wankinginthemoonlight said:
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
AndyFcum said:
Well many usernames have the word "blue" and even "Kompany" in them so obviously your fans are pushing your anti united agenda. The rest of your post is made up, shock horror.
My name on the MEN forum has been Moston Blue for years. I have commented on lots of issues under this name, so does that make me a bitter blue on every single issue?
This issue for me is not about being blue or whatever. It is for being green. I have voted green for over 20 years, and worked for 2 environmental charities for a total of 17 years out of the last 19 years. The playing fields are on a green field and a field that is under a covenant. That is what I am fighting to protect.
If Manchester city council can get that covenant overturned (that was given to them as guardians) then MCC can concrete over every piece of green land they own.
This proposal has to be stopped for that reason and that reason alone.
I have no anti United / FCUM agenda here - in fact I feel for FCUM who have been shafted by MCC over Ten Acres Lane and left to fend for themselves over the Moston dispute against local residents.
I completely understand why FCUM want their own stadium and want it within the city boundaries.
But this Moston proposal is so wrong on a number of reasons and I will defend that patch of land as best I can.
FCUM are welcome in Moston, but not on a green and covenanted land.....
MES
I respect all your views and comments on the proposals on the new GROUND not stadium...but what most fcum fans find hard to believe is the land you want to save.....its overgrown, its fenced off, and an eyesore... yes its green and maybe the only green bit you have within the area....but it needs attention and a lot of hard work to update...why is it now your only highlighting the issue? why not do it prior to fce plans if you felt some much for your green belt of Moston??
Why do FCUM fans keep insisting on saying ''it is not a stadium but a GROUND, when I have in front of me the 8 page FCUM propaganda leaflet, front page ''The Moston Community Stadium Facility''??????????? So it is a stadium. Official.
Yes the field is fenced off (more on that in a moment) and is overgrown and an eyesore. It is a overgrown and an eyesore BECAUSE it is fenced off, so how can you blame that on the local residents?????
The fence. No information was given about the fencing, it was just put up with no consultation whatsoever. It just went up. But two wrongs do not make a right. FCUM fans tell us ''the land is fenced up and you cant use it anyway, so may as well have a stadium there too''. The fencing of the land is no justification for adding a 5000 capacity stadium on the site.
I am sure, you will agree there is a difference between a green area with a fence around it and the same area with a 5000 capacity stadium and car park on the land.....
And..... we have been taking legal advice and it may appear the fence was put up illegally...... so watch this space on that one! ;)
-- Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:20 pm --
AndyFcum said:
Matty and Madeyeddreamer
MED you're a hypocrite you've already said you'd park where YOU wanted in Moston because "I pay my road tax", maybe you were visiting Bury back in 2009, lol. Desperate clutching at straws digging up a 2 year old parking story on persons unknown/Bury Fans??
Re the Stadium...Don’t you read the MEN? False claims of parking charges have already been denied in print by the city Council andFC United (it's not in our traffic management plans). Similar false claims aired in the press about our fans damaging cars in Moston has already resulted in a retraction in the MEN/North and East Manchester papers and claims of falling house prices are also unproven (in fact the opposite is usually the case). Additional false claims and hysterical public scaremongering from people with out-dated attitudes towards modern football supporters, claiming the development will bring rampaging fans, drunkenness, violence, graffiti and vandalism into Moston; are all just opinion, not the reality. (Maybe something for City to think about?).
Re the legalities.....There is a charitable covenant only on part of the site, the FC United ground and clubhouse would not be built on this part. The covenant seeks to retain land for recreational use and our overall proposal would enhance access to this land and increase the opportunity for participation in recreational activities, but will be subject to a decision by the Charities Commission. However, this access could stop anyway as a residents group are now looking into excluding Moston Juniors FC from ever using this field again, assuming FC United is unsuccessful in its application. What good would this possible outcome be for bringing through young Mancunian footballers or for English football in general?
BTW we don't "continually sing sings about you," arf.
Yes misquote me all you want. I dont have a car, but if i did, and it was taxed, then that allows me to park anywhere in the country that I can legally do so, for free, or for a fee, either car park or on street meter. So, if I were to drive and visit a friend and a volunteer warden approaches me and asks if i would park elsewhere (and possibly have to pay), I would ask the volunteer warden what would happen if I parked at the spot I was at now. The volunteer warden has absolutely no powers and could only tell me that it is the prefered option of parking elsewhere as to not be a convenience to people living in that area. Again I would ask if I was defying a council law on parking in that street. If the reply was 'no' then I would park there (and why shouldnt I?)
So the land is on a charitable covenant? I thought it was a covenant, but will go along with charitable covenant for now. So are FCUM a charity or a private business? (please dont start quoting about being a co-op and member owned club, we know all that), you are a private enterprise. So not a charity. So how do you expect to be able to break the covenant that has been in place for 91 years?
As for the false claims of damaging cars (that you claim was retracted in the following weeks paper), that retraction was retracted in last weeks Advertiser!!!! (maybe you are not local enough to receive it???). In no way did the original letter state FCUM fans had damaged cars, but asked if FCUM fans could deny cars had been damaged. There is a difference. Last weeks retraction of the previous weeks retraction stated that the police had indeed been informed that cars on St Mary's Road had been damaged (and all the cars were outside houses with ''NO'' posters in windows). Draw your own conclusions..........<br /><br />-- Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:25 pm --<br /><br />
Mike N said:
Couple of 'anti' letters and a picture of a recent 'no to FC' protest in the M.E.N. tonight. It doesnt look good to me.
Yes, I thought the letter from ''Moston Blue'' was very good ;)
