Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[RevidgeBlue]

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.

[Ben Frost]

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.

[Mattyblue]

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 March 18, 2021 by Mattyblue

[Ben Frost]

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.

[RevidgeBlue]

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... 

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 March 18, 2021 by RevidgeBlue

[RevidgeBlue]

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.

[tomphil]

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. 

[Miller11]

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.

[LDRover]

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

[darrenrover]

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.

[darrenrover]

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!!

[JacknOry]

Woooahhh all kicking off in here. So who is who again? 

Makes me laugh but also brings back memories of when I first came here. Gav said I was some chap called Oxoman or something.

[Mattyblue]

21 minutes ago, darrenrover said:

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

That’s a maybe, but it isn’t representative of the fanbase as a whole.

[darrenrover]

55 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

That’s a maybe, but it isn’t representative of the fanbase as a whole.

I recognise and understand that: out of our Group of 21, I'm the only contributor on here! (frustrating....tell me about it?!)

Their news source is generally LT and FaceBook Groups, perhaps why 't'others' are more prevalent on those sites! Also perhaps why there are so many drone pilots and statisticians posters on those sites that pedal 'the Coventry 3' party line!

It is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE that 'Rovers' stick together.

WE ARE The Rovers!!!

Edited March 18, 2021 by darrenrover

[tomphil]

3 hours ago, LDRover said:

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

Yep the first thing any plant would do would be to throw grenades and seek to divide.

Edited March 18, 2021 by tomphil

[Mashed Potatoes]

20 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Yep the first thing anyway plant would do would throw grenades and seek to divide.

As has already been said, it defeats the purpose of having a messageboard if you simply dismiss any minority or contrarian view as coming from a "plant".

[K-Hod]

1 minute ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

As has already been said, it defeats the purpose of having a messageboard if you simply dismiss any minority or contrarian view as coming from a "plant".

No issue with that, but when some people are seemingly being contrarian just for kicks, it can be frustrating.

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

As has already been said, it defeats the purpose of having a messageboard if you simply dismiss any minority or contrarian view as coming from a "plant".

There's a marked difference between having a minority view and just being contrarian for the sake of it though.

One will get tolerated by most but probably heartily and maybe even aggressively disagreed with, the other will get the replies it warrants.

[Mashed Potatoes]

4 minutes ago, tomphil said:

There's a marked difference between having a minority view and just being contrarian for the sake of it though.

One will get tolerated by most but probably heartily and maybe even aggressively disagreed with, the other will get the replies it warrants.

How do you tell the difference, though ?

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

As has already been said, it defeats the purpose of having a messageboard if you simply dismiss any minority or contrarian view as coming from a "plant".

You can hold a contrarian view, no problem at all, but if you do by then definition you should expect to be challenged on it.

And the more extreme your view appears the more you should expect to be challenged on it.

Fine line sometimes between being a contrarian and a troll?

How's that "progress" under Mowbray coming along BTW?

[matt83]

https://www.lancashirecricket.co.uk/development/?dm_i=1AF9,7AIAZ,770Z7X,TKMDG,1

Lancs trying to bringing fans along keeping them updated. Funny that. Not trying to sneak through plans without those pesky fans noticing actually involving them.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, tomphil said:

There's a marked difference between having a minority view and just being contrarian for the sake of it though.

There certainly is, but in my opinion, if you go back through all 72 pages on this thread, ANYONE who's had contrary views to the majority on here has been argued with based not on their opinion, but their person, character or motives. I agree that there's a difference between having a minority view and being contrarian for the sake of it, but are we to truly believe that every single person who's held a minority view is doing it for some ulterior motive?

Many pages ago I was accused of having a hidden motive. I was accused of being a puppet of the football club. I was subtly accused of accepting financial bribes from people associated with the football club. All because I gave some opinions that didn't quite match what a lot of other people thought.

Minority views may be minority and they may obviously be contested, but I feel that as a thread on the forum, this one's been pretty poor in allowing open discussion. Way too many contrary views have been dismissed as illegitimate, bribed, motived, fake or untrustworthy. 

7 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

And the more extreme your view appears the more you should expect to be challenged on it.

There's nothing wrong with people challenging people on their views, but too often on this thread in my opinion it's not the views being challenged - it's the character, the motives & the legitimacy of the poster being challenged.

3 hours ago, K-Hod said:

No issue with that, but when some people are seemingly being contrarian just for kicks, it can be frustrating.

Agreed that this can be frustrating, but I'd ask, what would somebody gain from holding the view that the STC/JTC plans are a good idea, just for the sake of it? Surely it would be fairly improbable that all the people who fit into the minority view on this issue are just being contrarian just for kicks. Because I don't think I can find somebody on this thread who holds said minority view has been responded to solely on the views they put forward alone.

4 hours ago, tomphil said:

Yep the first thing any plant would do would be to throw grenades and seek to divide.

What would somebody gain from this? Unless the accusation (as has already been put forward on this thread) is that people are being bribed to do so. If that is the allegation, I would suggest people tread carefully, as people don't take particularly kindly to being accused of such acts, and I know that there are probably others who would react in a more serious way.

4 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

That’s a maybe, but it isn’t representative of the fanbase as a whole.

I think you're right there. I think the reaction to the STC/JTC plans on here are fairly different to those online. It would be interested for sure to understand why that is. Obviously everyone thinks they're right in the opinion they hold or else they wouldn't hold it, but it's definitely intriguing to see how one site responds vs another. Is it an age bracket thing I wonder?

[AllRoverAsia]

I do hope that the Village based action group are well organised and wish them all success.

Lots of diversion happening here. Boring.

[Mashed Potatoes]

17 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

You can hold a contrarian view, no problem at all, but if you do by then definition you should expect to be challenged on it.

And the more extreme your view appears the more you should expect to be challenged on it.

Fine line sometimes between being a contrarian and a troll?

How's that "progress" under Mowbray coming along BTW?

The issue was never about a view being challenged but rather the absurd and I would have thought insulting accusation that the poster was a "plant" - a point you don't address. I find it hard to believe there are any on here - the board is just not that important.

There's been a bit of a hiccup on the progress front.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Many pages ago I was accused of having a hidden motive. I was accused of being a puppet of the football club. I was subtly accused of accepting financial bribes from people associated with the football club. All because I gave some opinions that didn't quite match what a lot of other people t

 

I completely disagree.

You made some extremely disparaging remarks along the lines of "The Jack Walker legacy isn't particularly important" and then went scurrying off complaining to the mods when you received the predictable flak.

You also received comments questioning the  impartiality of your stance as an existing Club sponsor which I think was an entirely fair question.

No-one accused you of taking any financial consideration for your comments or being "a plant".

No-one has stopped you from posting your views on here either,  criticism of the moderators in that respect is completely unfair.

You simply got overly precious about the fact people didn't like what you posted and took your bat and ball home.