You're right! I guess you'd be a bit of an expert on civil law, ex-Councillor Webster. I believe unlawful discrimination under the terms the Disability Discrimination Act would also be covered by civil law?

rlhttp://www.choicesandrights.org.uk/webdocs/docs/pdf/press_release_final.pdfrl

I think road rage, thoughhttp://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-15420044.htmlrl

is a criminal offence?

People who lend money in "wanting it paying back at a reasonable rate of return and over an affordable period" shocker.

What makes you doubt Hull FC's shareholder's intentions?

You've been keeping your powder dry.



There isn't even any evidence that your assessment is accurate. The RFL and fans generally want better facilities. See Wakey and Salford's efforts to build new stadia. Look at the upturn in support after Hull's move to the KC. Aim high (especially if you can persuade someone else to help foot the bill), but have a plan B (ie cutting costs).



Setting aside the franchise criterion and trying look at your question dispassionately - do Rovers need the new the North Stand?
Certainly better facilities would be very desirable, but the issue of capacity is valid. Will better facilities bring in more fans rather than just making the existing ones more comfortable? I can't see a massive upturn in away support as it is the journey which is a turn off for many I suspect. Certainly there is a shortage of available covered seating with an unobstructed view. The effect of the new east stand extension will be interesting, but won't be very informative in that respect. There is just no way of knowing without building it.

To put the losses into a different context. Rovers spend near the cap. Knock £200k of the wage bill and they'd still be competitive. If you can then get just £30 more from each existing, regularly-attending fan each year (about 60p/week), you are at break-even. There is potential to improve the merchandizing and retail side of things. If trimming the squad budget for a couple of years to invest in the business, as helpful Hull fans have selflessly suggested, that'd be fine by me. Difficult to balance on a 3 year license, but it used to be one year at a time, so can't complain. Self-funding major stadium improvements is always going to be a big ask without a strong commercial case, but if everybody else finds 'partners' Rovers need to too.

Were rovers near the cap last year? There have been contract increases for a number of players, 3 new players in on lower end contracts plus clinton's imminent arrival on a fair wedge. That all in must be £250k ish. Do you think the players who have left were on that much?

"Hudgell says he took the decision to publicly talk about KR's financial plight in a bid to highlight the need to develop Craven Park"

Nowt to do with Look North's feature, then? He'll be citing image rights as a reason not to file accounts next, oh, hang on...

If Rovers are trying to strong-arm them into giving them some money, the council should consider that if there was a compelling business case for the ground extensions, the funding woud have been forthcoming already in line with the 2008 franchise application and you would be kicking off 2010 in a 14,000 stadium.

They would need to consider that if East Hull is so deprived of "facilities" whether they could be provided at a better, more accessible, more cost-effective alternative location. Investing in a stand at Craven Park wouldn't provide many financial benefits to the local community other than a few short term building jobs and a handful of back office staff if demand picked up a bit, plus maybe pub landlords would see an upside.

Nah, gotta look at it from another angle.

Nothing. I was pointing out that however you dress it up it is a debt and has to be paid back. As you so rightly point out they are getting interest on their loans.

COME ON OUT KOSH....WE KNOW YOU'RE IN THERE !!!!!

you are obviously speaking from personal experience

Mine was better