Serious question. Should these boards feature adverts from a certain ambulance chaser who has just confirmed his dislike of free speech - surely reason for the boards existence in the first place?

That money is remedial maintenance to make a condemned stand barely usable again. Hardly a significant "improvement". The ground is disgrace - all the more so because it was built at a time when stadium architecture meant that there simply is no excuse for obstructed views, etc.

Freedon of speech exists within a legal framework. We are not "free" to write or say anything we like without an offended party having the legal right to challenge what has been written or said.

If what has been written about HKR turns out to be false then the courts will decide in their favour. It is the right of anyone to seek redress through the courts in this manner. Is it just because it's Hull KR that you're so upset about it? I think it probably is.

Not necessarily, you should try reading up on the defamation laws. It all depends on what the effect on aggrieved party's character would be. If I said tha Ian Huntley had never bought a TV licence in his life, even if untrue, it is highly unlikely that he would be awarded anything against me. Simply because my statement would do nothing to degrade his character further.

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to explain just what part of the HDM article is not factual.

But it is the right of anyone who feels aggrieved to ask the court for a decision.

I've no idea what part of the article is not factual. Although I guess now we won't know until it goes to court, if it gets that far. I'm surprised that it has been deemed necessary to take court action but hey ho. I suppose that publicity of this kind could be detrimental to the next license application which might be the reason for Rovers' action in this case.

My view is hdm said Hull KR are £3m in debt but accounts are for 2008 it is now 2010 rovers could now be £4m or even £5m in debt or they could be £1m or £2m in debt they could even be debt free(which i very much doubt).I dont know you dont know the only poeple who know are Hull KR

I'm considering taking the HDM to court because it makes my chips smell funny and the ink comes off on my arris

Although I'm no legal expert, the Dobson headline "I'll prove I'm the best scrum-half in the city" would be commonly interpreted as that, that is what he actually said when it wasn't. Even though they haven't put headline in quotes, I'd expect it to fall under some kind of law - possibly defamation in the context that the HDM have portrayed him to be arrogant/cocky etc. if not defamation then I'm sure it would fall into a similar category - which one I don't know.

Again common interpretation of the £3M debt headline again indicates the figure in a current context and in a current context, it is simply not true as the current figure is around the £1M bracket. I'd imagine if the club could argue that if the HDM deliberately printed the article to infer that the figure was in a current context to portray a negative image of the club to potential investors or who ever, then that would be their avenue of leverage - as for what law it would fall under I don't know.

When all is said and done, the bottom line is that I'm 100% sure that Hudge wouldn't take legal action unless he believed it would hold water.

Try eating the chips before you wipe your arris with it.

i dont know what you are on but if you think extending the length of a grandstand is remedial maintenance you should stop taking that stuff

Craven Park has improved significantly as a ground. we are talking about actual real improvements, not artists impression that never get built because they cant get funding.

a lot of money has been spent on Craven Park, be it club or council. Hull council have shown they will support their local clubs with ground improvemens, something wakey council should copy.

The only real improvement is the extention of the main standing area. The seating at one end of the ground is temporary. Is it any different to the corperate flats at Wakefield?

Try reading rlthe articlerl again, specificallyCovering the financial period up to November 30, 2008, the accounts indicate the Robins had debts of £3.16m at that time.

The figures do not take into account the 2009 season, during which Hudgell has already admitted the Robins made losses of around £450,000.

The accounts, signed by the KR chairman last month, show £2,284,107 owed to creditors by the Robins is due to be repaid within a year.

Another £882,090 is due to creditors over the longer term.

The accounts do not specify to whom the money is owed.

However, Hudgell has previously hinted that board members at Craven Park have been prepared to fund heavy investment in the playing squad, and underwrite the club's debts.[/i

You've completely ignored my points.

Besides all the "my dads bigger than your dad" bickering that's going on, why arn't people concerned by the fact that the financial state of the game cannot be classed as "healthy"?

The current financial state of play and the timing of TV renewals does not bode well for some I would suggest.