post soon.

Can anyone sum up Ealing Bee's latest diatribe?

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

 

[Ealing Bee]

Think along the lines of- I happen to be an expert on this subject as well because I've been on wiki and once saw a greyhound. I've a couple of hours spare so stand by for lots of expert opinions to try and show I'm more in the know and cleverer than people like Hobbsy or Markybee.

Blah blah blah blah

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

 

[Newport Pagnell Bee]

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "15."Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

Not a personal attack at all. Come on, you do like a good old row / argument. Just a simple fact.

Anyway, Happy new year to you Ealing Bee. Have a great night & let's hope the Bees go from strength to strength in 2015.

 

[Wise old Bee]

Bloody hell is this serious? Who'd even keep the ticket Stubbs to these games? Only really sado collector types!

Still got most of mine going well back. Have laminated a few particular favourites, Blackburn 89 etc, but the Barrow stub will only be brought out when I am really low and need to remember that things could be worse. By the way, I hope Liverpool - who I have little time for - really stuff the smug gits from AFC.

 

[vcmazz]

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "15."Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

Sure there is something in there about copy and pasting too?

 

[sonofabee]

From Forum Rule No.5: "If you disagree with what someone else says, say so and use whatever arguments you like to support your views. However personal attacks only suggest that you cannot support your views in any other way and are not allowed."
And Rule No.15: "Trolling" (i.e. posting in order to deliberately get a reaction or by posting false rumours etc.) is not permitted."

Happy New Year, thank you for providing us with so much fun and giving me a sense of perspective.
Its all about opinions and very boring if we all agreed.
That's as nice as I get and I won't be repeating anytime soon.

 

[Womble Bee]

Bloody hell is this serious? Who'd even keep the ticket Stubbs to these games? Only really sado collector types!

I got my ticket!

 

[horshambees]

This will be my last post on it as I don't wish to get in any protracted, long winded stuff.

Having been to all WWW meetings (We want Wimbledon) ie that is to STAY as a greyhound track (apart from the one meeting in Dublin) I am well aware of the necessity that Plough Lane must retain a sporting interest, which is where AFC's eyes lit up and you have a "marriage of convenience".

Having heard from one of their founders, who had absolutely no idea I had any interest or knowledge of greyhound racing, of their plans, earlier this year, that "greyhound racing is finished", It was only when I asked him a few questions, which he couldn't answer, that he stopped spouting his mouth off.

There's a lot that has gone on behind the scenes which doesn't sit comfortable with me but I do come in from a different interest.

The fact that Greyhound racing is there ,being profitable IS important. If it was completely dead and losing money no one would complain.

Pascal Taggarts plans to redevelop, retain racing etc are more in keeping with the environment and benefit to the residents.

It may well be that the football club currently playing at Kingstonians get to go back there and the Council that f**ked up years ago, increase their incompetence by trying to "right a wrong" and doing it again.

Yes, its obvious the people involved with AFC couldn't give a monkeys about what they are doing.

As I said before EB - which you avoided - anywhere but the greyhound stadium at Plough Lane!!! :shrug:

For a Club that has tried to build itself from scratch, moaned about MK Dons, I just find it incredibly sickening that they are trying to capitalise on another industry's situation, without any thoughts whatsoever.

Mark you do a great job for the Greyhounds and Wimbledon dog track and keep up the good work.

Just wanted to point out though that Merton Borough Council did everything they could to rehouse and work with Wimbledon fc,but Sam Hamman had other plans of which we see have since come to Plough Lane.He was not and never interested in Wimbledon fc playing in the borough after vacating Plough Lane.
He made a tidy profit on the sale of the football ground and kept it all for himself.

No doubt Ealing Bee will google and search to prove me wrong and your good self,but I think we know what we are talking about here and he would do well to sit back and listen and maybe,just maybe learn something.

AFC Wimbledon could and should develop Kingsmeadow,but they are only interested in a sale to Chelsea and we will all say goodbye to Kingstonian.

Horrible club with horrible morals complete with support to suit.

Keep the hares running for as long as possible.
Nice one Mark.

 

[TW3Bee]

Mark you do a great job for the Greyhounds and Wimbledon dog track and keep up the good work.

Just wanted to point out though that Merton Borough Council did everything they could to rehouse and work with Wimbledon fc,but Sam Hamman had other plans of which we see have since come to Plough Lane.He was not and never interested in Wimbledon fc playing in the borough after vacating Plough Lane.
He made a tidy profit on the sale of the football ground and kept it all for himself.

No doubt Ealing Bee will google and search to prove me wrong and your good self,but I think we know what we are talking about here and he would do well to sit back and listen and maybe,just maybe learn something.

AFC Wimbledon could and should develop Kingsmeadow,but they are only interested in a sale to Chelsea and we will all say goodbye to Kingstonian.

Horrible club with horrible morals complete with support to suit.

Keep the hares running for as long as possible.
Nice one Mark.

Could mean K's ground sharing elsewhere.

Back to The Bev maybe.

 

[horshambees]

Could mean K's ground sharing elsewhere.

Back to The Bev maybe.

Maybe.
It will go to show that AFCW could not give a crap about Ks and that is the point of all of this.

 

[samb22]

Maybe.
It will go to show that AFCW could not give a crap about Ks and that is the point of all of this.

I absolutely detest AFC Wimbledon and just proves the fact they are a scum club who will always think they are above everyone else even though they are *****. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

 

[Ealing Bee]

Just wanted to point out though that Merton Borough Council did everything they could to rehouse and work with Wimbledon fc,but Sam Hamman had other plans of which we see have since come to Plough Lane.He was not and never interested in Wimbledon fc playing in the borough after vacating Plough Lane.
He made a tidy profit on the sale of the football ground and kept it all for himself.

No doubt Ealing Bee will google and search to prove me wrong and your good self,

I had/have no time for Wimbledon FC - and certainly not Hammam, who was/is an unpleasant individual in the style of eg Ron Noades (imo).

But Hammam had nothing to do with AFC Wimbledon, so I don't see why you drag him into the present debate.

... but I think we know what we are talking about here and [Ealing Bee] would do well to sit back and listen and maybe, just maybe learn something.

I have learned a great deal from Marky B's posts and admire his knowledge and passion. (Also the courtesy in his replies to my posts, where unlike you and others, he is more concerned with debating the issues, rather than merely looking to disagree with me).

Where I dissent from him is in his (apparent) conclusion that AFC Wimbledon are the "Bad Guys" in the proposal to replace Dog Racing with Football at Plough Lane Stadium - from what he and others have posted, it seems to me that the real "Bad Guys" are the GRA (and possibly Merton Council?).

AFC Wimbledon could and should develop Kingsmeadow, but they are only interested in a sale to Chelsea and we will all say goodbye to Kingstonian.

Why "should" AFCW develop a stadium in Kingston which they don't even own?

Especially when they may now have the opportunity to develop a stadium in Wimbledon, where they have always wanted to be (for obvious reasons).

As for the proposed sale to Chelsea, imo it should be for Kingston Borough Council to look after the interests of, ahem, Kingstonian FC, not another football club, who if you look at it dispassionately, have done as much as anyone to ensure the survival of Kingstonian over the last few years.

Horrible club with horrible morals complete with support to suit.

That's your opinion and you must be entitled to it.

But what you should not be entitled to do is distort the argument solely to reach a conclusion which best suits your prejudices.

Well that's my opinion, anyhow.

 

[horshambees]

I had/have no time for Wimbledon FC - and certainly not Hammam, who was/is an unpleasant individual in the style of eg Ron Noades (imo).

But Hammam had nothing to do with AFC Wimbledon, so I don't see why you drag him into the present debate.

I have learned a great deal from Marky B's posts and admire his knowledge and passion. (Also the courtesy in his replies to my posts, where unlike you and others, he is more concerned with debating the issues, rather than merely looking to disagree with me).

Where I dissent from him is in his (apparent) conclusion that AFC Wimbledon are the "Bad Guys" in the proposal to replace Dog Racing with Football at Plough Lane Stadium - from what he and others have posted, it seems to me that the real "Bad Guys" are the GRA (and possibly Merton Council?).

Why "should" AFCW develop a stadium in Kingston which they don't even own?

Especially when they may now have the opportunity to develop a stadium in Wimbledon, where they have always wanted to be (for obvious reasons).

As for the proposed sale to Chelsea, imo it should be for Kingston Borough Council to look after the interests of, ahem, Kingstonian FC, not another football club, who if you look at it dispassionately, have done as much as anyone to ensure the survival of Kingstonian over the last few years.

That's your opinion and you must be entitled to it.

But what you should not be entitled to do is distort the argument solely to reach a conclusion which best suits your prejudices.

Well that's my opinion, anyhow.

At what point have I said Hamman has had anything to do with AFC Wimbledon?

Distorted facts?

Although AFC Wimbledon claim to be the original club do they not??

They list an FA Cup Final victory in their history and Sam Hamman was the owner of that club.

Anyway the local authority wanted to work with Hamman,but he had other ideas to suit himself.
Didn't stop him accusing the local authority of not working with him though.

I really cannot see the point in your argument and I do debate where you like to think you do,but.......? zzzzzz.

 

[Markybee]

I think the saddest part of all this is the fact that despite his wealth, poor Sam Hamman still can't afford to get his eyebrows trimmed

 

[sonofabee]

I think the saddest part of all this is the fact that despite his wealth, poor Sam Hamman still can't afford to get his eyebrows trimmed

lol

 

[Ealing Bee]

At what point have I said Hamman has had anything to do with AFC Wimbledon?

Distorted facts?

Hammam left Wimbledon FC (in the lurch) in 2000. AFC Wimbledon - the subject under discussion - wasn't even founded until 2002.

Although AFC Wimbledon claim to be the original club do they not??

They list an FA Cup Final victory in their history and Sam Hamman was the owner of that club.

The people behind AFCW (fans, basically) claim to be the "inheritors" of what the original club achieved. (They've certainly got a better claim than that lot up in Milton Keynes.)

Of course you can use that to tarnish the present people running AFCW if you like.

Which would be about as fair (relevant?) as "blaming" the people behind Brentford FC today for the actions eg of Webb, Noades or Dunnett.

Anyway the local authority wanted to work with Hamman,but he had other ideas to suit himself.
Didn't stop him accusing the local authority of not working with him though.

Er, the Local Authority was somehow "persuaded" by Hammam to let him buy out their Covenant which required the old Plough Lane ground only to be used for football.

Which is in notably stark contrast to the stance taken by LB Hounslow over Griffin Park.

How does that stand against your claim that "Merton Borough Council did everything they could to rehouse and work with Wimbledon fc" (post #192)?

I really cannot see the point in your argument

My point throughout has been this:
"Where I dissent from [Markybee] is in his (apparent) conclusion that AFC Wimbledon are the "Bad Guys" in the proposal to replace Dog Racing with Football at Plough Lane Stadium - from what he and others have posted, it seems to me that the real "Bad Guys" are the GRA (and possibly Merton Council?)."

I can't make myself any clearer.

... and I do debate where you like to think you do,but.......? zzzzzz.

Self-evident drivel.