The Luen interview needs to be taken in context, it was made to a fanzine site and by a guy who has been going to CP since he was 'but a lad'. To me this was nothing more than a light hearted comment and one I'm ok with, it wasn't malicious. I'm hoping the pricing structure for the derby is looked at this time around, because this to me says is more inflamitory than any throw away comment on a fanzine and may show a level of understanding (although I still reckon he'd get slagged off as being desperate if he did)..

Come on people, There are many things we should debate and be concerned over including world wide famine, devastation in Haiti and outrageous speculation over the England captains ball skills but lets not worry ourselves over a man in a silly costume.
Believe me things like this seem to work themselves out, lets move on with our lives and remember just how lucky we are !

But you don't know that FC were involved in the decision. We have no direct input into the SMC and we have no representative on their management team. Maybe FC were involved, maybe they weren't, but we don't know. Nor do we know what the actual offence(s) was/were, yet people feel it's OK to scream "over reaction". What if he'd made a handshuffle sign to the NE corner, for example? Would that be OK for what's effectively a children's entertainer representing your club?

so maybe they were, maybe they werent, different from your earlier statement

Which was?

I completely agree but the fact is that it has happened and it basically says that FC have no direct control over what happens at their stadium (I know its not theirs but in the eyes of the public it is). As a company I would want to know what was happening that may have a detrimental effect on the perception of the company. If they have no control what is stopping the SMC installing red and white seats, banning all oppo fans from the stadium or in the worse case not having the power to control the fans that they are directly responsible for. Lets say if there was major crowd disturbance at the KC who would get fined the SMC or FC, who would front off the press the SMC or FC, I'm betting it would be either Rule or his PR man.

Question 1: Assuming there was good reason (such as "inappropriate" gestures to the crowd, which includes young children who adore these mascots), do you think that the children's entertainer wearing the costume should be banned or not?

Question 2: how difficult would it be to find a replacement chidrens entertainer to wear the suit in their place?

I agree with all of that. Whether supporters or not, directors should be professional enough to rise above the petty banter and represent their clubs with distinction. Rovers have not had a decent chairman and board since the days of Bill Land and it shows.

No, it isn't.

The SMC is responsible for security/crowd safety/ stewarding. The accusation levelled at the guy in the Rufus suit is, according to the letter sent, that he did something designed/likely to inflame the crowd. That typically gets you banned from stadia all around the country.

This really has been blown up out of all proportion. An idiot did something idiotic and paid the penalty. Tough. The mascot isn't banned and this will have zero effect on Rufus attending future derbies provided someone else wears the costume. Why on earth would FC even WANT to get involved? It has nothing whatsoever to do with them and effects neither the club nor the fans.

Some people really need to drop their agendas and get some perspective.

Good points. If there was a major crowd disturbance it would depend who was at fault, I'd guess. FC have a responsibility for the behaviour of their own fans, but the SMC are responsible for safety and stewarding, for which we have a contract with them. So if it was away fans causing a disturbance, I'd guess it would be the SMC who were responsible.

In this case, in a scenario that FC found out about the decision only after the SMC had taken it about what is effectively a representative of an away team, I wouldn't be that surprised. We have had no influence on a number of things at the KC like hosting RL internationals recently for example. It's not a fantastic position to be in in terms of the balance of power, but the upside is a great stadium to play in, fixed outgoings to budget for (i.e. we know what the costs are and don't get hit for unplanned maintenance etc) and a business that doesn't need to spend time and energy worrying about stadium/safety/stewarding/ticketing etc.

=#FF0000Rufus NOT banned from the KC

I take my children to the KC and we were there for friendly, I didnt see the incident in question but if I had have done I would have defintely complained, they love the mascots and the people inside have a level of responibility which seems to have been overstepped.

While I know the fans of both clubs make these gestures to each other which doesnt make it right but at the end of the day it is just NOT acceptable for anyone associated with either club to do this sort of thing.

They are representing their clubs and should act accordingly, if the club dont do anything about it then it doesnt show them in a good light also as they are accepting it and he is one of their employees.

7 pages of Dobbins fans desperately trying to get something on HUll Fc and those of our fans who cannot wait to have a go at the club trying to find some way of linking it to us to do do just that. In the end the SMc are responsible for crowd safety, stewarding and taking these sort of deceisions. I am sure the guy can appeal if he so wishes but if he has done something stupid he's been caught, and the SMc have taken the action they deemed fit to do!

No doubt it is them thatwill have to be accountable for their actions!

So what its just a load of Joanas from our supporter base and those rovers fans who pretend to be reasonable, trying to pin it on our club, its a nothing event!! He's been found out, and punished, he can appeal, move on!

So in short reasonable debate is finished as far as you are concerned, as all reasonable debate can only be pretend. I personally class myself as a rugby fan and really enjoy a debate with opposing fans and also an element of banter. What I don't like is the pettiness and oneupmanship of some who believe they have the right to dictate to others how they should feel and think. I don't think we need to get one on FC over this, I just find it a bit sad that an occassion that should have been celebrated for the right reasons (and maybe brought the clubs closer together) has been brought down to the usual levels. If a fluffy bird waggling its rear is seen as potentially inflamatory why did the SMC get someone to come on and sing RRR at an FC home game, surely this is far more inflamatory.

I would have thought that the RFL would hold the club as responsible for the control of the fans either home or away as has been seen over the years. If not all clubs could just 2nd tier the stewarding, ground safety and abdicate all responsibility for anything that goes on in the ground. Didn't Hull City get some form of sanctions from the FA over the Millwall / Hudds disturbances.

Again read the Luen interview, because clearly your directors have no wish to bring the clubs closer together

they clearly do not lead by example.
His gestures have clearly caused offence to some people, now neither you nor I can judge on this, maybe children where present who knows.
The singers imo got the crowd going, it was not an act to cause offence but possibly to show respect for both sets of fans who had made the effort to attend.

Best we better ban try celebrations and badge kissing then

Get off your high horse while you can Kosh, will be a long way down if you fall

and yet our directors agred to play a friendly that earnt one of your players a hell of a lot more than he would have got had you played any other club in the country, i would expect the fact you played us doubled the gate..

As I said the Luen article was in a fanzine type website and never had a malicious comment in it, it was a bit of light hearted banter and i would be shocked if any FC found that offensive.

Don't be daft.

And in any case, there are examples of player celebrations getting people into trouble.


Only if you promise to stop being a drama queen.

Hull's biggest asset since the mereger with gateshead has been a BOD who are not fans and can make objective decisions

Very true, we may not always like their approach/decsions but no doubting they have produced a solid club financially.

I do believe due to health and safety regulations that its not possible for another person to use the costumes

So they get to buy a new one. Big deal.

Dont get why all the fuss over the banning of a person wearing a mascot oufit if they overstepped the mark. As has been said the mascot hasnt been banned just the person who has reportly done something that crosses the line of what is expected from a club representative.

Seems like its been blown out of all proportion with a witch hunt on the club and what can only be described as mass hysteria.

they cant fecking afford a new one FFS

I'm still struggling to see what part of this is FC's problem.

Maybe you should email the SMC with your complaints?