rlMore southern taxpayers money asked for for t'norf????rl

Why don't you just ground share????

There aren't any Union clubs quite close enough and to be honest the name Ionians RL doesn't appeal to me.

I do appreciate the part the southern taxpayers played in making our local telecoms company such a success though.

Apart from the fact it is very specifically 'K-u-Hull money', it isn't like London never gets any public investment is it? The government never even considered backing an Hull bid for the Olympics - harrumph.

you muppett

didnt think you bothered on here anymore?

Haven't any of your fans noticed there's a recession on?

far more important things for public cash to be spent on, and I'd include HullFC's training ground as an 'unnecessary' use of public funds also before anyone pipes up. The KC was built after a very unique sell off of public shares, and in a far different economic climate.

Most ironic post ever.

As a point of pedantry, the UK returned to positive growth at the end of last year. The country is still skint, though, and there is the possibility of a double dip.

To be honest, I don't mind Hull fans objecting (ideally on the Hull board, if they are going to be [ivery[/i sour, which tbf your post isn't). What galls me a bit is the combination of a 'should have taken the offer to use the Casey', with 'a missed the boat', 'had their chance' attitude that suggests, to me, you'd prefer Rovers not to play a better stadium - perish the thought.

just had a similar arguement with my father who is staunch fc, and he too is of the the opinion that we made our own bed and should lie in in it.
this is a all too common attitude, one which i believe to be wrong.
anything that contributes to making the city of hull better should be fully supported.
and having 3 top flight teams(or close to in city`s case) should be maintained and have backing,
city failed in their first foray in the prem for a few reasons, but some of which was the backroom politics that control our city.
hundreds of thousands was spent and wasted on a huge big screen tv(now removed)
hundreds of thousands was spent on daft 2ft high frogs..... Why?

the list can go on and on as where money is wasted .

Indeed, but I don't see in these challenging times what the compelling business case is for a new stadium for Rovers. Your crowds have stagnated, despite what the graph in your commercial brochure suggests. You can say "build it and they will come", but when looking at capital investment, you need to assess risk. Say the council spends £20m on a new stadium and crowds don't increase, which is a reasonable possibility given historical crowd sizes. It would be an extremely high profile embarrassment for the council. I suspect the council will step in to fund current plans as Rovers are unable to fulfil what they promised in the franchise application, but would be staggered if they chose to build a new stadium.

I can understand why Rovers chose not to use the KC, the location was completely unsuitable. And to be honest you'd have probably experienced declining gates if not gone bust altogether. The Rovers 'revival' was built on all the 'Pride Of East Hull' stuff...something you coulden't have done being based in WEST park.

Rovers do have to take some of the blame though, the predecessors who built a completely ridiculous ground (2 stands facing the wind, a school pitch without drainage, out in the middle of nowhere) are the real villains of the piece. Had Rovers built a 80's version of the Halliwell Jones this whole issue would have been avoided. Glanford Park is of similar age and size but has lasted much better.

overall my issue is that while cuts are being considered to the Police, education, health etc I find it completely inappropriate for a council to be handing out cash to a private sports club.

Sorry. I have to take issue with this.
















They're toads.

Aye, the late eighties Wright Group were the absolute villains of the piece as far as we're concerned.

Hull can't surely justify spending money on our ground.



I haven't seen any of them yet, I like the idea though, might get one me sen with my slapped arris face on it.

Hey, leave Rolf alone!

I'd agree with that. Crowds have stagnated, but have done so at close to capacity of the best bits of the ground. The further extension of the East Stand will provide 'more' and the new North Stand would provide 'better'. That would represent a very positive result IMO.

I definately see the arguments about the principle of public 'gifts' to private companies, but as rival RL clubs have benefitted, and with altruism so rarely trumping self interest, Rovers would be very unwise to make themselves the exception.

I think if the council funded the new North stand and a better arrangement at the South (not sure what but closer to the pitch and covered)that would be a great result and nowhere near the £20m bandied around. Rovers do not need a new stadium and council funding for one I think would be extremely unlikely.

The council could stipulate that a certain percentage (say at least 80%) of the work must be carried out by local companies, thus keeping the benefits of the investment in the local area providing/sustaining jobs and helping to keep council tax coming into the council's coffers.