He doesn’t name names because it is a general issue in the game with many SL sides committing to running a reserves team then backtracking on it
, and he offers his opinion that no reserves side should mean no marquee signings. No need to get personal about it, cos it is an opinion he holds about the wider game.

On the points deduction his comments were aimed at the RFL who lets face it have not shown to be the strongest and most consistent when it comes to administration of the game, it would not have mattered whether it was Bradford or any other club - again not personal.

Unlike LeBron, I believe Carter would have followed up on his statement had the decision not being made in accordance with the rules that were set out.

I do wish Chalmers wouldn’t respond to those two.

If carter and hudgell want to act out like that then let them. What with hudgell calling Chalmers an irritant and the two of them publicly sitting up at an rfl club meeting to put bids in on odsal (when their own clubs’ grounds are falling apart) simply because of chalmers’ position On the champ and LG 1 clubs advisory group. Carter making thinly veiled threats to Featherstone (again on the advisory group) the evening before the vote.

Leave them to it I say.

Floodlights erected not to standard by contractors can hardly be used as a stick to beat Hudgell with. I wonder what percentage of stadiums light towers would pass a health and safety test now? Hopefully all but chances are a few would be dangerous? Bradfords consistent mismanagement isnt Wakeys or KRs fault.The genius currently steering Bradford is just the latest in a string of talented individuals who despite repeated bail outs by rfl can't make a profitable venture of the Bulls

Hang on, no-one else’s floodlights have fallen over. Just because Hull KR’s were dodgy don’t try saying everyone else’s are.

Not sure why you’re having a go at Bradford. Or why Hudgell is artificially raising the price of the Odsal lease. It’s either politics v the RFL or one club owner deliberately trying affect the finances of another. Either way it’s petty and small minded.

I'm not saying everyone else's are. Just when a specialist firm sign off a job as certified and finished you tend to accept this as gospel The Bradford fan brought the floodlights into it and I was saying it wasn't relevant in regards Odsal or for that matter the thread title Wakey and Cas stadium. After reading 12/13 pages I still aren't sure what is actually happening regarding this?

The issue has never been about shared stadium. It has been about money and location. As someone has said, agreeing to share won't make the money suddenly appear.

The Newmarket project was for a Wakefield stadium. The Glasshoughton project is for a Castleford project. The club that has to play in the ground built for the other, and in the other's town, will die.


Odsal is a dump. You wouldn't expect them to "share" with Leeds at Headingly though.

Chalmers and Hudge have both made it plain they dislike each other. Quite why I don't know and as fan care little. Still not many facts coming out over the lights but would expect it's a legal matter so that's probably why

So kids are stabbing each other based on postcodes and we tut loudly, but a shared ground will kill a pro sports club...... Get a grip

What ridiculous post.

He is saying a shared ground outside your own borders where money goes to your rivals would not be supported and therefore would not be financially viable.
What has that got to do with what you posted?

mouthing off calling other club’s chairmen childish names is a stick to beat Hudgell with though.

I just wish Chalmers wouldn’t waste his time being dragged down to Carter and Hudgell’s level.

Well done for missing the point “genius”.

Carters level, what does that mean?

Surely reaching carter and hudgells level is something chalmers would be moving up to as opposed to being dragged down to?

only in Londarn pal

In the context of a ground share, he's right. It would have to be an absolutely even split, in all aspects.
Obviously there ARE far more important issues than RL and ground sharing.
Perhaps we should do away with all sport and concentrate on the important things

Double post

The point is the current Bradford custodian started the whole ding dong with Hudge. Just an annoyance really and is very vocal for his very limited influence.

Don't confuse him

How did he do that then?

Juve and torino fans don't get on....... Neither do the Milanese clubs, nor roma and lazio..... Yet these clubs and others with massive supporter bases managed to share grounds..... Yet the 4k fans at Wakefield or 8k fans at Castleford being lost to the game is somehow a major blow to the sport?
Celtic could play all their home games at ibrox and I'd still support them...... Some people are just too precious for the wrong reasons..... I'd say 10% of either fan base would walk...... And we'd be better off without them anyway...... Small minded idiots.

He outrageously acted as a spokesman for the championship clubs and tried to represent their interests in the face of Super league arrogance. A despicable thing to do I'm sure you'll agree and definitely a case of him "starting it".

The fact of the matter is that Hudgell was outraged that a championship club should have the temerity to call out the top flight teams for their selfish actions. Hudgell then went to press about his dislike of Chalmers.

I'll let the neutrals decide who "started the ding dong".

Who elected him spokesman? Chairmen will do what's best for them and their clubs and it's not really that interesting as a fan. Just read a few snippets from articles were the current Bradford guy was bleating. Think that's about the size of it.

Still don't get what it has to do with Wakey stadium?

Still don't get what it has to do with Wakey stadium?

Turin (Juve gone their own way now), Milan and Rome. The football teams from these cities are representing the same place, not a different one entirely. Much easier to share a stadium.

As already pointed out, Trinity and Cas suddenly decide to share won't make £20m appear. The council doesn't have a pot to in and Featherstone would rightly want something too so they will not be able to contribute in any major way.

That means piggy backing private developers and whilst the Newmarket one has well and truly shafted the public, the Five Towns Park one seem a little more trustworthy but have hit the stumbling block of the falling out of the retail sector.

Really, well first of all I doubt very much the Rangers board would allow it to happen, but looking on the bright side, if the unthinkable ever happened you'd be able to sit where you wanted to in the away part of the ground.