I'd love to give you one of El Presidente's light hearted accounts of what went on today, but, frankly, I'm not in the mood.
Although we were treated to a couple of hours of Ms Hazel McKay explaining that the Falmer for All Campaign was based on a slick marketing ploy by Dick Knight and a campaign slogan that said "Falmer Village is elitist and needs to be colonised by the proletariat".
Her cunning plan appears to be that the Albion should re-name themselves the Sussex Seagulls, work towards playing in the European Super League, and build a much bigger stadium near Gatwick (which would be handy for away fans travelling on cheap flights from Barcelona, Munich and Milan).
All you people who voted "Yes" in the referendum, signed the petition, or wrote a letter to John Prescott have been duped, by the way.
That was in the afternoon. The morning's business was much more serious.
The position, as far as anyone can tell, is that the Inspector has agreed to the joint request by the Football Club and the University of Brighton to hear the details of the revised application for the Transport Interchange and access roads in September.
However, he wants to complete the rest of the hearing (including the final submissions by the main parties) by the end of next week. That will enable him to complete almost all of his report to John Prescott by September (which was what was originally planned).
The September hearing will therefore be just about the interchange and access road (and shouldn't take long to complete).
The reason the access road issue can't be dealt with now is that it needs a new planning application (to Lewes District Council) and has to allow four weeks for objections to be received. The Club will ask John Prescott to call the application in and have it referred to the current Inquiry (and that isn't likely to cause any problems).
So far, so good.
However, what happened next was that Lewes District Council's lawyer stood up and said that his closing submission (which must be heard next week) will want to refer to the written evidence that has been put on the table by the University of Brighton.
However, so far, no-one has had the opportunity to challenge that evidence.
The Club (who had hoped that they could have reached an agreement with the University that would have meant the University's evidence could have been withdrawn) has prepared a rebuttal of the University's evidence and must submit it to the Inquiry if the University's evidence is still on the table.
Since the intention is that the Club and the University will eventually reach an agreement (thereby nullifying the University's evidence), it seems obvious to everyone that the right thing to do is for the University to withdraw the evidence now.
However, they refused to do so today. Which means that tomorrow's hearing may consist of the University presenting their evidence and being cross-examined on it, followed by the Club submitting its rebuttal evidence and being cross-examined. In other words, a public display of how far apart the two sides are. Hardly a prelude to concluding future negotiations with an agreement.
Martin Perry spent much of the afternoon being called to the telephone. He is obviously trying to do a deal which would smooth things over and get the University to agree to withdraw their evidence before tomorrow morning.
The University contingent had withdrawn to discuss their tactics at a venue in Lewes.
It's now up to the University to do the sensible thing and agree not to call their witnesses tomorrow.
Everyone will no doubt be delighted to know that the barrister representing the University did have the guts to stand up at the Inquiry this morning and utter the words "The University of Brighton supports this planning application".
If you want to try this trick at home, you might care to put on a Crystal Palace shirt and sing "Good Old Sussex By The Sea". Somehow it doesn't quite work.
Although we were treated to a couple of hours of Ms Hazel McKay explaining that the Falmer for All Campaign was based on a slick marketing ploy by Dick Knight and a campaign slogan that said "Falmer Village is elitist and needs to be colonised by the proletariat".
Her cunning plan appears to be that the Albion should re-name themselves the Sussex Seagulls, work towards playing in the European Super League, and build a much bigger stadium near Gatwick (which would be handy for away fans travelling on cheap flights from Barcelona, Munich and Milan).
All you people who voted "Yes" in the referendum, signed the petition, or wrote a letter to John Prescott have been duped, by the way.
That was in the afternoon. The morning's business was much more serious.
The position, as far as anyone can tell, is that the Inspector has agreed to the joint request by the Football Club and the University of Brighton to hear the details of the revised application for the Transport Interchange and access roads in September.
However, he wants to complete the rest of the hearing (including the final submissions by the main parties) by the end of next week. That will enable him to complete almost all of his report to John Prescott by September (which was what was originally planned).
The September hearing will therefore be just about the interchange and access road (and shouldn't take long to complete).
The reason the access road issue can't be dealt with now is that it needs a new planning application (to Lewes District Council) and has to allow four weeks for objections to be received. The Club will ask John Prescott to call the application in and have it referred to the current Inquiry (and that isn't likely to cause any problems).
So far, so good.
However, what happened next was that Lewes District Council's lawyer stood up and said that his closing submission (which must be heard next week) will want to refer to the written evidence that has been put on the table by the University of Brighton.
However, so far, no-one has had the opportunity to challenge that evidence.
The Club (who had hoped that they could have reached an agreement with the University that would have meant the University's evidence could have been withdrawn) has prepared a rebuttal of the University's evidence and must submit it to the Inquiry if the University's evidence is still on the table.
Since the intention is that the Club and the University will eventually reach an agreement (thereby nullifying the University's evidence), it seems obvious to everyone that the right thing to do is for the University to withdraw the evidence now.
However, they refused to do so today. Which means that tomorrow's hearing may consist of the University presenting their evidence and being cross-examined on it, followed by the Club submitting its rebuttal evidence and being cross-examined. In other words, a public display of how far apart the two sides are. Hardly a prelude to concluding future negotiations with an agreement.
Martin Perry spent much of the afternoon being called to the telephone. He is obviously trying to do a deal which would smooth things over and get the University to agree to withdraw their evidence before tomorrow morning.
The University contingent had withdrawn to discuss their tactics at a venue in Lewes.
It's now up to the University to do the sensible thing and agree not to call their witnesses tomorrow.
Everyone will no doubt be delighted to know that the barrister representing the University did have the guts to stand up at the Inquiry this morning and utter the words "The University of Brighton supports this planning application".
If you want to try this trick at home, you might care to put on a Crystal Palace shirt and sing "Good Old Sussex By The Sea". Somehow it doesn't quite work.