I think your answer is the question to be honest. Rumours can or cannot come to fruition. I am sure there may be the odd fan on here who may have posted a rumour in the past that maybe didn't happen.
Opinions are similar, sometimes right, other times not. I mean those 500 new season ticket holders hull fc manage to sign up for 2015 (and despite desperate Rovers fans thinking otherwise) your club would, at least equal the number sold last season. Any update on this ?

So let me get this right, another poster calls me mentally defficiant (Staffs FC) I responded back in kind. Another poster asks why I am name calling (& I explained why) another one chimes in with more of the same as if I'm the one who started it..and you're calling me a girl..yup, that's just about the level of integrity on this forum...
I explained why I said what I did in response to Staffs FC getting gobby, I used the same wording and that as far as things go was were it was at until others joined in & started laying blame at my door for name calling when Staffs FC started it.
So if you want to point the whiny biatch finger at someone then point in the direction of the person whom started it..

As for Radford, he's not a forum poster (as far as I know) and what I say about him or anyone else away from the forum is none of your business and not against the forum rules..
and considering what Radford has done so far he hasn't got two braincells with regard to rugby coaching to scratch together..okay..

Jeez!!
I'll leave it for others to decide how embarrassing your girly ranting is becoming.
Go and have a lie down Bumpy.

Do you mean deficient or defecating?

Shhhhhhh!!!!!!!
I've sent Bumpy to beddybyes.

Back on topic, this has said about Micheals playing for Donny today

@PeteSmithYEP: @djb2708 Looked good early on. Caused Leeds problems + set up a try. Think he was rested at half-time though.

Shame we couldn't get another game out of Micheals, would possible add some more pace to our backs, looks certainly look slightly stronger there, spits up to our forwards to beat there's and lay the platform for the halfs.

Agree with that. Wardle and Cudjoe both strong centres and our edge defence has been questionable to say the least.

Asked how Michaels got on on the Donny board



Worthwhile run-out hopefully.

On topic, I'm pretty much with AP on this.

There will (hopefully) be a benefit to the team to play the games in the way we have and Radders will have the first 17 ready for next week, but I can't help feeling that fewer, more focussed games would be better, and that as fans, our attendance isn't needed at them. It's good to see rugby after so long, but if I wanted to see the U19s warm up games I'd move to Hull and go to them at Bishop Burton or wherever.

I don't want us to be underdone, but with the exception of the Rovers game, I can't see what benefit we will have got from, basically, opposed training sessions and I'm worried that we will be. Again.

Would also be interesting to see the overall preseason minutes played by each player in the three/four games. If, say, Ellis has played 80 minutes of the 240 available, yet, say, Turgut has played 120, is that a good use of the games to have Hull FC ready for SL?

And if so, is it worth my time, as a fan, to go and freeze my nuts off to watch? Already wondering if I'll be going to any next year.

nice one,ccs.

Way I see friendlies is we've had the most undisturbed pre season I can recall. Early at that. We've been training well apparently for months using the combinations we're looking at using and to be fair the squads not had a huge overhaul. So we play against lower league n run over them n go through them clinically as you'd hope too. Then against rovers which is as tough n super league like as you'd get for a friendly we carry on and are dominant for a long time so coach I assume is happy with what he's seen and decides he now wants to start his league campaign with a full strength team who are fit n also able to train together right upto the 1st game. If we'd lost sneyd n mini or Ellis the same way as rovers have lost Kelly n larroyer I'd be more upset than seeing the kids get beat at wakey.
What does anyone make of wigans pre season?

Just a few points on this. Firstly, the two concerns that Pearson has are that friendlies either disappoint fans or give them unrealistic expectations. Well, the club haven't exactly helped themselves on that, have they? The determination to crowbar in yet another derby is guaranteeing that at least one friendly will never be fully accepted as the training/preparation exercise that it is. If he genuinely wants friendlies to be seen for what they are, he should ditch it. And unrealistic expectations will always be risked when you field arguably your strongest lineup of preseason against the weakest opposition of the lot. It's practically guaranteed to be a blowout game where you look good and don't really get tested.

Secondly, I don't believe the claim that the Rovers game is the only one that's any good because of the intensity it provides. It's purely and simply money, IMO. It always gets the highest gate and is also the most expensive. The reason it will have been the most intense game is largely (maybe even only) because it was the only one of the 4 preseason games that actually featured close to 2 SL sides for any length of time.

Lastly, I'm not convinced that friendlies are a waste of time, although 4 may be slightly more than necessary. The teams you should be looking at as a yardstick (i.e. those that actually win things, not just the one you're playing first up who happens to fit your point) don't seem to think that way, either. I do lean towards them being a waste of time the way we have used them for the last few years, though. I really don't understand the 'all or nothing' approach we have with first teamers/youngsters. It's supposedly about seeing if the youngsters are ready for SL, but en masse, guess what - they're not. IMO it would be far more sensible and beneficial to be seeing the young players mixed in with the experienced ones, as that is most likely (at least hopefully) how it would happen if they got called up during the season.

The bottom line is that you can only judge how good preseason was once the season pans out. As much as we may question or compliment our approach at this point, it's only the competitive season that will tell us if Radford was right or wrong. The only thing we can then ask is that we learn from the experience. With this and the other Pearson story this morning he seems to be forming his opinion and 'digging his heels in' before actually waiting to see the results/evidence from which to form an opinion.