personally i think Rovers are probably to blame when it comes to giving RH/HDM the facts, the board love to treat us all like mushrooms.

I expect the usual suspects to be on here slating the club for taking this stance, as they did when FC had a similar dispute. Only the other day someone was happily making the point that the sports programme was up for a Sony award.

I still think humberside give rl pretty good coverage as a whole. Once Dobbo is back playing and this thing is put to bed all will be back to normal.
I know a lot don't like Gwillam but at least he reports on rl favourably. All we get ATM is burnsy harping on about city for 90% of sportstalk

Or shorpe united on sports talk to be honest that's got very boring to

after listening to the aftermatch commentary and the comments made by the presenters in the wake of no one on one interview with JM.....

i would also boycott them ....
saying that rovers and jm had thrown the toys out of the pram is hardly being very professional or respectfull for a broadcaster .
But as KCFM no longer do rugby commentary ,people are stuck with them.

Hudgill was unhappy that they reported a story without approaching anyone from Rovers to give their side of it

The Mail & Radio Humberside are not propaganda arms of our clubs, I do not know about the mail but the BBC do pay the RFL (thus our club) to cover the game so to boycot them is a bit silly. Alarm bells start to ring with me when the news in the media is at odds with what the club puts out, As a fan of the game as well as Rovers I would prefer everything to be out in the open, good & bad news. An old adage when the press is full of good news the jails are full of good people.
Slightly off topic there are rumours that the BBC are looking at dumping local coverage of sport (to save money) & shift it all to radio 5 live with a slightly expanded local reporting. I cant see them giving us the coverage we now get from Humberside.

Exactly. Love 'em or loath 'em and I spend more time doing the latter (although I do think they made a sterling effort bringing us the game last night by mobile phone) we really can't afford to lose 'em.

Which is why I think all clubs would be prudent and eventually self-serving by presenting a united front with Humberside until the decisions are made on this. It would be much easier for the top echelons to terminate the future of local sport if the sports editor is at loggerheads with all he represents. Over to you, Burns.

This is a good point.
I wonder how many local stations have been 'banned' by all the clubs they represent in the nearish past (Grimsby Town, Shorpe United, Hull City, Hull FC, Hull Kingston Rovers).
When you think about it that actually takes some doing!!!

P.S I think this was what you meant BTW.

You've got it right, [sizefor once[/size, Roverswall . Sorry if I wasn't too clear.

Try telling Burns that. He constantly displays behaviour that epitomises all you describe above in his abject refusal to take any feedback or criticism on board.

Don't forget, though - he's only transient, unless they axe Humberside Sport, then he'll be the last ever sports editor. Frightening to contemplate, so, much as it guiles me, bridges ought to be constructed with the onerous self-congratulatory egotist.

Either that or as you say ALL the clubs get together and give Humberside an ultimatum being that the clubs will remove all contact from local BBC until Burns and his idiots go.
I can pretty much guarantee if that happened Burns wouldn't see out the week.

Ah, but City love him. Because Carpet would let them walk all over him - he's only obsequious when it comes to them. I remember when he fell out with Duffin the Fool and Pesrson. His voice shook every time 'till they were friends again. Not so with rugby.

Good point.
I suppose that could be where Hudge would come into the equasion with him being on the City board.
That plus Citys bed mates (FC) saying the self same things to them.