Sport
Features
Interactive
Sport Hull | Forum
FANZONE
FORUM > > | Author | Message |
StuRowson  |  Nov 27 2007, 09:59 AM |
 Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | It's been a cracking three-and-a-half years for sport in Hull but, happily for me (and no doubt nearly all of you), I leave this Friday to join Look North. So this is your final chance to slate me or, alternatively, chew the cud over today's big sports news stories. Are you as surprised as me that Hull FC got off scott free at the RFL hearing last night? Do you think Adam Pearson, for all the greatness he achieved at City, has been too hasty in getting shot of Billy Davies? Do you think that City are finally starting to fulfill their promise and that the play-offs is a possibility? And who do you think should be England manager, given that Mourinho and O'Neill, my two best bets, don't want it.... |
 | |
| Mighty_Onions | Nov 27 2007, 10:26 AM |
 Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Thu May 31 2007 Status: Offline | Are we allowed to mention Peter Levy as it's yr last day Stu?! |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 10:29 AM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | Feel free to mention whoever and whatever you like. But be careful Onions... What do you fancy for City tonight? I'm torn between believing they've turned the corner, but still being worried by their inconsistency |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 11:01 AM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | With Caleb Folan nearly fit, but Pedersen still a momth off (at least), who do ou think will be leabving in January if anyone. Surely Stuart Elliott looks a certainty to leave, while you have to wonder if there's a future for John Welsh at the club. I think you can stick them in the same out tray as Ryan France. Elliott and France have nearly really been good enough for this level, though you get the impression Welsh would do someone a job in this division. |
| |
| Jimiimij | Nov 27 2007, 11:22 AM |
 Group: Member Posts: Joined: Wed Aug 8 2007 Status: Offline | I really like john Welsh unfortunately while he's benn out the club has moved on, leaving him behind. I can't see him displacing okocha, hughes, ashbee, livermore, marney in the first team squad. He should be allowed to leave along with Elliot and maybe Featherstone (on loan). I'd keep France as he can cover all down the right. |
| |
| tigermegan | Nov 27 2007, 11:23 AM |
 Group: Member Posts: Joined: Tue Nov 27 2007 Status: Offline | Yes - it's time to say a big thank you to Stuart Elliott for his contribution to the Tigers over the past few years but to acknowledge that he has never shone at Championship level and move him on.John Welsh and Ryan France should be given post-injury chances to fulfil their earlier promise with a view to moving them on in summer 2008 if they don't make it. My big worry about City is that their current success is being built on players that are either very old or on-loan - in either case they won' t be here long and will need replacing with new players quite soon. We need to get some long-term players into the club to build the future on and to do that I guess the chairman must bring the wages bill down and that will mean quite a few fringe players leaving - possibly in January 2008. By the way Stuart - surprised you're going to Look North - you've got a good face for radio I'd say !! |
| |
| jimmyandgazza | Nov 27 2007, 11:29 AM |
 Group: Member Posts: Joined: Mon May 28 2007 Status: Offline |  i dont know about anyone leaving but city need a quality left-back(dawson not good enough,delaney too slow).i'm still not happy with the midfield either,the centre of the park is ok but the wings are underachieving at the moment.browny to me has got the clough philosophy to me -decent goalie,centre back,and strikers(all thru the middle)perhaps the ones to go will be-welsh,france,delaney,elliott,maybe even livermore. |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 11:30 AM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | I wouldn't worry about the loan/age situation. I agree Campbell is on loan and Deano is 46. But remember, Deano will keep going next season too, and there's a certain figure called Caleb Folan in the club now. Okocha might be getting on a bit, but he's here for the instant hit, rather than for the next five years I would think. You're often better having a team of 28-32-year-olds with bags of experience and nous, than you are with young kids who run around like headless chickens and bottle it when it matters. As for my fizzog - no worries there Megan. They're going to lock me in a dark cupboard and never let me near the goggle box. It's for the best. |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 11:35 AM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | Quote: jimmyandgazza at Nov 27 2007, 12:29 PM wrote i dont know about anyone leaving but city need a quality left-back(dawson not good enough,delaney too slow).i'm still not happy with the midfield either,the centre of the park is ok but the wings are underachieving at the moment.browny to me has got the clough philosophy to me -decent goalie,centre back,and strikers(all thru the middle)perhaps the ones to go will be-welsh,france,delaney,elliott,maybe even livermore.I think you could be spot on with Dawson. I think his better days might be behind him. Delaney does a job, but he's not the bombing on full-back you want. As for width, I get the impression Brown is hoping Pedersen can cure the left-wing spot, while Garcioa and Hughes can compete for the right-wing slot. Not sure McPhee is a long-term winger solution. Then again, I thought the same about Fagan - and he's in the Premeirship!!!!! |
| |
| LauraNorder | Nov 27 2007, 12:32 PM |
 Group: Member Posts: Joined: Thu Aug 16 2007 Status: Offline | Do you think that one day the HDM will stop the negativity towards football whilst being positive as regards rugby. For example fans fighting on the pitch at Craven Park was a "minor skirmish" whilst a 30 second chant at City was front page news for days. Do you think fans fighting on the pitch would have been described as a 2 minor skirmish" at a City game. Not to mention repeating an untruth about chant which never occurred except in the minds of a NOTW reporter, and to be fair to QPR fans they wrote to the media to say so. And for that matter, dealt with by a few fixed penalty fines instead of months of studying viideos and taking people to court 18 months later? Mentioning up and coming games a bit more wouldn't do any harm in helping attendances either. city are having a great spell and there was more about who might or might not be captain of FC next season and other similarly uninteresting trivia than there was about City last week. And this is the rugby close season. As a final word, no matter how the HDM wriggle to get out of it they were wrong about City and three wins on the trot in the championship. It is no good saying that the Middlesrough game was in between. It wasn't a championship game and it was originally stated that we had not won 3 championship games on the bounce, not that we hadn't won 3 consecutive games whilst in the Championship. I've a feeling it could be Cappello for England manager. Isn't bothered about massaging egos and is unconcerned about what the media thinks about things. That is a good start, add in that he knows about winning things and he wouldn't be bad at all. |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 12:33 PM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | One of the lads on the sportsdesk, Mark Fewings, is convinced City are heading for the Premiership. I think he could be right, but I think year will be too early. But with Duffen and Co in charge, provided the losses aren't too big and can be sustained in the mid-term, I think the Premiership is a genuine probability - maybe next season. This year though, is for a flirt with the play-offs, and it'll be interesting to see if Paul Duffen gets his wish and sees bigger crowds at City this week. Two big home games..... |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 12:38 PM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline Last Edit: 27 Nov 2007, 12:40 | Laura, I won't do any wriggling. If we stated three Championship wins on the bounce, then we were wrong. No excuses. Personally, I thought we said three games, which means we're right. As for City, I honestly don't think we could publish any more on the first team given the restrictions we have. We are only allowed to talk to three players per week, but they still get more coverage than the rugby teams. The four pages to preview and review a game, compared to just two each for the rugby is testament to that. Granted, hands up, we could and should do more on the youth and reserve teams - and certainly the school of excellence set up. It's quite right though that City gets more coverage, because City attracts more readers than rugby (and more than twice the amount of visitors to this site), whether the rugby lot like it or not. As for the QPR chanting, it's not my place to comment. It was covered by news. As for the rugby trouble, it was big news at the time and I argued it should have been on the front, but was shouted down in an editorial conference... |
| |
| LauraNorder | Nov 27 2007, 12:51 PM |
Group: Member Posts: Joined: Thu Aug 16 2007 Status: Offline | A bit more promotion of games at the HDM might help. Rugby games are built up as though they are of world-wide interest yet forthcoming City games are scarcely mentioned in the days before. There was more mention of who may be captain next year for FC and of other unimportant things than there was of City's forthcoming games last week and yesterday. Is that maybe because the rugby reporters are fans and act like it, (with all the bias that comes with being a fan) whereas the football reporter isn't? You only have to compare the reports, "brave" (they are always brave or courageous when they lose)FC never deserve to lose and wouldn't have if it wasn't for bad luck and incompetent officials and all the players get higher scores than City ones do following a win. Rovers, no matter how many (or few) are there are always followed by an army (and the same photo with a flag which must have appeared a dozen times last season) and the atmosphere is amazing, even at games with about 4,000 there whilst City take more away for further distances with scarcely a mention. |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 12:57 PM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline | I don't buy the argument about being overly positive about rugby than football. If the reporters are doing that, and I don't think they are, then it's my fault as much as theirs. Their job is to report objectively on their clubs. I know what you mean by a perceived lack of City content before the Scunny game, but we have to judge each day on its merits. We can't fabricate stories and, given the Paul Cooke thing recently, it's hardly been quiet... Again, if you look across a week, we publish five pages of City on a Friday and a Monday, plus an average of two every other day - plus the columns from Swanny and Phil Brown. That's more than we do for any other topic. Stop eating so many lemons. |
| |
| LauraNorder | Nov 27 2007, 13:01 PM |
Group: Member Posts: Joined: Thu Aug 16 2007 Status: Offline | Quote: StuRowson at Nov 27 2007, 13:38 PM wrote Laura, I won't do any wriggling. If we stated three Championship wins on the bounce, then we were wrong. No excuses. Personally, I thought we said three games, which means we're right. As for City, I honestly don't think we could publish any more on the first team given the restrictions we have. We are only allowed to talk to three players per week, but they still get more coverage than the rugby teams. The four pages to preview and review a game, compared to just two each for the rugby is testament to that. Granted, hands up, we could and should do more on the youth and reserve teams - and certainly the school of excellence set up. It's quite right though that City gets more coverage, because City attracts more readers than rugby (and more than twice the amount of visitors to this site), whether the rugby lot like it or not. As for the QPR chanting, it's not my place to comment. It was covered by news. As for the rugby trouble, it was big news at the time and I argued it should have been on the front, but was shouted down in an editorial conference... Thanks for the honesty there Stuart. I'd like to know the rationale as to why fighting on the pitch isn't front page news but a 30 second chant is. It somehow reinforces the views of those who perceive a bias between the way the two sports, especially any negative aspects, are treated. Whether the rugby lot like it or not isn't the issue. They won't admit it. They won't admit more people in Hull like football than do rugby (and I'm not talking city, FC or Rovers but the actual sport). I'm sure a World Cup match featuring the world champions for football would have attracted more than the 3,000 that went to the Boulevard. Over 20,000 for friendlies featuring the under 21's against minor countires would seem to confirm that. The often repeated fact that over 70 divisions of football (including the largest Sunday League in the country) compared to 1 of rugby league for seniors and 24 divisions of junior football (including what was and maybe still is the largest junior football club in Europe) compared to 6 of junior rugby league merely compound the fact. |
| |
| LauraNorder | Nov 27 2007, 13:04 PM |
Group: Member Posts: Joined: Thu Aug 16 2007 Status: Offline | Quote: StuRowson at Nov 27 2007, 13:57 PM wrote I don't buy the argument about being overly positive about rugby than football. If the reporters are doing that, and I don't think they are, then it's my fault as much as theirs. Their job is to report objectively on their clubs. I know what you mean by a perceived lack of City content before the Scunny game, but we have to judge each day on its merits. We can't fabricate stories and, given the Paul Cooke thing recently, it's hardly been quiet... Again, if you look across a week, we publish five pages of City on a Friday and a Monday, plus an average of two every other day - plus the columns from Swanny and Phil Brown. That's more than we do for any other topic. Stop eating so many lemons. I don't live in an area where the HDM is available and so I am basing my observations on what I read on the web. The only time I see the HDM normally is if I buy one when in Hull to see City. |
| |
| StuRowson | Nov 27 2007, 13:16 PM |
Group: Contributor Posts: Joined: Tue May 1 2007 Status: Offline Last Edit: 27 Nov 2007, 13:22 | If that's the case, and you desperately want to see all of the City coverage we have, I'd suggest you get a paper via mail order. I'm sure it's onl a couple of quid a week. I'm not saying that for extra sales, as I leave on friday so couldn't really care less... But if you want to read the media source that carries the most information, views and analytical comment, you need to see the Mail. As part of the differentiation for users on web and readers in paper, we hold the analysis and the columns back for the paper, while, when it comes to a preview like today, we only put part of three stories on the internet, while we have a total of five pages in-paper on the game. It's a difficult balancing act between giving everything away for free on the t'internet, whilst keeping people, like yourself, happy who don't have access to the paper. |
| |
| tomgeee | Nov 27 2007, 14:10 PM |
Group: Member Posts: Joined: Mon Aug 13 2007 Status: Offline | Stuart, good luck in your new job. i enjoyed Rant @ Rawson, and all your failed attempts to keep it unbiased!! Why the surprise about F.C. not being punished? I was at that match and saw it all. The Hull fans were virtually on the pitch anyway because of the poor ground conditions. There is a massive difference between walking a couple yards to congratulate your side and climbing over a barrier, running 100 yards and attacking people. With a franchise coming up you would have thought Rovers fans had more sense. The outcome was correct, if not a touch lenient. Tom |
| |
| MR_HUTCHIE | Nov 27 2007, 14:45 PM |
 Group: Member Posts: Joined: Thu May 10 2007 Status: Offline | Quote: StuRowson at Nov 27 2007, 10:59 AM wrote It's been a cracking three-and-a-half years for sport in Hull but, happily for me (and no doubt nearly all of you), I leave this Friday to join Look North. Great, so the none existant sports coverage will go right donw the pan now  Only joking, best of luck and im sure we will meet again soon |
| |
| Also today on |  |
