The point you haven't addressed is whether Hudgell's moral standing can be brought into question by the fact he paid a fee for a convicted violent criminal. Can it, or not?

The point that you are raising that I have not addressed has not been framed as a question previously. I will give you my take on this particular situation that you have raised.

Are you actually seriously suggesting that Neil Hudgell's moral standing can be brought into question because of a single signing made by the club? Not him personally, but by the club! I would, obviously, point out the vast sums of money he has raised and donated to local charities and argue that this certainly impacts on his moral standing or is it more convenient to ignore these facts and focus on a single, albeit potentially quite serious negative.

Regarding the actual signing, yes he would have had to sanction it but it would have been the coaches target, does this mean that the coach is morally questionable? or is it MS who would have secured the signing? is he morally questionable? Are you asking me to condem one person in a group for a decision I did not agree with and one which I did not have full access to the process and thoughts behind?

It would help me frame any future replies if you could confirm if it is the issue of the fee or the violent crime that you take the most exception to? This would allow me a better understanding of your main argument.

I will say that I think it was morally wrong of the CLUB to keep him after his conviction. I personally did not want to be represented by this particular player. However I do understand that if we condem someone perpetually for foolish mistakes then what chance of reform and rehabilitation? If we travel down this dangerous road then as a society it is a short step to what we are currently seeing in the US.

In simple terms, I think the club was morally wrong to keep him after his conviction. However, regarding the resigning I think that the answer is not quite clear cut. Mainly for the reasons stated above. I would be personally reluctant to condem anyone for giving someone a chance at redemption. I would also argue that up to this point BC has repaid the faith shown in him by the club and appears to have done a great deal of maturing.

Regarding comparative morality, and in return for my reply to your question, how do you feel about the people at your club who signed or kept multiple convicted violent criminals? I am not saying your club was wrong for the same reasons I have outlined above but am just interested in your opinion.

Will you love off

So in summary Rovers were morally wrong and as head of it Hudgell sanctions all decisions so DGM may be able to avoid your slander/defamation provocation.

As for Hull FC and Reardon:
"Unbe-fecking-lievable. I am ashamed of all involved in making this signing. You really couldnt make it up.
Mrs Barista • Sat Apr 11, 2009 3:18 pm • Reply with quote"

On Crookes I agreed with FC baldy who said he should be sacked and called out management's apologism.

Pryce and Feka had more distance from their crimes, but the morality was still questionable. Fortunately Feka has won awards for his community work across the city which is outstanding.

Hopefully the RFL will shortly absolve Mr H from any shortcomings in crowd control at the MPG. Once is careless, surely twice would be...?

Do you know for a fact that Hudgell sanctions ALL decisions at the club?

If you read my post you would see I stated I thought it was morally wrong to keep BC after his conviction, but did put caveats that could justify his resigning, you seem to have misunderstood that slightly.

The original post was that DGM should support his statements with facts regarding the individual, at which point you jumped in with a decision made by the club, albeit one NH would have been involved in so my original assertion still stands.

Interesting point regarding Pryce and Feka and lapsed time. What is an appropriate amount of time to sign a player after a conviction for violence? I am not saying Hull were wrong to sign any of these players as once a conviction is spent people must and should have a chance to re-bulid their lives. For me the biggest issue with the Reardon signing was the timing in relation to the laudable stance taken by the club regarding domestic violence.

Again with Hudgell, crowd control at the MPG was poor (I don't want to break the sites swearing policy son had to go with poor), yes in hind sight it was not adequate but can the blame be laid at his door? did he state how many stewards were required or was it the clubs mistake?

Over 5 years without posting and then we're subjected to this.

Mrs b always posts

You only need to look at Hudgell's day job to realise that he is in a highly questionable area regarding morals. As the 9th best ambulance chaser in the country at extracting money from the NHS I'm sure we all have a lot to thank this saintly man for.

His contradictory statements and actions regarding loyalty between club and players are a matter of public record and Larroyer is but one example.

Can we get back onto the subject of Lorroyer please.

Radford said in the press conference yesterday that we are simply helping the bloke out. He's desperate to get back to match fitness and gain a contract with another club, and we are helping him do that. He will play against Donny as a trialist and we are at full cap so unable to sign him even if we wanted to.

Unless a player or 2 go out to Bradford on a season long loan in the next couple of weeks