[urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18297762[/url

Putting the petty bickering to one side, a capacity of 9k, which in reality will end up being less than that due to last minute non attendees, is a little poor IMO. For a game which could comfortably get double the attendance its going to it does represent some short sightedness or lack of planning from the rovers board.

Either the North stand development should have been better timed or the venue should be switched. For a club who's chairman has openly stated there will be no big signings as finances dictate that belts must be tightened they have passed up the chance to gain in a six figure sum.

As the North Stand build is a 50-52 week project then timing is not part of the equation regarding derby matches, the aim is to have it ready for next season and get the major construction done during the summer/autumn with final internal construction during the late autumn/winter. Looking at the current progress at CP the piling mat is down and the harcore for the access road is compacted so the major construction work can begin shortly.

In theory it would be a bigger crowd, hence bigger cash generater, however there were alot of FC fans threatening to boycott the game on your boards, due to not wanting Hudge/Rovers to make any extra cash, not wanting to see Rovers fans in their seats etc. There were also Rovers fans threatening to boycott due to having bought a pass for Craven Park, not wanting to give up home advantage, worried Fc would gain financially etc.
Non of us are privvy to the rental costs or conditions for us to use the KC, maybe the board have thought the expense involved wasn't worth the risk in terms of financial gain, and loss of home advantage and it's possible effects on the result.
I wonder how many of those threatening to boycott a switched fixture are now the ones berating Rovers for small club mentality for not switching?

I missed the good Friday game (which was due to be at CP) as I booked a holiday around Easter which Hull FC originally had 2 away games. The July game was going to be the home derby for me, now its an away game. I wouldn't boycott any game which my teams was competing in, thats just small mindedness.

Neither would I, however many on the Fc board were threatening to, as were some Rovers fans. The point I was making was, if the Rovers board had picked up on this negativity, maybe they were concerned the risk was not worth it. Imagine the outcry if we lost at the KC, it would have nothing to do with strength of either squad, but be entirely down to the surrendering of home advantage. And like I said, nobody really knows the costs or conditions incurred in a switch,

Was a silly idea to start with.

This.

Quite possibly your shortest and smartest post ever on here.

I see your point.

I also see the paradox of the timing of Hudgells press releases firstly regarding the venue of the derby (the game with the biggest pulling potential) and secondly his bemoaning the lack of finances for marque signings.

I also wouldnt say rovers lose such a great deal (advantage wise) from playing at the KC, your record there before the start of the season was played 6 won 3 in competitive games.

Finally, I would have thought that the relationship that Hudgell has with Allam might have leveraged some benefit with the hire of the stadium (if I am right in thinking that Allam runs the SMC)

Any way, decision made, Hubble telescope on stand by for viewing from the Immingham end

And since the start of the season its played 1 lost 1. This is far more relevant than any history lesson. Rovers are currently far more of a proposition at home than on their travels.

Any idea when tickets go on general sale?

Aw all sold out dave soz FC only Allocated 4 tickets one person to sit on each floodlight, halftime entertainment apparently god knows what they're planning for that



seriously tho I reckon ud only get a few hundred allocated