Interestingly, if the reported Premiership ruling regards shared stadiums was to ever be sanctioned and come into force, Mr Pearson has manouvered himself into a position where he could remove Hull FC from the KC by accepting a compromise deal to play elsewhere on their behalf.

I've had the pleasure of meeting Pearson on a couple of occasions, granted it was a while ago when he was at Leeds Utd, and while he seems to be a decent fella he was never interested in Rugby League at all! It surprised me when I heard he'd bought into Hull FC because he was adamant all those years ago that he he wasn't interested in any other sports.

Maybe there's an element of pre planning and positioning going on in readiness for a Premiership ruling?

neither was Glover,but just like you're owner Mrs Pearson and their 2 daughters are hugely into RL.

All hearsay,which will never come to fruition.This all stems from the pitch at the DW stadium,but the pitch at the kc is always top standard.Why would it affect us at the kc? Hull city don't own it no more than we do.Both clubs pay an even rent to the ''council'' owned stadium.Mr Allam,city's owner did want the stadium,but wanted it for free,so he could finance against it to build on,for which the council sent him packing.I doubt the stadium will ever be sold at any time due to it being paid for by hull peoples money (kc shares issue).

The DW is owned by Whelan,unlike the kc,which is owned by the local authority

But that doesn't stop Pearson, acting as soccer boss, from formulating an offer to the Rugby League club which would see them receive a cash offer to move out and then Pearson, acting as Rugby boss, accepting his own offer and Hull FC vacating the KC.

Strange and unethical but we've certainly seen similar things happen in sport, Rugby League, even at Wakefield and even at Hull FC. Look at the wrangle going on at the Galpharm with respect to Davy's strange Aquisition of Huddersfield Towns shareholding of the stadium.

Never underestimate the power of money on the decision making of an individual.

It may be hearsay but it's an issue that keeps coming back up time after time after time!

There's no doubt whatsoever that soccer bosses would love to have soccer stadiums with no one else, no other sport being payed there. There's equally no doubt that the FA Premier league will one day, sooner or later, pass legislation that their clubs must play in soccer stadiums and no other sports are to use their facilities.

If Hull City were to win promotion under such legislation do you really think that Pearson would turn down the £millions they'd earn just to keep the FC faithfull happy?

Of course he wouldn't and he's cleverly put himself into a situation where he would/could make all the important decisions regarding the offer and acceptance of a deal which would see FC vacate the KC.

What I dont get is if Pearson has all the evidence of the Brisco to Leeds fiasco why are we not seeing Leeds/Kath/Agar etc being hauled before the courts and Redhall ?
If you were in his position with that you would be looking to get compensation and it never happening again.Not spouting to a set of fans and doing your case harm by doing so.

the most frustrating thing about Briscoe from a Wakefield point of view is that he was another young player in the Wakefield system that was unable to be retained.

Players like Milner, Smith, Hampshire, holmes, etc all gone. I hope this is a priority of mr glover to address as the real young quality is in the catchment area.

Pearson, i believe has reported them to the relevant bodies.The likelihood of Kath or even Gary being welcomed into the boardroom by adam are very slim!

Think you will find Briscoe was signed by Leeds from Hull not Wakey but RA taking the flack from FC fans HTH

I think you will find Briscoe was brought through the Scholarship at Wakefield, prior to signing for Hull. I'm not that sad to hth.

I love the way you talk about these people as if they're all personal acquaintances - it's quite sweet, in a slightly stalkerish kind of way.

In other news - a story in the Hull local rag suggests that the RFL will take no further action against the club. If true, the RFL proves itself to be spineless and hypocritical; Fatty Woods stated publicly the other day that the club had brought the game into disrepute - despite that, they let UKAD do their dirty work and take no action themselves? At best, that shows profound weakness at the RFL.

A few clubs, not least Cas, will have a right to feel profoundly aggrieved; they were fined 40 grand for the actions of a few fans that was outside their control, whereas Hull suffer no penalty for the actions of 3 of their paid officers that was very much within their control. It's potical.

I did mention this earlier in the thread and TBH if I was a Cas supporter I'd be shouting for action once again the RFL show their inconsistency in dealing with the running of the game, it was the RFL's words "Bringing the Game of RL in to disrepute" hypocritical IMHO

Apoligies if thats the case but he left Hull for Leeds

Eh? what has any of that got to do with what I've typed, or are you saying because of all these interesting things, you lot won't turn on him if your around the middle of the table for the next 3 years.

I can assure you it is the case I had the fortune to coach him in that system for a couple of years. No need to apologise by the way.

All I was trying to say there is a great debate going on about him moving from Hull to Leeds and in my opinion the real debate should be why was he allowed to leave Wakefield so easily. I appreciate money was a factor but given where Wakefield are now with a 3 year security blanket it's time to give a bit more to the kids that have been allowed to walk without too much of a fight.

In fairness, that's only coming from certain obsessed Hull fans who can't let go of their Agar fatwa, although admittedly, it's being fuelled by the daft ranting of their new owner; if I were RA, I'd be having a word with my legal bods.

The club 1873 scheme will hopefully help us keep more of our promising youngsters

If I were Agar, I'd just get on with guiding us to a mid-table finish, the first step in a rebirth, and deal with any anti-Hull feeling the same way Kear did: beat them on his first return there.

If it were just the silly fans I'd agree, but since their new owner has made the same allegation in a public forum, it becomes more serious.

[/u

Same cas board and management at the time of the offence,sanction date and now,whereas at hull,the board a the time of the offence went before any sanctions were imposed,rule,cooper,gleeson all sacked by the new owner when it came to light.Adam is the sole owner and cannot be made responsible for the mistakes made by idiots.If more sanctions are/were to be made,how about Long for actually supplying the pills to gleeson?

Pearson was upfront and honest in his thoughts about Kath,Gary and Rich.Adam stated at the time there would be no ''knee jerk'' reaction regarding our coaching set up.Perhaps the findings over Luke Briscoe changed his mind regarding Agar? As or Kath,she obviously knew she was on her way when she tipped off her hubby.

I completely disagree with your position; for me, an organisation cannot absolve itself of any responsibility for the actions of its employees simply by getting rid of the individuals involved - however, it's a pointless argument now, since the RFL appear to have taken the spineless option that I predicted they would.



There you go again - stalkerish and potentially libellous in one paragraph! You broke your NY resolution already by the way.

Only Cooper was actually sacked jimmybigbelly,Adam has told you wrong.
As you fully know.

Rule and Agar were pushed,keep up fella