HC Green":3mzaog5h said:
Electronic":3mzaog5h said:
Don’t you mean Argyle fans from Plymouth who live in London, Leeds and Southampton?
Most people who object to the plan feel that way simply because they don’t understand why James Brent bolted on the HHP plans unnecessarily and risked the grandstand refurb. The parking/traffic issues are a symptom of that. Let’s see what happens. Any delays been mooted yet?
The motive of the people objecting to the plans is that they are doing so because they would regard any planning refusal or delay as a victory as in their mindset it would harm James Brent regardless of the detrimental impact on Argyle.
You just to read the posts most of the ‘objectors’ have put on Facebook and ATD over the years about the Chairman also with their trying to find any reason possible to put forward as an objection and then criticise organisations like FOCP who don’t object to come to that conclusion.
An example of this is the same people criticising Argyle for not increasing the capacity of Home Park as part of the plans and saying it would limit the future expansion of Home Park objecting to the current plans due to lack of parking and increased traffic.
It is fair to say that such contradictory positions bear the hallmarks of an "anything but (James) Brent" outlook. Consistency is not a golden thread through these objections.
Perhaps it's down to the insidious spread of social media since the NWO were doing their thing but I don't recall anything remotely near such a concerted effort being put in to challenge them while they were busy promising the earth but delivering nothing.
Maybe back then the majority were happy to cross their fingers and hope that the world cup megabowl stadium would happen rather than actually examine the finer detail because it looked really good on an artist's impression...ask no questions hear no lies could best sum the position taken then.
Result £17,000,000 of debt forced administration.
Post near death experience for Argyle though where the new incumbents have stuck to affordability and sustainability and all manner of rabid cynicism and finger pointing has emerged. Odd contradiction that.
So while we're talking double standards HC, we need to look further back than just the double standards between the contradictory application objections, we need to acknowledge the massive contradictions that exist between how the green army generally hold James Brent to account now compared to how 'we' failed to do the same to the NWO then.
Just my theory but I reckon general laziness and impatience explains it. Folk were happy to go along with an ultra grand vision while the magic money tree of world cup grants was going to pay for it, and quickly. But when under sustainability THEY ultimately have to pay for it and it'll take a long time, suddenly all manner of challenges and objections come forward.
Same as with a successful and entertaining football team, the cart needs to be put before the horse before Plymouth will embrace it. We play fast and loose with our future if we can't pay the bills though, we know this now.
It might well be a compromise but the sooner we get the facilities we need built to increase club revenue, the sooner we can increase the on field spend on a better team. All this objecting for the sake of it just delays that happening, a multi billionaire is not on the horizon ready to get the green army off the hook by quickly building a fantastic stadium and quickly putting a fantastic team inside it.
We have to go with reality because fantasy simply ain't gonna happen for us.