More SMC v Hull Citizens.

Problem is, Chair SMC As Chairman of SMC he has been negligent in two of his duties, to maximise income for the stadium and to allow the stadium to be used by the whole community not just football fans. The decision was made with his Hull City hat on and if he is now sticking by the decision we are never going to get an RL international at the KC again because they are always sorted well before football fixtures come out.
This ludicrous situation of being chairman of both Hull City and SMC needs addressing because there is a clear conflict of interests'"

Yes heard what he said , was tongue in cheek , and as someone who watches rugby league and football it did not upset me . However I can feel uproar in the air from sections of the RL world who cannot take a joke .

Being a band wagon City fan means that you wont know about a man called Adam Pearson, without him and the council owned telephone company called "Kingston Communications" the stadium would not have been built.

You surely cannot be this naive?

The stadium would not have been built for City alone, so it works both ways. The whole point is that the project was only viable, and to an extent remains so, with both clubs using it. Something that both you and Duffen appear to have either forgotten or arrogantly chosen to ignore.

I normally steer clear of these arguments as I'm not really bothered about City one way or the other, but you're doing them no favours on here with your defence of the indefensible.

Christ you make me laugh.

One of the reasons I started to post on here was the absolute crud some of you posted about Hull City. The chairman makes one little joke and some of you are drowning us with tears. Get a back bone.
For those twittering about him resigning due to conflicts of interest, give your heads a rattle.

It's FC's board you need to be calling negligent because they've turned down every opportunity to get involved with the SMC. The plan was that they'd be equal partners, FC wouldn't do it. About the only input they had was to try to reduce the capacity. If they'd won that battle, you wouldn't even be having this debate.

Now, when all the works done you're expecting more say?

He would feel very safe in an audience 100% Football, although said tongue in cheak it was a very 'laddish' thing to say by a man who normally comes across with a fair share of intelligence, until now.

It also goes some way for him to feel justified in his (bent) decision and probably feeling comfortable being with that audience, there is no way he would have said that in front of a RL audience, he would have been lynched on the spot, and rightly so.

I honestly think that the man is so out of touch with this City, he is an embarrassment, the sooner the council get rid of him the better.

Someone who only posts on here because he gets upset about what's said about City think that RL fans are being over-sensitive?

You couldn't make it up.
It's FC's board you need to be calling negligent because they've turned down every opportunity to get involved with the SMC. The plan was that they'd be equal partners, FC wouldn't do it. About the only input they had was to try to reduce the capacity. If they'd won that battle, you wouldn't even be having this debate.

Now, when all the works done you're expecting more say? IIRC the board at the time couldn't or wouldn't come up with the money required to take up the post. My guess is that situation is unchanged.

And people aren't asking for more influence for FC. They are in fact arguing for no influence from either club.

The guy's a first class prat. I know plenty of people who go to both the football and Rugby League matches. So in turn he's just insulted his clubs own fans.
As if this city hasn't had enough people knocking it over the last few years.

I have been a passholder since 1974 of Hull City , think it was 3 shillings to get in back in about 1970 when I first went . The Chairman then was Harold needler , we have had his son Christopher , Don Robbie , Richard Chetham , Michael Fish , Tim Wilby etc as Chairman since off the top of my head so if that makes me a bandwagan fan then tough . But as I have said , the onlty reason the stadium was built was because Hull City would be the main tenant . FC as the only tenant would not of made it viable. Listen to Humberside as Burnsey said tonight that he hopes to speak to a RL rep.re. the KC and non international event . The RL rep may blame Duffen but he may back what Duffen has said. PS. I have been going regularly to Fc since late 1975 when crowds were often round the 3 K make so that makes me an Fc bandwagon fan too.

You are partly right in that it would be better for the stadium to be in use all year so FC would use it during the summer . However if only FC had committed to the move to the KC and City had elected to remain at BP then the stadium would not have been built. I know of several councilors who worked on the stadium project who said that Hull City had to be involved or the KC would not be built , but it would have been built if City had been the only professional tenants.You do need to be bother about City because without them FC would still be at the Boulevard playing in front smaller gates than at the KC .

Whether this is true or not i couldn't give two hoots.

But the fact remains it is meant to be a community stadium run INDEPENDANTLY by the SMC on behalf of the council.

Now IF he has let his role with Hull City affect his decision as chairman of the SMC to allow an International RL match to be staged there then he needs to be made to answer why?

It's not just Hull FC fans that will suffer from this decision. Many Hull KR fans attend the test matches at the KC as well as fans from Yorkshire and Lancashire.