Yeah they're totally fair points too, just find it frustrating sometimes the negative coverage they give e.g. that business the other year where they were suggesting we had big financial problems then ended up going back on themselves.

The reaction here is a startling contrast to the robust defence of RH over breaking the Cooke story and their editorial commentary around the ridiculous signing of Reardon over the river. Rovers have had a good relationship with RH in the past, in part due to the clear majority of RL commentators on the station being of the red and white persuasion. RH have now sought to address this a bit with giving Craig Murdock a bigger role, which coincides with Gwilym Lloyd being off sick also. Burnsy is a mischief-maker, he did it with Reardon, he's now doing it over the Tongan passport. Whilst I understand your annoyance at the fun-poking, as it's uncomfortable, a) it's the same for both sides and there were several threads on here enjoying it when the boot was on the other foot, and b) it's a genuine story.

Not sure about the HDM really. Again, they are interested in a big story and broke the Dobson deregistration, which, like it or not, is a fairly big story. I don't see some sort of negative theme by them on Rovers though.

I find it pretty annoying when FC take their bat and ball home with the local media and in the long run I don't think it serves much purpose other than to limit opportunities to use the media to your advantage when you get a good news story you want to milk.

Think will be probably be because when all the Dobson/Mason visa scandle went on you had people from humberside on the radio interviewing RFL officials. The interviews won't have being the sour point to Rovers it will have being the negative questions that Humberside where asking the RFL official regards the rules of the game and insinuating that it's illegal at every corner. Not once where they sticking up for Rovers but constantly giving negative questions to the RFL to make the situation look as bad as possible to gain a few viewers at the expense of Rovers.

Now as a viewer of local radio that really ed me off.

I'm thinking it might be because when Humberside first 'broke' the Dobson/Mason story they suggested Dobson had been released and continued to do so for an hour or so. Surely as any good media type should have done, they would have contacted the club first before jumping the gun.

Do you not just think that it may be because to everyone, other than Rovers and the RFL, the whole de-registration saga left a sour taste?

Oh, and Easty, now you know how we feel about them. Get well soon, Gwillym.

Until we get a reporter that knows anything about the game, Im afraid we will be stuck with this negative reporting. Hull FC for the last 30 years have had two die hard fans with knowledge of the game reporting for them. We seem to get any one who is out of a job.

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.