Interesting article on the Serious About Rugby League website which I'm sure someone with far more idea than me can put a link up on here in which Neil Hudgell Hull KR chairman refers to Andrew Chamlers as a "complete irritant "and accusses him of working behind smoke and mirrors.

[url=http://www.seriousaboutrl.com/exclusive-kr-owner-hudgell-talks-elstone-hetherington-toronto-bulls-and-robins-survival-17774/Link To Story[/url

It seems that he's trying to deflect away from what has actually been said by the Leeds camp - namely that the sport needs to move as a whole rather than 12 elite clubs at the top lining their own pockets to the detriment of the rest of the sport.

As sickening as it is for me to say, if RL in this country had been run in the way Leeds Rhinos has been for the last 20 years, the sport would be far stronger.

Of the 10 clubs who voted for the change, how many are actually making a profit? Increasing their crowds? Adding to the home grown talent pool?

And he's rounded on Chalmers because he's a dissenting voice to the "SL should be in charge" argument and is also in charge of the largest club outside of SL.

Completely agree. They've run their business the correct way since the inception of Super League.

Mr Chalmers has discussed the 'grass roots' and the 'best interest of the game',albeit in another country,as far back as 2007.

Long before Hudgell got involved.He also has some qualifications.

Interesting interview,among others, [url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10430304HERE[/url

It's nauseating the way that Hudgell always talks as if he is a fully established member of the SL elite.

12 months ago he was in the Championship - and Derek Beaumont was sitting in his seat

And in a few months, he might be the chairman of a Championship club again...

It's squeaky bum time already for Leigh to get Derek's bum back in that seat, at least for 2019.

Would be quite interesting though to see Hudgell sitting next to his "constant irritant" at the "lower table". If there's a punch up, Chalmers should have it streamed for all! But only if certain Cumbrians agree.

Hi. I read the article this afternoon, and I was interested to see the reaction.

Just to note a couple of things...



Hudgell took over as Rovers’ chairman in 2005.




Apologies if you’re joking and I’m being dim, but he specifically makes that point in the article. ‘I was in the Championship last year and I could be back there at the end of this’

No, apologies are due from me, I glossed over that bit. And I was coloured by watching him on Back Chat a few weeks ago when he seemed to have the attitude that he was a member of the elite.

The point is basically still valid though. And it is this: [iwhy should 12 club chairman decide the future of the game when several of them might not be in a position to make that decision in a few months?[/i

That said, I don't Andrew Chalmers has covered himself in glory with some of his comments and - perhaps more so - the [iway[/i in which he expresses them

I broadly agree, and ideally we’d have a whole sport solution with wide buy in. I find the current divisions pretty concerning.

I don’t know much about Chalmers, so I was curious to see whether he was popular with you guys. Do you feel like he is getting your club back on the right track?

It may have been the year earlier,actually.

It was about that time Chalmers was a board member on the New Zealand rugby league and was elected chairman

in 2007 - and a member of the RLIF.[url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10437833Before He Swallowed A Dictionary And Learned Business Speak[/url

People with strong opinions are often classed as irritants. Reading the article , Hudgell’s main target is Hetherington not Chalmers .
The most impressive case I’ve heard against the Super League “ power grab” was made by Carl Hall ( Doncaster CEO on Back Chat a few weeks ago. His argument was based on the belief that you start building a structure from the foundations ( grassroots ) not the roof ( Super League). Quietly effective.
Hudgell’s appearance on Backchat was far less convincing - to me he seemed distant and not prepared to engage in debate. As Paul Walker comments:
“He seemed to have the attitude that he was a member of the elite”
Perhaps that’s why Hudgell concentrated on Gary H - a peer rather than an underling.
Going back to Chalmers
He has turned round our club. Not only by recruiting a good coach and protecting the Academy structure but seemingly running the business side pretty well. There have been blemishes such as the occasional outburst but all in all he’s done a good job, especially given that the joint owner Graham Lowe cannot travel and is not able to share the day to day running of the club.

As you have mentioned Graham Lowe, he has actually sold his 50% of the club and is no longer involved with the Bulls. No clue who it was sold too.

https://opencorporates.com/companies/nz/1388503 All information available here.

https://opencorporates.com/companies/nz/1388503 All information available here.

Overall he's doing a tremendous job considering where we were when he took over. As others have said, they have been issues along the way with his outbursts. Hudgell did make me laugh abouy him swallowing a business speak book though.

Regarding the structure, he's been appointed as one of the front man to stand up for L1/Championship clubs, hence his clashes in the media with SL chairmen (although i don't think he's said anything as confrontational as what the fev, fax, Batley or Hunslet chairman said) but for obvious reasons we're the club that will rile others up. Personally i'd rather us just be quiet and just get on with our rebuilding, but obviously Chalmers feels they are greater stakes in regards to the structure, hence taking his fight to SL. He's getting a lot of stick for his role in the structure, but IMO he's doing it as he genuinely believes it could damage the sport as a whole. If he was just looking at hselfishly it would impact the Bulls, he would probably join the SL teams in calls to reduce championship funding as Bradford would be one of the few would could survive due to their fanbase. We'd be much weaker, but probably the strongest in the second tier. Look how strong the championship is now due to the funding.

I personally don't like the 8s, Widnes could finish bottom for the second year in a row and not get relegated. They could get 3 bites at the cherry (finish bottom of regular season, weakest SL team in M8s, then MPG and still survive) and i don't think for a minute 4 sl clubs are in danger of going down. so i agree with sl chairman that it needs changing, im dead against them having more power though. The SL chairman still voted through the Stobart deal, scrapping reserves, dual-reg. Lenegan mentioing loop fixtures returning should be setting the alarm bells off.

Anyway all chairman (and i include my own in this) need to stop the mud slinging in the media, get around a table and thrash out the differences.

To Chalmers by the looks of it. The new shareholder is FOURFOURONE Investments, of which Chalmers is listed as one of 2 shareholders.

I would argue that opinion is divided there. Most fans believe he has done a tremendous job. There is another load of fans (including myself) who no longer attend games and just follow casually, because of some of the decisions made by the chairman.

On the face of things, people are happy because it seems stable, which is what fans have been craving for years. Whether it's stable behind the scenes or whether people are just happy to bury heads in the sand as long as they don't see the terms "winding up petition" again, time will tell. None of us really know the answer to that, only those privy to the books (and I don't include mouthpieces who make out they're privy to that info to get attention).

It’s a good job super duper league wasn’t a closed shop when it started or the likes of Hudgell wouldn’t be anywhere near it.

He’d just be another “irritant”.

Wait... what???

When did that happen?

4th of April. New share holder is FOURFOURONE INVESTMENTS LIMITED( 5593625 ), which has 1 director (Danielle Emma CHRISTOFFERSEN) but for which Chalmers is joint shareholder.

Just looks to me like Chalmers buying out Lowes share.

There's a Danielle Christofferson who is an an Associate of Meredith Connell, a law firm in Auckland and Wellington after some years working in Oz. Could they be one and the same?

Her stated experience on the firm's website includes:

[i"Acting for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment in relation to the sale of properties forfeited or restrained under the Criminal Proceedings (Recovery) Act 2009 =#FF0000and in relation to the sale of properties pursuant to the Insolvency Act 2006, and advising on associated property issues."[/i

Hope there's not another multi hundred page thread coming up!

That’s the same person, but they appear to be business partners.

100 shares (100.00%)

Andrew David Kenneth CHALMERS
C/- Meredith Connell, Level 5, 4 Graham Street, Auckland, 1010 , New Zealand

Danielle Emma CHRISTOFFERSEN
C/- Meredith Connell, Level 5, 4 Graham Street, Auckland, 1010 , New Zealand


And her expertise and experience covers far more than recoveries. [urlhttps://www.mc.co.nz/our-people/danielle-christoffersen[/url

We can only hope.




Super League was a breakaway organisation, only fully reintegrating with the RFL in 2002. I wonder how far in that direction we’re heading again.

Between 1998 and 2000 it was a closed shop, meaning it took Huddersfield four goes to get relegated. Some Hull fans are still angry that the Premiership clubs wouldn’t accept them when their Sharks incarnation sunk, and as we were one of those Premiership clubs, and... well let’s just say that period of RL history is still discussed from time to time on our boards.

lgk;bjtdlkhtnbio[djobpe[jot=boe

If anyone other than named people are bankrolling the Bulls, I don't think it would take many guesses. If someone's in the background, I would put good money on the name rhyming with Goulash.

Let’s ignore the fact that yours is a newly created account for now, and assume you are something other than a troll...

Danielle being his wife would make sense, I did wonder if that was the case.

As to the question of bankrolling; I read the statement and my first impression was he was eluding to the RFL secretly bankrolling the bulls. On second read not sure if he was but convinced he was intending to create rumours and murmurs to try discredit Chalmers. His rant about Chalmers struck me as more petty and misguided than anything Chalmers has come out with.

So on the finance front, is anyone other than Chalmers bankrolling us? I have no idea. However; given we have crowds to rival some super league clubs, but a largely part time squad, isn’t it possible we are actually living within our means?