AFT statement on HHP development and **new update 19th Sept*

[Biggs]

I only use Pasoti but I don't understand why this rivalry, between people who, I assume, are genuine and committed supporters of PAFC, exists. It seems to be historical but I can't work out where these 'differences' originated from.

Is it because there was another group that were competing with James Brent to take over the club?

Unfortunately, I was 'out of it' for about 3 years but I am struggling to figure out the root of this animosity.

Lots of stuff apparently happened as Argyle were being read the last rites. Seems some never got over it and have carried on a Hillbilly feud ever since. Lots of individuals seeing themselves as being above the rest of us. Funny to read if you're not involved, from the outside it's all very childish. Unfortunately it creeps into the real world as this thread has shown.

And into the most recent Fans Forum.

It was clear when JB was talking about Free Chat, ATD and Nigel *can't remember his surname* that not many people knew what he was talking about.

I'd certainly never even heard of Nigel.

 

[tandark]

Forgive my ignorance, but their statement won't do anything to halt any development will it?
Therefore doesn't amount to much.

 

[Kentishgreen]

I think people have their knickers in a twist because a minority of people claim to represent many others when they don't. Moreover and very unfortunately they are taken to be the major organisation that represents the majority of Argyle fans. They don't and never will and no amount of dissing by some people will alter that fact. It's the people who believe that AFT represents the majority of fans views that need a reality check and need to get over themselves. What organisation that attracts 12 people to its AGM can be said to represent anybody- apart from those 12 of course. This is what happens when you let others do your talking for you.

But it is good that this is being aired.

 

[Stuart House]

Forgive my ignorance, but their statement won't do anything to halt any development will it?
Therefore doesn't amount to much.

Probably not, but I would hate for the planning committee to think that Argyle fans in general don't want the development because a handful of people claim to 'represent' the fan base as a whole. Because they simply do not.

The AFT have made a considerable amount of assumptions in on what people think in forming their opinion and statement.

The club should actively look to align this opinion during any hearing as that of a section of Argyle fans, but certainly not as representative of the whole.

 

[Chancellor]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

Is that on John Lloyd's anti-James Brent Facebook page?

The PCC planning website, where it matters, had 58 letters of support and 38 objections.

 

[Daz]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

That's a loaded question though isn't it?

The option to "support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan" is not an option on the table. Its either support the current application or don't support it surely?

 

[Stuart House]

Chancellor if you poll the Labour Party conference about ending austerity you will get overwhelming majority. Same thing here.

Polling a group already in favour of a certain thing is hardly going to give you surprising results.

But I'm sure Pasoti/free chat/atd would not purport to represent a majority of the fan base.

AFT did, and they didn't even to a poll for christ sake.

 

[Chancellor]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

Is that on John Lloyd's anti-James Brent Facebook page?

The PCC planning website, where it matters, had 58 letters of support and 38 objections.

Why is it anti-James Brent? There are plenty of people on there who support James Brent. Its a forum pretty much how Pasoti used to be when I joined 16 years ago, all opinions were welcome provided they didnt cross some pretty broad boundaries. These other sites only exist because this site has suffocated debate.

 

[Chancellor]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

That's a loaded question though isn't it?

The option to "support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan" is not an option on the table. Its either support the current application or don't support it surely?

That is one of the options in the poll and not one person has voted for that. So that dispels the thought that people are anti Brent. But it does demonstrate they are pro-Argyle.

 

[Emeraldinho]

Well done JB for not only submitting a hybrid application, when quite clearly the grandstand should be a separate one. But also for creating division in our fan base. His popularity is rapidly declining and no wonder!

Says WHO exactly? Or is this another AFT myth? :roll:

 

[PL2 3DQ]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

Is that on John Lloyd's anti-James Brent Facebook page?

The PCC planning website, where it matters, had 58 letters of support and 38 objections.

Why is it anti-James Brent? There are plenty of people on there who support James Brent. Its a forum pretty much how Pasoti used to be when I joined 16 years ago, all opinions were welcome provided they didnt cross some pretty broad boundaries. These other sites only exist because this site has suffocated debate.

There's no debate being suffocated here, maybe you're just not used to other people having a different opinion and standing their ground?

Anyway, the club have noted the strong support for the application from those living in the region ....

We are delighted to see the strong support for the plans from people who live in Plymouth and in Devon and Cornwall. Of those who have commented and who have declared that they live in the city or region, three times as many have supported the plans as have objected.

 

[Chancellor]

People on this forum keep harping on about the minority being objectors. Indeed even mention of "tiny amount". A poll was set up this morning on a forum that has several thousand members and the current status is 124 votes support the refurb but object to or have concerns about other aspects of the plan. 18 support the application in its entirety. 124 v 18 isnt exactly a minority. I expect if a poll was held here it would pretty much be the reverse so a guess would be the fanbase is a 50/50 split.

Is that on John Lloyd's anti-James Brent Facebook page?

The PCC planning website, where it matters, had 58 letters of support and 38 objections.

Why is it anti-James Brent? There are plenty of people on there who support James Brent. Its a forum pretty much how Pasoti used to be when I joined 16 years ago, all opinions were welcome provided they didnt cross some pretty broad boundaries. These other sites only exist because this site has suffocated debate.

There's no debate being suffocated here, maybe you're just not used to other people having a different opinion and standing their ground?

Anyway, the club have noted the strong support for the application from those living in the region ....

We are delighted to see the strong support for the plans from people who live in Plymouth and in Devon and Cornwall. Of those who have commented and who have declared that they live in the city or region, three times as many have supported the plans as have objected.

Its incredibly ironic that you, who used to quite rightly question everything and who was vehemently against Brent in the first place, is now one of those that have had the stuffing knocked out of them. And dont give me any evangelical bull about how you have seen the light!

 

[Kentishgreen]

So Chancellor as like George Osborne you seem to have all the answers what's the alternative bearing in mind that nobody makes money just out of football

 

[Damon.Lenszner]

I would like to remind people that the plans are not subject to a popularity vote. Objections must stand scrutiny by the Planning Authorities. The only objections that actually 'count' right now are those of the Highways Agency and those of the Environment Agency, both of which will delay the proposals and neither of which would have halted the Grandstand refurb if the Grandstand had it's own Planning Application.