: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:33 am  

Explain?

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:34 am  

Do we really need to get into the 'city v FC' bollox again?

We havent got a test match here, so what!

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:38 am  

Course we do Dave it should be here end of.
It isnt so we post in this thread to voice our anger. You dont have to read it dave do you ??

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:41 am  

Coach wrote:

Course we do Dave it should be here end of.
It isnt so we post in this thread to voice our anger. You dont have to read it dave do you ??

Then talk about the merits of having a test match, not slagging between FC and City, its very boring now.

Voice your anger all you want, the decision wont be changed and we havent got a test match. Ive got better things to do with my time! (apparently im at work!!)

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:49 am  

I think where all meant to be working Dave its just that if people didnt make stupid decisions we'd never have anything to talk about on here anyway and all our work would be up to date

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:15 am  

Sexual Deviant wrote:

Having considered the aforementioned, i know a lot of you have shouted down MUH, but he's right when he says an awful lot of you need to be in posession of valid facts instead of letting your obvious anti-football bile cloud your judgement.

Let's say for argument's sake, we got the game at the KC, and it's England versus Australia. England turn up, all bullish and bristling with intent, Australia turn up quietly, looking a bit half-ar$ed. By half time Australia are 30-40 points to the good, a capacity crowd are more than a tad cheesed off, and vow never to waste an evening in such a way again.

The simple fact of the matter is RL fills the KC once, maybe twice a year. Football is filling it twice a month. This immediately blows the 'blow to the local economy' argument clean out the water.

One way to demonstrate to the SMC (not Duffen, the SMC) that RL can be a commercially viable activity is to fill the ground this Friday. Will it happen? I think we know the answer.

Ask yourself this question......"I wonder what would be the 'state of play' if there were two soccer teams and only one RL team in the city"? Then sit back and think about it.

Answer.........You will probably realise that there are just as many rugby fans as there are soccer. OK, Hull FC only have an average of around 13,000 supporters and then theres a few thousand more that turn up for the 'bigger' games. So.....unless you choose to bury the fact that Hull City have a mostly 'fickle glory seeking following' (YES.....ITS TRUE) that have jumped on the premiership bandwagon, you will remember the days when BOTH Hull and Rovers had bigger and louder crowds than City could only dream of! Most 'new Tigers fans' will no doubt be getting mummy to wash their Liverpool. Newcastle and Man U shirts.....'just in case'!!!!

This City has always been a Rugby League nest.......and this fact should be respected by the 'fly-by-nights' that come and go while in charge of the lesser loved club!

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:33 am  

Sexual Deviant wrote:

Having considered the aforementioned, i know a lot of you have shouted down MUH, but he's right when he says an awful lot of you need to be in posession of valid facts instead of letting your obvious anti-football bile cloud your judgement.

Let's say for argument's sake, we got the game at the KC, and it's England versus Australia. England turn up, all bullish and bristling with intent, Australia turn up quietly, looking a bit half-ar$ed. By half time Australia are 30-40 points to the good, a capacity crowd are more than a tad cheesed off, and vow never to waste an evening in such a way again.

The simple fact of the matter is RL fills the KC once, maybe twice a year. Football is filling it twice a month. This immediately blows the 'blow to the local economy' argument clean out the water.

One way to demonstrate to the SMC (not Duffen, the SMC) that RL can be a commercially viable activity is to fill the ground this Friday. Will it happen? I think we know the answer.

you mean bandwagon jumpers

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:54 pm  

I think Mr Duffen spat his dummy out over the RL international because he'd just been skanked by Fulham for £5m and then been told the player wasn't insured because it had happened before and was therefore a pre existing condition.
Doubt his mood will have improved after watching his team lose to the team he'd rather be chairman of.

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:57 pm  

Zaphod wrote:

I think Mr Duffen spat his dummy out over the RL international because he'd just been skanked by Fulham for £5m and then been told the player wasn't insured because it had happened before and was therefore a pre existing condition.
Doubt his mood will have improved after watching his team lose to the team he'd rather be chairman of.

Think you maybe right..we won't have this problem next season when they are back in the championship

: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:33 pm  

Can't for the life of me see why people think this is a Hull City thing. Every other stadium booked for the tournement has either a football or RU team playing during a winter season.
Speaking of the venues though, the RFL really do think small time. Aus vs NZ at the Stoop? Last time they played in London they got a bigger crowd than the capacity of the Stoop. Donny, Wigan and Hudds? I must have imagined the game at the COM which attracted 39k not so long back, and the fact that they sold out Elland Road before. The RFL are too obsessed with getting a full stadium for internationals. Why not hold the England games against NZ and Aus at Anfield and Elland Road with the final at the COM? If they don't sell out, so what. They will get bigger crowds than the venues they are hosted at now. The France game is never going to get a big crowd up north, for me it has expansion written all over it. Could at played it in Nottingham, Leicester or Birmingham to test the water there.
Also think think they should have had the NZ vs Aus game at Craven Cottage. Decent size crowd and will acommidate the crowd quite well.