FORUMS FORUMS






RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
25 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
  
FORUMS > Hull FC > O/T - Allam the terrible !
328 posts in 23 pages 
<<   PREV  NEXT   >>
Subscribe | Moderators: Admin, Kosh , Roland_R , Karen
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach13126No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 200520 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Apr 2023Feb 2022LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
12839_1486909898.png
[b:16wvcohs]"To play your best football you need players with enthusiasm and drive and energy." - [i:16wvcohs]Peter Sterling[/i:16wvcohs][/b:16wvcohs] [quote="Adam Pearson said not":16wvcohs][b:16wvcohs]I know there are two franchises and two clubs (in Hull) and that will remain forever more[/b:16wvcohs][/quote:16wvcohs]:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_12839.png



Quote: Mrs Barista "I think you're mistaken saying that plans wouldn't normally be very well developed at this stage.'"


Indeed. This seems to have been our friend's argument since day one but, as you point out, it is totally flawed.

RankPostsTeam
International Board Member37704No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200222 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Aug 2018Aug 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
2051.jpg
The older I get, the better I was Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator." cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan:2051.jpg



Quote: VoiceOfReason "Although OFF SUBJECT...I don't know why people are getting larthered up over Siemens.

They WILL NOT COME HERE.

Our council and government WILL NOT offer them enough financial discounts over a number of years for this to happen - SIMPLES....move on'"


I disagree. The ConDems will do whatever is necessary to mitigate the effects of mass redundancies at Brough

RankPostsTeam
International Board Member3524No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200222 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Aug 2023Apr 2022LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
3444.gif
HULL FC CHALLENGE CUP WINNERS 2005 GRAND FINALISTS 2006 CHALLENGE CUP FINALISTS 2008 CHALLENGE CUP FINALISTS 2013 CHALLENGE CUP WINNERS 2016 CHALLENGE CUP WINNERS 2017 HKR THE PRIDE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP:3444.gif



Quote: ☺East-Sard☺ "They'd never get the turbines under the bridge
+ Shallow water'"


Correct , the Humber between Hull and Brough is not deep enough.

RankPostsTeam
International Star43No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Mar 201114 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jan 2015Sep 2013LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
57208_1318368293.jpg
:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_57208.jpg



Quote: HFC Boy "Correct , the Humber between Hull and Brough is not deep enough.'"


Not deep enough for what exactly? We're not talking about vessels with an excessive draft. Remember many feeder ships go down the Humber to Goole every day.

Sorry to be off topic.

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach5166No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Oct 200717 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2017Mar 2017LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
35457_1309776065.png
HEY YOU GUYS!!!!!!!!:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_35457.png



Quote: cod'ead "I disagree. The ConDems will do whatever is necessary to mitigate the effects of mass redundancies at Brough'"


Cant believe im agreeing with coddy. Know someone who works with Siemens and they have the factory at brough in their sights.

RankPostsTeam
Club Coach1746No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Mar 200520 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2024Jul 2017LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
14059_1449048926.jpg
All existing and generally known ways to immortality can be divided into four catagories. The way of the Fakir. The way of the Monk. The way of the Yogi. The most honourable being 'The way of the FC' Sebasteeno = CLUELESS:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_14059.jpg



Quote: Feathers "Not deep enough for what exactly? We're not talking about vessels with an excessive draft. Remember many feeder ships go down the Humber to Goole every day.

Sorry to be off topic.'"


Maximum draft vessels of 5m for 3 days every 2 weeks (spring tides). Dredging is not possible nor feasable as the banks are continually shifting on each and every tide. Any construction of berth/jetty at Brough is also not possible as this would alter the flow of the river in that area and could well make it worse than what it is now.
The river from the bridge to Apex is actually flowing over a hill (Wolds) the rivers Trent and Ouse are deeper than the Whittons where Brough sits, ships run aground regularly due to the unpredictability of the shifting sands, therefore there isn't a snowball in hells chance of what you are thinking.

RankPostsTeam
Club Coach738No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200420 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Feb 2013Feb 2013LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
disney1/Dis83.gif
St Helens and Gateshead fan. You're only called FC, because you know football is far more popular. We'll never be mastered...:disney1/Dis83.gif



Quote: Mrs Barista "I think you're mistaken saying that plans wouldn't normally be very well developed at this stage. I do property investment appraisal for a living, including retail parks, and in order to put together an initial bid we'd have, as a minimum


You have a strange and almost unique way of working if you're putting firm plans together, including a contaminated land assessment at this stage in discussions. The most people tend to do is make a quick assessment for the potential for contamination based on the lands previous use rather than the expense of full assessments as without knowing where the buildings are, an assessment's isn't even possible to assess if it's suitable.
At this stage, most schemes use generic building costs until much later in the process. To do otherwise doesn't make business sense.

I suspect the schemes you're talking of are further down the line and more simple.

As for the rest of it, you're STILL stuck in the belief that the Council should be looking at this as a singular proposal. It's that that makes them and you look very small minded.

What they should be doing is looking to see if there's a way of stitching together the elements of the concept that meet Mr Alams needs with those of the Council.

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach29793No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Jul 200519 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Nov 2024Nov 2024LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature

:



Quote: My Uncle Harry "You have a strange and almost unique way of working if you're putting firm plans together, including a contaminated land assessment at this stage in discussions. The most people tend to do is make a quick assessment for the potential for contamination based on the lands previous use rather than the expense of full assessments as without knowing where the buildings are, an assessment's isn't even possible to assess if it's suitable.
At this stage, most schemes use generic building costs until much later in the process. To do otherwise doesn't make business sense.
I suspect the schemes you're talking of are further down the line and more simple.'"

Not at all. If you're going to bid on a site, you need to know how much money you'll make before deciding on the level of bid. You can't do that without working up the site plans, estimating "abnormal" build costs, assessing cost of highways reconfiguration if necessary, but importantly understanding the size and configuration of the income-generating commercial units, which, for this project, sounds like a supermarket at least. Your "have a bit of a guess, but get on with giving him the stadium" approach invites precisely the risk, which is a big one, (that I talked about earlier and you conveniently ignored). Allam gets the stadium for nowt and builds the extension to the KC. He then conveniently uncovers land/construction/planning/funding issues down the line which mean he can't build the "Sporting Village" as articulated in the original deal. End product - stadium is in private hands, the council have given away a major asset and the premise for the giveaway never materialises. Often in these sorts of deal, the council would state as part of the arrangement that the Village has to be up and running before the extension to the KC can happen to avoid the obligations being avoided later on when the primary objective of the whole thing, in this case the acquisition of the KC for nothing, has been achieved and the rest can be conveniently parked (as it seems the ice rink and swimming pool already have been).

Quote: My Uncle Harry "As for the rest of it, you're STILL stuck in the belief that the Council should be looking at this as a singular proposal. It's that that makes them and you look very small minded.
What they should be doing is looking to see if there's a way of stitching together the elements of the concept that meet Mr Alams needs with those of the Council.'"

Ultimately there will be a single proposal and it's the job of both parties to produce the most compelling one on which the public can then vote. The Council have already said several times that a project team is in place to support this process of working with Allam to refine the details and options as you suggest, but have not been presented with any plans yet. They have yielded and are taking a reasonable position. The ball couldn't be any more in Allam's court to deliver a proposal on which to proceed.

RankPostsTeam
Club Coach738No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200420 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Feb 2013Feb 2013LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
disney1/Dis83.gif
St Helens and Gateshead fan. You're only called FC, because you know football is far more popular. We'll never be mastered...:disney1/Dis83.gif



Quote: Mrs Barista "Not at all. If you're going to bid on a site, you need to know how much money you'll make before deciding on the level of bid. You can't do that without working up the site plans, estimating "abnormal" build costs, assessing cost of highways reconfiguration if necessary, but importantly understanding the size and configuration of the income-generating commercial units, which, for this project, sounds like a supermarket at least. Your "have a bit of a guess, but get on with giving him the stadium" approach invites precisely the risk, which is a big one, (that I talked about earlier and you conveniently ignored). Allam gets the stadium for nowt and builds the extension to the KC. He then conveniently uncovers land/construction/planning/funding issues down the line which mean he can't build the "Sporting Village" as articulated in the original deal. End product - stadium is in private hands, the council have given away a major asset and the premise for the giveaway never materialises. Often in these sorts of deal, the council would state as part of the arrangement that the Village has to be up and running before the extension to the KC can happen to avoid the obligations being avoided later on when the primary objective of the whole thing, in this case the acquisition of the KC for nothing, has been achieved and the rest can be conveniently parked (as it seems the ice rink and swimming pool already have been).

Ultimately there will be a single proposal and it's the job of both parties to produce the most compelling one on which the public can then vote. The Council have already said several times that a project team is in place to support this process of working with Allam to refine the details and options as you suggest, but have not been presented with any plans yet. They have yielded and are taking a reasonable position. The ball couldn't be any more in Allam's court to deliver a proposal on which to proceed.'"



My experience differs from yours. The first time I saw it in action I was amazed at the lack of detail and assumed it was a one off by a shoddy developer, but it turns out generic costs are certainly the norm at this stage of a proposal. The exception tends to be for competitive bidding and the costs and work involved highlights why it's not done until needed. Had Mr Allam done as you suggest, he'd potentially be millions out of pocket to find out it's a none starter for party political and personality reasons.

As for the rest, you're STILL stuck in the small, offer and accept mindset. It needs more expansive thinkers involved to try to broker the best deal for all. Yes, Mr Allam needs to put more meat on the bones, but rightly or wrongly their seems to have been a clash of personalities involved that prevented more open discussions. What a shame if that kills even the consideration of an opportunity.

As I see it, Mr Allam's sat comfortable and he and his family could sit out their lives without striking another bat. Our representatives in the Council need to find funding to develop Hull and initiate investment to benefit us. The ball sits squarely with the Council. The manner in which the Council are reported to want talks in the media is hardly conducive to encouraging a potential investor. It doesn't put an 'open for business' sign to investors.

RankPostsTeam
Club Owner9673
JoinedServiceReputation
Jan 200421 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jul 2024May 2024LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
8087_1342892330.gif
:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_8087.gif



I love this thread!!

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach29793No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Jul 200519 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Nov 2024Nov 2024LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature

:



Quote: My Uncle Harry "My experience differs from yours. The first time I saw it in action I was amazed at the lack of detail and assumed it was a one off by a shoddy developer, but it turns out generic costs are certainly the norm at this stage of a proposal. The exception tends to be for competitive bidding and the costs and work involved highlights why it's not done until needed. Had Mr Allam done as you suggest, he'd potentially be millions out of pocket to find out it's a none starter for party political and personality reasons..'"

By “it turns out”, I assume you mean “someone on City’s messageboard reckons”. I agree that if the council were not prepared in any way to entertain any development, costs would have been sunk unnecessarily. However, they’ve invited the detail and had more than one meeting with Allam, which suggests they are interested in progressing. Based on this, it’s standard practice to incur initial feasibility costs to enhance chances of a scheme progressing with provision of detail and a business case. In reality what’s happened is that no plans have been presented and Allam has refused to start talks until he’s guaranteed the freehold of the most valuable element of the site. This is beyond unreasonable. We all know it.

Quote: My Uncle Harry " As for the rest, you're STILL stuck in the small, offer and accept mindset. It needs more expansive thinkers involved to try to broker the best deal for all. Yes, Mr Allam needs to put more meat on the bones, but rightly or wrongly their seems to have been a clash of personalities involved that prevented more open discussions. What a shame if that kills even the consideration of an opportunity..'"

No I’m not. If you’d bothered to read what I put, it was that the council don’t have a proposal to discuss on the table but still have a team in place to work up feasibility and consider the various options, to put together the best scheme. Allam has some £3k plans which he won’t share and won’t negotiate until the transfer of the KC is signed off as a pre-requisite to any talks. If the lead on a scheme in my organisation went to a landowner and/or council adopting with an opening gambit of “I’ve got some plans which I’ll not share at this point, but I want half the land for nothing before we start talking” our reputation in the market would be destroyed. It’s a nonsensical position. You might want to dismiss it as a “clash of personalities” but that’s trying to gloss over the ridiculousness of Allam’s upfront demands.
Quote: My Uncle Harry " As I see it, Mr Allam's sat comfortable and he and his family could sit out their lives without striking another bat. Our representatives in the Council need to find funding to develop Hull and initiate investment to benefit us. The ball sits squarely with the Council. The manner in which the Council are reported to want talks in the media is hardly conducive to encouraging a potential investor. It doesn't put an 'open for business' sign to investors.'"

And the Council are "sat comfortable" on an asset that costs nothing to maintain and provides a home to the city’s main professional sporting clubs. We’ve established so far that in the recent meeting the swimming pool and ice rink were regarded as expendable by Allam in face of the apparently "new information" that there are already facilities in place nearby, so from their point of view, the development opportunity vs the original Sporting Village concept is unclear, apart from the supermarket. The ball is therefore in Allam’s court to provide something, anything, to frame the discussion. Hull City Council btw have a decent reputation in encouraging development from a property perspective. Can’t see at all that them struggling to negotiate with a proposer who won’t start talking until he’s guaranteed the freehold of the main element of the land would mean any serious developer would be put off.

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach811No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Sep 200717 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Nov 2020Nov 2020LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature

:



Even i have "lost the will to live" on my own thread.

Mrs B....give up......Arry obviously doesn't have a life and is completely unable to accept defeat on the matter. icon_rolleyes.gif

RankPostsTeam
Club Coach738No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200420 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Feb 2013Feb 2013LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
disney1/Dis83.gif
St Helens and Gateshead fan. You're only called FC, because you know football is far more popular. We'll never be mastered...:disney1/Dis83.gif



Quote: Mrs Barista "By “it turns out”, I assume you mean “someone on City’s messageboard reckons”. I agree that if the council were not prepared in any way to entertain any development, costs would have been sunk unnecessarily. However, they’ve invited the detail and had more than one meeting with Allam, which suggests they are interested in progressing. Based on this, it’s standard practice to incur initial feasibility costs to enhance chances of a scheme progressing with provision of detail and a business case. In reality what’s happened is that no plans have been presented and Allam has refused to start talks until he’s guaranteed the freehold of the most valuable element of the site. This is beyond unreasonable. We all know it.

No I’m not. If you’d bothered to read what I put, it was that the council don’t have a proposal to discuss on the table but still have a team in place to work up feasibility and consider the various options, to put together the best scheme. Allam has some £3k plans which he won’t share and won’t negotiate until the transfer of the KC is signed off as a pre-requisite to any talks. If the lead on a scheme in my organisation went to a landowner and/or council adopting with an opening gambit of “I’ve got some plans which I’ll not share at this point, but I want half the land for nothing before we start talking” our reputation in the market would be destroyed. It’s a nonsensical position. You might want to dismiss it as a “clash of personalities” but that’s trying to gloss over the ridiculousness of Allam’s upfront demands.
And the Council are "sat comfortable" on an asset that costs nothing to maintain and provides a home to the city’s main professional sporting clubs. We’ve established so far that in the recent meeting the swimming pool and ice rink were regarded as expendable by Allam in face of the apparently "new information" that there are already facilities in place nearby, so from their point of view, the development opportunity vs the original Sporting Village concept is unclear, apart from the supermarket. The ball is therefore in Allam’s court to provide something, anything, to frame the discussion. Hull City Council btw have a decent reputation in encouraging development from a property perspective. Can’t see at all that them struggling to negotiate with a proposer who won’t start talking until he’s guaranteed the freehold of the main element of the land would mean any serious developer would be put off.'"



The childish comment about 'someone on a Hull City message board' is wrong. To assume it's a football v rl issue also shows a limited and inaccurate perception.

It's interesting you see the stadium as an asset. Due to the money that will need spending on it and the area, it could be seen as a liability. It's also only worth anything as an asset if its value can be realised.

As for the stance about needing the freehold, that in itself shouldn't be an end to talks. There are ways of encouraging negotiations without having to commit to that.

I keep saying I'm neither for or against either party. I just want to see avenues explored rather than dismissed out of hand for the wrong reasons. If reports are to be believed, the Council has no problem in gifting assets to Mr Alam, they supposedly offered Costello, so the issue seems to be on the specific asset. As they're our representatives, I don't think it's unreasonable for them to make clear what their alternative intentions for the site are.

RankPostsTeam
Club Coach738No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200420 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Feb 2013Feb 2013LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
disney1/Dis83.gif
St Helens and Gateshead fan. You're only called FC, because you know football is far more popular. We'll never be mastered...:disney1/Dis83.gif



Quote: VoiceOfReason "Even i have "lost the will to live" on my own thread.

Mrs B....give up......Arry obviously doesn't have a life and is completely unable to accept defeat on the matter.
I'll accept defeat when it arrives. Just as long as you realise having a different perspective than a few posters on here doesn't make me wrong. icon_rolleyes.gif

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach29793No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Jul 200519 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Nov 2024Nov 2024LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature

:



Quote: VoiceOfReason "Even i have "lost the will to live" on my own thread.

Mrs B....give up......Arry obviously doesn't have a life and is completely unable to accept defeat on the matter. Tend to agree. In summary as I see it, the council have called Allam's bluff on bringing forward a proposal to discuss. No sign of one yet. As said, if the lead on a scheme in my organisation went to a landowner and/or council adopting with an opening gambit of “I’ve got some plans which I’ll not share at this point, but I want half the land for nothing before we start talking” our reputation in the market would be destroyed. Ball's in his court. If this scheme is so compelling for him, the council, the developers with their margins to satisfy and the people of Hull, the refined proposal worked up in conjunction with the council will be a no-brainer for the electorate. icon_lol.gif

328 posts in 23 pages 
<<   PREV  NEXT   >>
Subscribe | Moderators: Admin, Kosh , Roland_R , Karen
328 posts in 23 pages 
<<   PREV  NEXT   >>
Subscribe | Moderators: Admin, Kosh , Roland_R , Karen



All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.

Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.

RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.

Copyright 1999 - 2024 RLFANS.COM

You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.



Please Support RLFANS.COM


7.0595703125:5
RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
1m
Memorable Games
BP1
37
5m
Schoey not a well man
The Biffs Ba
12
10m
DoR - New Coach - Investor & Adam - New signings
Hasbag
3744
18m
ALL NEW 49ERS ERA LEEDS UTD THREAD
The Biffs Ba
2564
24m
Pre Season - 2025
mwindass
142
38m
IMG scores
Butcher
261
45m
Game - Song Titles
Wanderer
40565
46m
BORED The Band Name Game
Wanderer
63058
47m
Film game
Wanderer
5264
Recent
Call for funds
Hudd-Shay
183
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
15s
Recruitment rumours and links
Or thane
3541
16s
2025 Season tickets
Trojan Horse
195
17s
ALL NEW 49ERS ERA LEEDS UTD THREAD
The Biffs Ba
2564
18s
Game - Song Titles
Wanderer
40565
26s
IMG
karetaker
79
28s
IMG scores
Butcher
261
35s
Schoey not a well man
The Biffs Ba
12
36s
Pre Season - 2025
mwindass
142
37s
Rumours and signings v9
NSW
28868
46s
Call for funds
Hudd-Shay
183
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
A Year to Remember
Zig
1
TODAY
2025 Annual
JamieRobinso
1
TODAY
2025 KIT Thread
Sadfish
1
TODAY
NRL Kick Off Rules
stpatricks
7
TODAY
Garry Schofield
PopTart
6
TODAY
Out of contract 2025
Wires71
8
TODAY
Gary Scofield
Rugby Raider
8
TODAY
Joe Phillips
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Andy Ellis
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Manoa Wacokecoke
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Jeylan Hodgson
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Mackenzie Harman
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Ben Dent
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Callum Rutland
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Harry Aldous
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Jack Aldous
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Garry Schofield
karetaker
12
TODAY
Lennon Bursell
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Brett Ferres
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Reece Dean
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Alex Holdstock
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Thomas Minns
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Josh Guzdek
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Jamie Shaul
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Ben Hodder
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Tom Halliday
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Scott Taylor appointed as Head Coach
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Schoey not a well man
The Biffs Ba
12
TODAY
Guess whos backtrying anyway
Bullseye
4
TODAY
Welcome on board
Sadfish
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS
England Beat Samoa To Take Tes..
852
England's Women Demolish The W..
673
England Beat Samoa Comfortably..
962
Operational Rules Tribunal –..
758
IMG-RFL club gradings released..
1048
Wakefield Trinity Win Champion..
1555
Hunslet Secure Promotion After..
1789
Trinity Into Play Off Final Af..
2058
Wigan Warriors Crowned Champio..
1646
York Valkyrie Win Back to Back..
1885
Hunslet Book Relegation Play O..
2271
Penrith Panthers Secure Fourth..
1808
Wigan Humiliate Leigh For Gran..
1891
Hull KR Survive Warrington Fig..
2049
Warrington Wolves Break Saints..
2203