Protestors hope Viking heritage will sink Rovers' training ground plans (From Wirral Globe)

Call Tony Robinson and the Time Team aided by Prof Steve Harding!

Really clutching at straws now. Read this interesting link from the University of Nottingham over The Wirral Carrs and Holms as it is quite interesting.

www.nottingham.ac.uk
/ncmh/harding_pdfs/P
aper357.pdf

As far as stating the site is of “special archaeological interest”, give us all some proof of this as this is something that has never cropped up before.

Professor Stephen Harding is a huge Tranmere fan. If there was a Viking link to the club land he would have pointed it out years ago before any of these changes were even thought of. Next?

PROFESSOR HARDING HAS SPOKEN ON THIS HE SAID

ontrary to what is being argued by the creator of the Youtube clip, the proposed development of Rovers I think will be a very good thing from a Viking Heritage point of view - provided it is done properly, and after the appropriate Archaeological assessments have been made.
Yes the Woodchurch site is the site of Kiln Walby a former Viking settlement. I wrote about it in my book Ingimund's Saga 12 years ago. Myself and colleague Dr. David Griffiths at the University of Oxford wrote a letter to the Wirral News last October, in the fear that Wirral Council were going to bypass the archaeology:
http://www.wirralnew
s.co.uk/views-blogs/
letters-editor/2011/
10/26/wirral-letters
-shortpoints-october
-26-80491-29657354/
This was NOT about stopping the development but arguing that the area needs to be properly assessed archaeologically before a development can take place. I think the poster of the youtube clip has clearly misunderstood this.
So the Club's proposed development may actually be a good thing for everyone: from a Viking Heritage point of view it will give us a great opportunity to find out whats down there and when thats been properly done and assessed hopefully the Development will take place, with the positioning of facilities chosen appropriately. .
Very appropriate with the Club having a Viking name,

Hope this helps!


WOULD BE NICE TO SEE THE GLOBE CONTACT PROFESSOR HARDING RATHER THAN AGAIN LOOK TO DEAN JOHNSON FOR SOUNDBITES

BabsMcG wrote:
Professor Stephen Harding is a huge Tranmere fan. If there was a Viking link to the club land he would have pointed it out years ago before any of these changes were even thought of. Next?

So he is clearly neutral then :)

Silly season meets Ingleborough.

With luck they'll unearth the fossilised remains of the prehistoric Wirral lion--a bit like the Essex one but not so orange in the face-- and Ingleborough will be preserved as a World Heritage Site.

Sillier things can, and will happen before this sage comes to an end.

agreed Bickyboy. but as pointed out its clutching at straws really.

and as Dean Johnson is a kean reader of this thread as per his diatrite on his wilfred website. i'm sure the council will undertake or ask for a survey to take place at the woodchurch site.

NB the whole of the wirral was viking land as Tranmere is a viking namr surely then ingleborough is viking land too maybe when thats ripped up for housing we may find a long boat there.

you could write your next musical about our viking heritage.

BabsMcG wrote:
Professor Stephen Harding is a huge Tranmere fan. If there was a Viking link to the club land he would have pointed it out years ago before any of these changes were even thought of. Next?

This is really confusing so are people against the plans or supporting the plans?

The following is quoted from Dean Johnson's website the other day:

"In response to comments on the Wirral Globe website:
There is obviously sufficient evidence to support the argument about the Viking site. Dr Harding is a very keen supporter of TRFC.
We assume without prejudice that is why he wrote to The Wirral News about the site and the issues.
However, Wirral Borough Council own the site: they should carry out their own archaeological investigation. It should not be a "planning gain" "

.... and this quote from the same website today:

"According to postings on the Wirral Globe website we are 'desperate' and 'clutching at straws' to try and alert the public to the heritage of the Woodchurch site. The site is linked in the planning to Ingleborough Road, so yes we are desperate to save it. Supporters of the scheme say they were aware of the Viking history at the Woodchurch but it is not mentioned in TRFC's Heritage Statement supporting the planning."

I wonder what "symbolism" Dean Johnson has planned to make his point this time? In his relentless quest for self-publicity, and although seriously discredited by the poor judgement shown in thinking photoshopping war graves onto an image of a playing field was a good idea, it seems his intention is to leave no stone unturned to fuel his own vested interest and stoke up publicity for his tawdry business ventures.

Particularly ironic that Dean Johnson questions the motives "without prejudice" of a man who has done so much to promote Wirral's Viking heritage - Dean, do you not realise that there is no bigger conflict of interests in this whole "saga" than your increasingly erratic attempts at attention seeking!

Lurkinhead wrote:
I wonder what "symbolism" Dean Johnson has planned to make his point this time? In his relentless quest for self-publicity, and although seriously discredited by the poor judgement shown in thinking photoshopping war graves onto an image of a playing field was a good idea, it seems his intention is to leave no stone unturned to fuel his own vested interest and stoke up publicity for his tawdry business ventures.

Particularly ironic that Dean Johnson questions the motives "without prejudice" of a man who has done so much to promote Wirral's Viking heritage - Dean, do you not realise that there is no bigger conflict of interests in this whole "saga" than your increasingly erratic attempts at attention seeking!

Completely agree with you!

Yet more from Dean Johnson's website:


"26/08/12: COUNCIL SNUBS CONSERVATIONISTS AT POET'S BIRTHPLACE
A controversial housing development at Wilfred Owen's birthplace in Oswestry has been given the go-ahead despite the site being under consideration for listing by English Heritage. Both Wilfred Owen Watch and Oswestry and District Civic Society had requested Shropshire Council to delay the final decision until it is known whether house and curtillage are to be listed by the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics Media and Sport.
Dean Johnson of Wilfred Owen Watch said, “This is the most important Wilfred Owen-linked heritage site of all. It is the 'jewel in the crown' and its importance to Oswestry and Shropshire as a tourist attraction is not yet properly recognised. In France they have spent 13 million euros on a Wilfred Owen shrine. Why are we in such a hurry to build a housing estate in the garden where the poet spent his formative years?" He points out that the 2014 centenary of the Great War is only two years away and that Wilfred Owen is then likely to become a major focus of media attention.
In March the Northern Planning Committee of Shropshire Council took the decision to approve the application. Final approval was delayed while the applicant completed legal formalities connected to the provision of affordable housing.
Local Historian Dr Nigel Tinsley has discovered that this is actually the second time that planning permission has been granted for the site. In the mid-1950s consent was given for three detached houses in the orchard and vegetable garden. That permission lapsed after the applicant Arthur Phillips and his wife sold Plas Wilmot to local auctioneer Frank Ikin and moved to Wilmot Drive. Ethel Phillips had been friendly with Wilfred's mother, Susan Owen, in the 1930s and it may have been some scruples on that account which saved the grounds on that occasion.
Source: Wilfred Owen Watch - The Poetry In Your Heritage"


Oh dear - it would appear he is getting short shrift down in Shropshire for his squalid antics and attention seeking - let's hope for an equally pragmatic decision by Wirral Council!

Dear Leigh,

I am writing to you as a regular reader of and contributor to your paper and website (My username is Deadly Sub).

I was disappointed to see that you took the rather excessive step of removing the entire comments thread from the Asda article, replacing it with a very one-sided editorial comment (http://www.wirralgl
obe.co.uk/news/99...
orial_field//)

In my opinion, the quotes you used against the pro-development campaigner were not particularly offensive when taken in context. I do not believe for one second Yogz66 was intending to be disrespectful to the fallen, although his tone was perhaps a little over the top. However, this was in reply to a number of aggressive and inflammatory posts by some anti-development campaigners.

Many "facts" have been put forward by Dean Johnson over the last few months that are anything but facts. These include the 88 fallen and 88 poplar trees. I have no doubt that there were 88 BI old-boys that died in WWI,but it is true that only 83 are on the plaque that used to take pride of place in the school. It may be that the other 5 were perhaps deserters. In less enlightened times, these men were shot as traitors. There has been a successful movement to recognise these men as part of the fallen and I am sure all TRFC fans including Yogz66 would support this. There is very little detailed source material regarding the trees planted at the site either. None of the trees currently on the site are poplars and there are less than 88 trees in total, suggesting that none of the original trees remain (if in fact the poplars were ever planted).

I agree that these points have little bearing on the pros or cons for the development and I would prefer it if the debate concentrated on more important aspects of the arguments for and against the development. But the fact remains that Dean Johnson continues to peddle assumptions, opinions and rumours as facts. That is why the pro-development campaigners are so quick to jump on any inaccuracies that Johnson uses in the numerous articles in your newspaper.

I am also disappointed that you have chosen not to follow up the original Asda article, in light of the fact that Asda have written to numerous TRFC fans stating that they do not support Dean Johnson's campaign. I would agree with you that Asda have not covered themselves in glory during this episode, but surely you have a duty to ensure that the correct information is in the public domain? It would do you and your paper a lot of credit if you wrote a follow-up article highlighting Asda's apparent shifting of position and their suggestion that the fault actually lies with your paper.

Finally, I see that there is a further article in this week's printed newspaper about Dean Johnson's latest "Green Not Greed" campaign. I am disappointed that this article does not appear on the website. I can understand that you may be worried that the public debate may overstep the boundaries within your website, but as a journalist, surely you support the right to freedom of speech and expression? Any offending comments could easily be deleted by you or your staff.

One of the reasons that I am disappointed that the article is not available on the website is that once again it contains a quote from Dean Johnson that is highly questionable:

"The residents are beginning to understand that the consultation they signed was false information, it is to secure 'outline planning' only.
"This just enables a change of use of the field, if permission were granted the builders can draw up new plans including commercial outlets. Residents can confirm this information with the planning department."

I have just had a quick look at the Ingleborough planning application on the Wirral Planning website (http://www.wirral.g
ov.uk/planning/DC...
ystemkey=89307). The application for Ingleborough is an outline planning application for "Demolitions of existing buildings and redevelopment of the land for new build residential development for up to 90 new dwellings (USE CLASS C3) with means of access and associated infrastructure"

The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 defines Class C3 as:
Class C3. Dwellinghouses

Use as a dwellinghouse (whether or not as a sole or main residence) —

(a)by a single person or by people living together as a family, or
(b)by not more than 6 residents living together as a single household (including a household where care is provided for residents).

In other words, there is no suggestion that commercial outlets would be built on the site. Such a development would require full planning permission, with the associated consultation and planning committee meeting.

So once again, we have Dean Johnson being given a platform by your newspaper to put scaremongering "facts" in the public domain which do not stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

I fully appreciate that the Wirral Globe is a small newspaper with limited resources, but I would urge you to allow TRFC supporters the right of reply or at least investigate Dean Johnson's claims before going to print.