Put a pack of Menos in Hudge's Diet Coke and it fizzed all over his brand new John Smedley jumper.

Hudge went chicken oriental and Kung Fu chopped Alby right on the corn rows, Alby went off in a strop and chucked Mike's Remington out the window.

don't disagree with anything you say in your second sentence but to say it was not for financial reasons they took the decision to suspend him at that point in your season, that is naïve, rovers saw a way out of the rest of his contract without paying him off they couldn't play him if that was there intention after they suspended him or they would have deemed to have put the matter to bed but by keeping him on suspension and then sacking him they walk away without comp, but was it the right decision? would he have made the difference in those last few games? I think he would so to me it was a poor call and may have cost you your SL place and financially a million quid one of a string of stinking calls made by your management team in my opinion, but if you genuinely think it was the right call fair enough like ou say its your club this is just a discussion forum that's all

Thought as much.

But he was such that the entire squad basically refused to play with him so the suspension ( which even with hindsight) was absolutely the right call. I'm not having the cash argument, this was about principles and not allowing someone to do what they liked without consequences.

Knew alf macklin through local darts in 2000s very good chucker and a good bloke.dont really remember his playing days tho.

Craig, he worked with my wife at Akzo Nobel, he was a great darts player, as you say. As a winger he was my favourite player when I was a kid, simply because the first game my father took me to was versus Rovers in the mid 70's and Super Alf scored the match winner in the far corner late on in the game.

Cheers for reply,I had a similar first game experience and George Fairbairn was my hero.happy days

It is easy to slag off our management (you're an FC supporter, it's your default setting), but doing so from a position of not knowing all the facts seems a bit stupid.

Kelly's actions backed us into a corner. I won't go into what they may or may not have been, but they were more than pitching up late to the most important game in our season (if that doesn't set alarm bells ringing?) Even if our management wanted to smooth it over they couldn't, as the playing squad refused to play alongside him anymore. That makes it a lot less about money and more that his position was untenable.

Kelly should he remain fit will give you a good season and should compliment Sneyd well. I am sure that he works out as an attractive gamble, as his actions most probably mean he will be a lot cheaper than before and he will have to play out of his skin next year or contemplate a career away from rugby. After year one I would be wary of any contract that doesn't impose harsh penalties on indiscretions (he has mugged off 3 clubs in 6 years now.)

can not disagree with some of what you say here its the right approach with this player who you rightly point out has a great 1st year and then goes off the wall but I don't buy into the all the players would not play with him rubbish it was probably led by a couple of senior players, there's no proof of that other than it been said by your management team and lets face they would say that wouldn't they, it detracts from there decision get rid rightly or wrongly

I believe although I don't know Kelly had probably had a few discipline issues during the season, and this was "coming back late" the final straw for Peacock so he used it as a way to sack Kelly and get out of his contract early without having to pay him off he took the gamble with having Campo back you could get through the middle 8s without him, but it went very wrong, Peacock is cutting his teeth in management at your club he will use you to enhance his CV and experience, then when a job comes available he will be off at the first chance its rumoured he applied to Leeds recently his 5 year plan will never be realised by him and lets be honest with a fine coach like Sheens who has all the contacts in Aussy why do you need a rugby manager at championship level its not like he could give Tim any coaching advice or I would say man management advice is it ?

Does anyone actually know?

I've yet to see anyone on here post what has supposedly actually happened (other than the story we were told about him returning from Aus late).

Over the past few weeks some KR fans have alluded to there being something more serious that's gone on with Kelly, perhaps to appear 'in the know', perhaps it's a bit of sour grapes as he's joining FC and they just want to cast that extra bit of doubt in FC fans' minds? Or is it all just pub talk?

Is it as simple as there were numerous breaches of club discipline, and as fc-eaststander says the returning late episode was the final straw?

Hudgell stated just after the event, and before the season ended that it was a lot more than turning up late. I think it was Cooke who said players he's close to in the Rovers squad had told him that the playing staff had had enough and wouldn't play with him. In reality they probably would have if it had come to it but still sounds as if he's gone too far.

My knowledge is only from what has been in the press or what Hudge and Cooke have actually said. I assume the full details were not made available at the time, so as not to prejudice any legal action from either side.

A lot of this was mentioned before FC showed any interest, so I don't think it's sour grapes. It also seems that Hull are going into this with their eyes wide open.

If you get the Dr Jekyll player he can be, with Sneyd organising and a dominant pack he will go really well. If you get the Mr Hyde signing he can also be overweight and injured due to poor fitness.

Chief, just because you keep making the same three points in your endless posts, it doesn't make them any more valid.

Even though I'll get accused of being a vulture, should we offer Dane Chisholm a way out of the Bradford situation?

After stumbling around naively in our dealings these last few years, I'd almost welcome being accused of vulturism. A bit of ruthlessness would be reassuring. Don't think Chisholm should be a priority, necessarily.

What I don't want to hear from the club is that we're going to do 'the right thing'. Need to focus on what is best (for Rovers). Silence on the matter is fine, also.

On Kelly, I've heard a version of events that seems plausible to me. It's simpler, if not much better, than other things I've seen (and sometimes deleted)on here. I can't show that it is true though, so won't risk libelling him. I also heard one or two anecdotes about him earlier in the season from Hull fans.

If true, it justified and arguably necessitated his suspension. Wouldn't unduly concern me as a Hull fan - your club understand the risk-reward calculation, I'm sure, and I've never believed that rugby players should be role models just because of their job.

I think that the thing that finally turned the players against Kelly after all his misdemeanours was when he turned up ed and late after his official time off before the play-offs.

Ordinarily, this may have been forgiven in any other circumstance .....But, considering that Blair had just lost his brother and Allgood had just lost his grandmother and both decided to concentrate on trying to keep Rovers in the Super League as opposed to taking time off to bereave, I think this is probably the main reason why the players finally turned on Kelly ........Bobby and Mitch decided to help Rovers, even within their hour of adversity ......But, Kelly decided to think only of himself and when Kelly turned up ed and late, this may have been the straw that broke the camels back regarding the player's attitude towards him because if Kelly was a professional and really cared for his fellow players then he would have stood up and been the professional that Bobby and Mitch were .....Maybe the fact that Bobby was forced into the decision of playing such an important game because he didn't have the support of a teammate given the bereavement that he had to deal with was the reason why the rest of the team turned on Kelly .......Maybe the team decided that Kelly's actions placed Bobby in a situation that he shouldn't have been in ........Regardless of this, Bobby and Mitch stood up and showed everybody the true measure of a man!