You're right! I guess you'd be a bit of an expert on civil law, ex-Councillor Webster. I believe unlawful discrimination under the terms the Disability Discrimination Act would also be covered by civil law?

[urlhttp://www.choicesandrights.org.uk/webdocs/docs/pdf/press_release_final.pdf[/url

I think road rage, though:

[urlhttp://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-15420044.html[/url

is a criminal offence?

he qouted earlier that he is no longer a councillor for now,
this thread has been so enlightening

People who lend money in "wanting it paying back at a reasonable rate of return and over an affordable period" shocker.

What makes you doubt Hull FC's shareholder's intentions?

You've been keeping your powder dry.



There isn't even any evidence that your assessment is accurate. The RFL and fans generally want better facilities. See Wakey and Salford's efforts to build new stadia. Look at the upturn in support after Hull's move to the KC. Aim high (especially if you can persuade someone else to help foot the bill), but have a plan B (ie cutting costs).



Setting aside the franchise criterion and trying look at your question dispassionately - do Rovers need the new the North Stand?
Certainly better facilities would be very desirable, but the issue of capacity is valid. Will better facilities bring in more fans rather than just making the existing ones more comfortable? I can't see a massive upturn in away support as it is the journey which is a turn off for many I suspect. Certainly there is a shortage of available covered seating with an unobstructed view. The effect of the new east stand extension will be interesting, but won't be very informative in that respect. There is just no way of knowing without building it.

To put the losses into a different context. Rovers spend near the cap. Knock £200k of the wage bill and they'd still be competitive. If you can then get just £30 more from each existing, regularly-attending fan each year (about 60p/week), you are at break-even. There is potential to improve the merchandizing and retail side of things. If trimming the squad budget for a couple of years to invest in the business, as helpful Hull fans have selflessly suggested, that'd be fine by me. Difficult to balance on a 3 year license, but it used to be one year at a time, so can't complain. Self-funding major stadium improvements is always going to be a big ask without a strong commercial case, but if everybody else finds 'partners' Rovers need to too.

Were rovers near the cap last year? There have been contract increases for a number of players, 3 new players in on lower end contracts plus clinton's imminent arrival on a fair wedge. That all in must be £250k ish. Do you think the players who have left were on that much?

"Hudgell says he took the decision to publicly talk about KR's financial plight in a bid to highlight the need to develop Craven Park"

Nowt to do with Look North's feature, then?

He'll be citing image rights as a reason not to file accounts next, oh, hang on...



If Rovers are trying to strong-arm them into giving them some money, the council should consider that if there was a compelling business case for the ground extensions, the funding woud have been forthcoming already in line with the 2008 franchise application and you would be kicking off 2010 in a 14,000 stadium.

They would need to consider that if East Hull is so deprived of "facilities" whether they could be provided at a better, more accessible, more cost-effective alternative location. Investing in a stand at Craven Park wouldn't provide many financial benefits to the local community other than a few short term building jobs and a handful of back office staff if demand picked up a bit, plus maybe pub landlords would see an upside.

Oh do be quiet.

Quote ="Tarquin Fuego"Quote from the Man in charge www.sporthull.co.uk/headlines/Hu ... ticle.html '" Sounds to me like Grudge is getting more and more hysterical. The bleat to the Sun last week didn't bring the council running to upend the Guildhall coffers into Rovers' bottomless pit, so he's now turning up the gas in the local rag. Parasol, thought to be their main backer, via Crossland, appear to have downgraded their sponsorship from "main club sponsor" : [urlhttp://www.parasolgroup.co.uk/about-us/our-vision/hull-kr-sponsorship/[/url when they stepped-up their level of support to a different league to that of previous years. Now, in 2010 they are mere "shirt sponsors" : [urlhttp://www.hullkr.co.uk/article.php?id=619[/url Is this a step down, again? Hence Grudge's seeming desperation?

Quote ="Tarquin Fuego"Quote from the Man in charge www.sporthull.co.uk/headlines/Hu ... ticle.html '" Sounds to me like Grudge is getting more and more hysterical. The bleat to the Sun last week didn't bring the council running to upend the Guildhall coffers into Rovers' bottomless pit, so he's now turning up the gas in the local rag. Parasol, thought to be their main backer, via Crossland, appear to have downgraded their sponsorship from "main club sponsor" : [urlhttp://www.parasolgroup.co.uk/about-us/our-vision/hull-kr-sponsorship/[/url when they stepped-up their level of support to a different league to that of previous years. Now, in 2010 they are mere "shirt sponsors" : [urlhttp://www.hullkr.co.uk/article.php?id=619[/url Is this a step down, again? Hence Grudge's seeming desperation?

Nah, gotta look at it from another angle.

Nothing. I was pointing out that however you dress it up it is a debt and has to be paid back. As you so rightly point out they are getting interest on their loans.

COME ON OUT KOSH....WE KNOW YOU'RE IN THERE !!!!!

Quote ="Tarquin Fuego"Quote from the Man in charge www.sporthull.co.uk/headlines/Hu ... ticle.html I hope you get off to a good start this season. I started this thread as I feel as a neutral that Mr Hudgell is getting ready to apportion blame for when it may/may not go a bit wrong. Why is he asking what the next 2-3 years has in store , IF Jimmy the Ruler was coming out with this I would be highly suspicious , wouldn't you ?'" Oh my lord that is the best gag since Monty Python. You wouldn't know 'Neutral' with regard to HKR if it poked you up the .

Quote ="Tarquin Fuego"Quote from the Man in charge www.sporthull.co.uk/headlines/Hu ... ticle.html I hope you get off to a good start this season. I started this thread as I feel as a neutral that Mr Hudgell is getting ready to apportion blame for when it may/may not go a bit wrong. Why is he asking what the next 2-3 years has in store , IF Jimmy the Ruler was coming out with this I would be highly suspicious , wouldn't you ?'" Oh my lord that is the best gag since Monty Python. You wouldn't know 'Neutral' with regard to HKR if it poked you up the .

you are obviously speaking from personal experience

Mine was better

He wants to get to 10,000 - this is only 17% more than current.

5 years ago the average was 2,400 (2004 season under Reilly/Hall), so our current average is 355% up, not the 500 quoted.

Hull's last 3 years have been the largest 3 in their history.

All this proves that you cannot use history (including the 80's) to gauge future potential.

In other words 'god didn't he make my mate look a turd i'll jump in and try to deflect attention'.

I'm disappointed - I've come to expect so much better.
Business plan! When do the council expect to have recouped the £44 million they laid out for the KC? The clue I suspect is in it being called a 'community' stadium.
As I say, I'm not a fan of professional sports clubs receiving public subsidy, but for a fan of a club who have benefitted from it on a fairly spectacular scale to come over all holier than thou and start employing business criteria to other putative projects is a bit hard to swallow.

Why did the rate payers of hull have to fund 700 K of their monies to HFC for the Boulevard ? Now you are moving back the rate payers should be getting some of thier monies back

Why don't you worry about the mighty Hull Super League who have similar debts that are owed to the Directors in loans !

I may be wrong but didn't they pay 900k?

no good asking any of the cabbages, there's some severe alzheimer cases going on in the west, they can't seem to remember anything pre KC!

Ooh, hark at her!



The KC was built from a KC cash windfall, wasn't it, hence the name KC stadium? And Rovers were offered the chance to play at the stadium gifted to the city but turned that chance down. So having opted to go it alone to now ask for extra money to build their own because they've only just realised their business model is unsustainable is a bit hard to swallow.





Councils are strapped for cash. As stated, if there is such a proven need for community facilities in East Hull I'm sure it will already be high up the council's priority list, so let them appraise potential locations against a set of community, accessibility and and financial criteria.



Still, you side-stepped Hudgell's image rights "rationale" quite neatly there.

it was indeed, but if it was down to the majority of the population in hull, the public money would have gone elsewhere, not just to the 50,000 sports fans.

The name of the KC has nack all to do with the revenue used to build it. Kingston Comms have a 10 year sponsorship deal with it. The windfall was taxpayers money which the council chose to squander on all manner of dumb projects - you should see the cash wasted on council house gates/fences etc around parts of the city.

Rovers turned down the chance to play there for 1 reason only - location. Had it been built centrally it would have been a worthwhile consideration.