The HDM....font of all knowledge

You didn't make it up Mrs B, that statement actually went to print, I'm reading it now in yesterdays paper. Looking forward to reading Charlies retraction tonight

Yes, although we (or certainly I) have a policy of not discussing its specifics, for fear of getting into trouble.

I accept that Hull FC have made a tremendous success of their move to the KC. And they pay the equivalent of a commercial rent. If that rumour is accurate, then they do not IMO have a commercial rent agreement. Or at best, it is unusual and was generous - given that your average in your last season at the Boulevard was seven thousand. Of course, as I say, you grabbed a golden opportunity, to the extent that it is perhaps now a 'millstone'. I hope Rovers can to some extent emulate that. Imitation as flattery and all that.

As far as I'm aware, and despite the information that was allegedly removed from the HDM report (missed it myself), Rovers have not got an equivalent deal. The council are just showing us a little of the faith they showed in you.

I'm starting to lose track of the beef here. Are we ripping off council tax payers, or are we getting a more favourable deal compared to Hull? Who brought Hull's deal into this? Why?

When I consider the way the city council toss money around, I don't care if we have taken £4M out of the purse, although this would appear to not be the case. As long as we get improvements to the ground, I'm not bothered. I pay more taxes (nationally & locally) than the GDP of some African nations, its about time I saw something other than the odd dustbin collection for my hard earned.

I don't care if this upsets folk, I dont care if we pay "peppercorn" rent, I dont care if we have had a hand out or a leg up or any other anatomy-related jibe. We are getting a better ground, that's the end result, and it still wont persuade some Hull fans to attend derbies at Craven Park ("I'm not giving Hudge a penny of my cash"). Well 3,000 Rovers fans thankfully didn't take this attitude to the testimonial last January. Small minded?

In a nutshell, I think you'll find the general consensus is that Rovers fans begrudge anything hull achieve and hull fans begrudge anything Rovers achieve. It's a recurring theme...

You are probably on the money there. I don't begrudge Hull the KC personally, why would I? Its a nice ground, smack in the middle of their traditional territory. It would now appear the same will be true for Rovers (although we could debate the location of NCP as its not where it should be!).

The 3,000 Rovers fans weren't asked to pay nearly double what was asked of fans from all other clubs for their seats.

True, but that's not what I'm referring to here. I agree that the South Stand is bobbins, but I am referring to several comments passed since Monday that imply that even with new facilities, they won't be setting foot inside Craven Park (examples below). Do you consider that continuing attitude small minded?

Hull requested the south terrace because they wanted more tickets than Rovers' normal away allocation (2/3 of the north stand). I'd like to think Hull's reasoning behind this was to provide more tickets to their fans, but the cynic in me thinks the extra rake off they'd earn from the ticket sales might have made the decision a little easier. From Rovers' point of view, they didn't want to be out of pocket by selling hull fans 50% more tickets but charging 50% less for them.

Personally, I didn't think it was particularly fair on the fans, but I can see why both clubs thought it was the only way to go. End of the day, it's another reason why it's high-time Craven Park was brought up to scratch and hopefully these issues will be a thing of the past.