Re: Signings this week?

16
Justanordinaryfan wrote:I read somewhere (think it was before Xmas) that the stadium plan had changed, now not incorporating a business park or something?

The internet Being the internet, it won’t be hard to find !

The plan may have changed again but haven’t read that.
The latest I can cite is Gloucestershire live on 1st May. That does not mean to say that article is correct, or that in any event the situation hasn't changed. What I would argue is that a cited fact should be given more credit than an un-cited one.

Re: Signings this week?

17
Stan A. Einstein wrote:
Justanordinaryfan wrote:I read somewhere (think it was before Xmas) that the stadium plan had changed, now not incorporating a business park or something?

The internet Being the internet, it won’t be hard to find !

The plan may have changed again but haven’t read that.
The latest I can cite is Gloucestershire live on 1st May. That does not mean to say that article is correct, or that in any event the situation hasn't changed. What I would argue is that a cited fact should be given more credit than an un-cited one.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-g ... e-41398098

Re: Signings this week?

18
tompkip wrote:
Stan A. Einstein wrote:
Justanordinaryfan wrote:I read somewhere (think it was before Xmas) that the stadium plan had changed, now not incorporating a business park or something?

The internet Being the internet, it won’t be hard to find !

The plan may have changed again but haven’t read that.
The latest I can cite is Gloucestershire live on 1st May. That does not mean to say that article is correct, or that in any event the situation hasn't changed. What I would argue is that a cited fact should be given more credit than an un-cited one.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-g ... e-41398098
That article is dated September 2017, the Gloucestershire live one May 2018. I guess Dale is playing his rich man games.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exile 1976, G Guest