: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:58 pm  

Like everyone else, am truly gutted at the news, found it a brilliant and unique experience going to an international game at KC. Was great for the city having extra TV coverage, + attracting fans from other clubs too.
If it is to do with Hull City getting preferential treatment it's an absolute disgrace, and (if it were possible) the decision should be reversed.

As someone as said, you just know that all efforts would be made to accomodate an England U21 international, even though these lost their novelty appeal very quickly (unlike the RL games which maintained 20,000+ crowds), with I think the last one drawing less then 10,000.

Either way, the RL community of Hull is missing out, very wrong IMO.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:02 pm  

The Video Ref wrote:

Sending Duffen or the Council 'outrage' e mails is not going to achieve anything.

We need to know why this decision was taken, if it was taken because of a valid reason then I can respect that.

If it has been taken for the benefit of Hull City AFC then serious questions need to be answered about how our 'community'stadium is being run.

I didn't send e-mails to achieve anything, I sent them to vent my feelings and frustrations on Duffen denying the venue and going into hiding by not being 'available for comment' to explain his reasoning behind the decision.

By doing that it's only reasonable to assume/conclude that due to his very deep involvement with 'City' that it may have been made to favour City.
And I still feel that the council should have some power to over rule Duffens decision on the basis of it being a benefit to the whole of the community to have the game here.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:11 pm  

me 'n' our kid wrote:

I didn't send e-mails to achieve anything, I sent them to vent my feelings and frustrations on Duffen denying the venue and going into hiding by not being 'available for comment' to explain his reasoning behind the decision.

By doing that it's only reasonable to assume/conclude that due to his very deep involvement with 'City' that it may have been made to favour City.
And I still feel that the council should have some power to over rule Duffens decision on the basis of it being a benefit to the whole of the community to have the game here.

Hear hear! Well said!

you can sit back and say it won't do any good and you are probably right but the Council is elected by the people to ensure that the people get a fair share of the services on offer. Do you honestly think that if it had been a Football International it would have been refused without any explaination to the City fans? I doubt it!

I have written to the leader of the council for no other reason than that it made me feel better!

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:25 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Feel free to come up with a possible scenario where that would be true.

One possible scenario? There's plenty, but that would put in the realms of the weak and feeble minded jumping to conclusions and half cocked theories on here. Seriously, if you can't even see the obvious two, then there's precious little wonder you're not understanding the situation and blaming football.

I've done none of the above.
Bravo. Now go tell everyone else how silly they're being.

It's good for the city to hold big events. True, but this isn't really all that big outside of the M62 is it.
It's also great for local fans to be able to see an international in their local stadium. If you can't see that then you really do have your soccer blinkers on. But others are claiming that this is a hotbed of RL, surely it's better to have it an hour down the road in a bigger ground so more of them can see it? The equivalent in Union would fill the KC more than three times over.


I haven't blamed anyone for anything, other than registering disappointment that the council couldn't step in to sort something out. There may be a perfectly valid reason for this decision, but as yet nobody has come up with one. I admire your optimism, but question the logic of asking one of the opponents of teh whole stadium concept for their support.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:44 pm  

[quote="My Uncle Harry"][/quote]Bloody soccer sheep!!!!!!!!

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:45 pm  

The Dentist Wilf wrote:

Hear hear! Well said!

you can sit back and say it won't do any good and you are probably right but the Council is elected by the people to ensure that the people get a fair share of the services on offer. Do you honestly think that if it had been a Football International it would have been refused without any explaination to the City fans? I doubt it!

I have written to the leader of the council for no other reason than that it made me feel better!

Exactly Wilf, the other thing is, if the SMC was independant from either club then I believe that it would have gone ahead without any problems, in fact it should be independant so it can be promoted better.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:55 pm  

me 'n' our kid wrote:

Exactly Wilf, the other thing is, if the SMC was independant from either club then I believe that it would have gone ahead without any problems, in fact it should be independant so it can be promoted better.

The SMC is independent.
Also, FC had the opportunity to have more of an input when it was first muted but declined, why should the format be changed because someone on an internet form thinks it could possibly be a football reason why a pseudo International game looks to be not taking place there causing the Rugby mad fans the possibility of a one hour journey instead?

Perhaps you'd have been better holding your tongue until the facts were better known?

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:05 pm  

[quote="My Uncle Harry"]The SMC is independent.
Also, FC had the opportunity to have more of an input when it was first muted but declined, why should the format be changed because someone on an internet form thinks it could possibly be a football reason why a pseudo International game looks to be not taking place there causing the Rugby mad fans the possibility of a one hour journey instead?

Perhaps you'd have been better holding your tongue until the facts were better known?[/quote]


And perhaps you had best keep you mouth shut trying to make excuses and speaking for Duffen, these are our views on the matter that have no concern to you, and frankly my dear I couldn't give a toss what your views are.
Until Duffen becomes 'available to comment' and gives reasoned and valid arguement as to why he made the decision, whatever you say means 'Jack Schitt' on here sunshine.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:05 pm  

How can an international match be classed as being "not really all that big outside the m62"?

I didn't realise it stretched that far, i always thought it stopped just past Manchester.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:15 pm  

me 'n' our kid wrote:

My Uncle Harry wrote:

The SMC is independent.
Also, FC had the opportunity to have more of an input when it was first muted but declined, why should the format be changed because someone on an internet form thinks it could possibly be a football reason why a pseudo International game looks to be not taking place there causing the Rugby mad fans the possibility of a one hour journey instead?

Perhaps you'd have been better holding your tongue until the facts were better known?[/quote]


And perhaps you had best keep you mouth shut trying to make excuses and speaking for Duffen, these are our views on the matter that have no concern to you, and frankly my dear I couldn't give a toss what your views are.
Until Duffen becomes 'available to comment' and gives reasoned and valid arguement as to why he made the decision, whatever you say means 'Jack Schitt' on here sunshine.

'Sunshine'

I see you ignored the suggestion to read the posts again minus the small minded attitude you suffer from.

I'm not speaking on behalf of Duffen, I'm simply pointing out that you're running off at the mouth without having ANY facts at all. That's the mark of a fool.

Besty, if there's really such an interest as you claim, the KC far too small for it.