Forums Forums Local News ingleborough fields

No, & I strongly disagree with "£1.3 million over the last 10 years" of Council Tax money being spent on it.

No. Professional association football is an idiotic proletarian spectacle played by overpaid oafs in polyester clothes covered in writing.

The rememberance of the fallen of WW1 is more important than some men kicking a bit of leather around a field. Sod the lot of them.

Its not about a football club Lee,its about disrespect to the memory of our fallen soldiers, those memorials were paid for by the people of Birkenhead out of there own pockets and now the council and tranmere are making loads of cash from the sale.Its a shonky deal and as was said before its the anniversary of the start of ww1 and all they think about is money.

The tree's will be replanted and there will be a PROPER memorial incorporated in the new housing plans.

The point raised about the council sponsorship, every Tranmere fan was proud to have Wirral on the front of the shirt.

The council imo got more out of it than Tranmere did.

Ok lets get this right. Ingleborough Road was given to Tranmere Rovers in exchange for its old training ground in Valley Road, a site bigger and therefore probably more valuble than Ingleborough. It was not sold for 20k or given as a gift. As for getting up a petition to stop the developement it`s already been done by a publicity seeking, failed folk singer named Dean Johnson (the owner of the Wilfred Owen museum in Argyle Street, an establishment that very few had even heard of before Deano jumped on this particular campaign, and the pubisher of the website so beloved by some posters to this site who seem to consider it the last word on the subject and quote it as if it were the Bible, whereas it is mainly the made up ramblings of a man who went so low as to publish a picture of French wargraves "photoshopped" onto a picture of Ingleborough) who`s love of Wilfred Owen is matched only by his love of seeing his own name in print and his hatred of TRFC, a hatred it seems is shared by several people on this forum especially philmch. His "Hopefully the buggers will go out of business. The eyesore that is Prenton Park can be levelled and houses built upon it too." is typical of the sort of comment I have come to expect from some of the Plastic Scouse lowlifes that inhabit parts of this region. Just why these people have these feeling about a club which has proudly represented this area for over 125 years is beyond me. I for one am glad the word "Wirral" is off our shirts next season for that very reason. Why bear the name of somewhere that is home to people like Philmch ?

"Promises to re-site the Memorial Plaque (the whole field is the memorial and is listed) do not need to be honoured by the builder as this information from the Planning Office confirms, “The applicant would not be tied to the indicative drawings 1531-119, 120 and 121 - they are simply an indication of the type of development that might be brought forward at the reserved matters stage.” This of course applies to the number of houses as well. When there are millions of pounds in the offing please read between the lines."
Source http://www.wilfredowenstory.com/ingleboroughroad.html

Thread stopping comment, if ever there was one

I am a Tranmere fan and have been all my life, it dosen't mean I support everything that Tranmere do, Peter Johnson is grabbing as much money back before he tries to sell Tranmere on ebay again. Community club yes, Peter Johnsons pockets no

I see you havent minded the £1.3million off the council over the past years and dont mind doing deals with your pet councillors to get what you want, so much for a community club that represents the wirral, they only represent themselves, who will take money off anyone to fund there sad club

What exactly is a "Plastic Scouser" when it's at home ?

This is about a question of respect for our fellow man. FYI I have just as much respect for those who were tragically killed at Hillsborough and the MUFC players who died in the Munich disaster.

To dishonour decent people in such a way in the name of business is just plain wrong.

That's not entirely accurate.



The proposal is for Tranmere Rovers FC to build a leisure centre with flexible spaces to cater for all current users of the centre, together with new changing facilities for community use. The existing swimming pool will remain untouched, and the new centre will accommodate the Club's Admin Dept & changing facilities.

The proposal for the fields is to make use of them to cater for the club and community use by developing state of the art facilities, including:
* 3 multi use sports pitches & 2 half size pitches free for community use.
*10 5 a side fottball football pitches available with free weekly and weekend community use,
* a full size all weather pitch that would be available for use.
* 2 full size pitches and a training area, to fulfil TRFC requirements.

Thw Leisure Centre and fields would be maintained by TRFC to ensure first class facilities long term.



The above information is taken from the Woodchurch Community Public Consultation by Tranmere Rovers FC in January 2011, the community defined as being bordered by the M53 to the east, the Upton Bypass, Arrowe Park Road & Woodchurch Road.

Of the residents that responded to the question: "Overall are you in favour of TRFC moving to Woodchurch", 98.7% responded "Yes".

Now I do accept that in an ideal world, leisure centres should be run by the council, but rightly or wrongly in the current economic climate, the Woodchurch Community Centre has become run down & poorly maintained, and has been subject to speculation re possible closure. Against that backdrop, and given that the fields themselves are unkempt and little more than a convenient dog toilet, I personally believe that the benefits to be accrued by this proposal far outweigh the negatives.

I'd define a plastic scouser as someone not from the city of Liverpool, but who aspires to scousehood, as they feel that it gives them extra kudos, for whatever reason. To that end, they are prepared to detract from their own borough, and are often prepared to deny their roots in favour of pretending to be from a neighbouring city. The irony, which is often lost on them, is that real scousers certainly don't consider the "plastics" as part of them, and are generally ambivalent as regards the surrounding areas, such as Wirral, St Helens or Southport.

Within the context of this debate, I think this is relevant, as there are many Wirralians who attach their allegiances to the big football clubs over the water, and whilst it is a free country, and they have every right to do so, ultimately, their interest is vicarious, as any sporting triumphs and disasters are not genuinely theirs, other than by pretence.

Consequently, at a subconscious level, they feel a sense of shame at prostituting their emotions to a professional football club other than the one that represents their community, with the result that this discomfort manifests itself in misplaced hostility, in this instance to Tranmere Rovers FC.


So, all that said, I believe part of the motivation for some people's stance regarding the Ingleborough Road debate stems from that, which is a shame, as it muddies the waters re the substantive argument, which I guess in short can be summed up as:

a) Some people believe that the Ingleborough Road fields, trees etc are a war memorial in their entirety, and therefore should not be sold or developed under any circumstances,

or alternatively

b) Some people believe that The Fallen can be honoured, remembered & respected as part of the development, and whilst acknowledging the sensitivity of the situation and the opposing view, believe that the positive legacy of the proposal going ahead outweighs the negative aspects.


It is an arguable point, and I don't believe either side has the moral high ground as such. However, some of the emotive language emanating from opponents of the development is, in my opinion, both arrogant and intolerant, as despite their beliefs, which of course they are entitled to, that doesn't give them the exclusivity on truth or superior ethics, but merely a different opinion.

Although I'm not local any more I'll put in my two pence worth.
I think the proposal to build houses on the Ingleborough Rd. site is simply wrong and I don't see how the Council can have the power, or the nerve, to put aside the covenant.
I was raised just a stone's throw from these fields, corner of Ben Nevis Rd./Irvine Rd., when they were the Institute playing fields.
When I was a child, my dad used to take me to see the Rovers play on a Saturday. It was usually cold and wet. It's owing to this experience that I have had a lifetime's dislike of football ( I have a similar dislike of Rugby as I was forced to play it at school).
By all means, let Tranmere Rovers either disappear or move to Woodchurch, when Prenton Park can be used for housing.

Would I be right in saying that tranmere have owned the fields over the last ten years and it they that have let the fields become unkempt and a dog toilet?and that the £1.3million that has been given to tranmere would have been better spent doing the Woody up, now that sounds right to me public money spent on the public instead of a private club.