We have previously been able to carry out short periods of kicking practice though.

Also I understood that the ban used to apply to both us and City...

if that's no longer the case then things have changed, be interesting to know if it's Allam that has ultimately stopped us, an appeal to the actual OWNERS of the facility should be AP's next step if that's the case. I have tenants call me and say "the agency said I can't do x but I'd really like to, can I have your permission"

The 'owners' have no control. The company that has control is the SMC. The person in control of the SMC is Mr Allam... Sorry, we're stuck with the poisonous b**t**d...

I really dislike the man!!

Of course the owners have control, the SMC manage it on their behalf, wether the Council has any apetite to get involved would be an entirely different matter.

I'm affraid we have, I've been and watched em a few times times in 2004/5/6 there have even been open training sessions on sponsors nights over the years.

Originally there was an agreement with the SMC (although not in the lease) that that Hull FC could use the pitch for one session before each home game and the same went for City (although in fairness we didn't always use it far from it in fact) then it became us using it at mutually acceptable times and now I believe we can't use it.......... sign of the times really! If what going on everywhere else at the KC is anything to go by we would probably have to pay for it if we wanted to train on it!

It would be interesting to know if City still train on it.

some thing has to be done about the smc(allems) they seam to be intent of destroying hull fc the doing evey thing to this end. what is they end game?

From their point of view City have a real possibility of being a Premier League side next season, so they are increasing their revenue streams (hence why the cost of facilities etc. has increased at the KC), so I can understand that side of things (even though I do not agree with it).

I don't think the Allams have anything against Hull FC, it's a personal battle between them and AP, unfortunately for AP they have much deeper pockets. They didn't need to buy YPI, it was done to spite AP, but as I say, I doubt they care either way about Hull FC as an entity in it's own right.

Trouble is its not HUll City that are doing all this it is the SMC (all be it one of the same thing as far as Mr A is concerned) and anything to do with the Stadium and income gained from Hull FC should be going into what is an ailing management Company responsible for the upkeep of the Stadium for its two tenants and not into Hull City. You'll argue they are one of the same thing but they legally are not, if the ownership of the SMC had been independant of the football Club and the rugby Club this would never have happened. It wil get worse before it gets better if it ever will get better. Be affraid!!! About time the Mail got involved and we got some clarification!

Here Here !! I agree with every word you say. You've saved me a job.

I'll argue no such thing, as for the HDM getting involved, I wonder how much of Northgate Press Allam owns, they seem to be his personal mouth piece. The Council should be getting involved, but they're too busy fighting amongst themselves (not much change there).

We definitely need clarification.

Also, if Richardson and his fellow "directors" had been willing to put theiir hand in their pocket, we'd have been involved in the SMC from day one.

I have heard today that City recently trained on the pitch, but it wasn't from the most reliable of sources so could easily be bullcrap designed to wind up FC fans.

While I agree that there is a personal vendetta going on here, I disagree that they don't care about FC. They know they'd have a much better chance of owning the KC if we weren't tenants, so if they can make it untenable for us to remain there they'd see that as a win.

No. They don't!! The SMC has a watertight lease on the KC.. There is no breaking that service agreement!!

It's watertight provided terms aren't breached. Not suggesting for a second they have been, just that if either council or SMC don't fulfil their obligations, surely the contract would be broken? Don't know what the terms are, like. Doubt there's anything about treating tenants equitably as impartial landlord and custodian of the council's community asset though.

.

It will be intersting if we lose tomorrow night on goal kicks!