for someone who says he's loved Sport in Hull for 40 odd years, where was he when Lloyd padlocked the gates of Boothferry Park?, he'll charging rent for the commemorative 'stones' next?

Go at it from the community angle - community stadium should reflect that community and some things should be deemed outside of commercial activity. And of course mention the obvious conflict of interest and injustice of the arrangement as many times as you can.

I'm no fan of the Allams but I would say that if in our contract it states we have to pay to display our stuff then we should pay surely? Maybe this part of the contract has been allowed to lapse and now they have decided to enforce it?

If the council have put the pictures there then that may be slightly different.

It's petty on the surface but if they have been asking for a payment and we have been refusing then maybe they are trying to force our arm?

Lot's of unknowns and it's not helped that the club are not talking.

The info we have at the moment is that the lease doesn't mention the display of items at all. In the past this was taken to mean that they could be displayed for free, but now a charge is being levied.

I'd say that the club not making any official statement on the matter is exactly the right thing to do at this stage.

Where do we have that info? City guy on radio said there is a fee to pay, same for both clubs. Maybe it's never been enforced before? If it's a new charge then Hull have right to refuse or negotiate.

If I were going on, I would invite the SMC to answer, by whichever public media outlet they chose, but in the next 48 hours:

How come the SMC was making a profit, and a nominal return to the Council during both Pearson and Duffen's stewardship, yet it has made excessive losses in consecutive years, despite having over a million pounds in it's account on it's last set of books.

Why hasn't the SMC organised a single event outside football or rugby since it was taken over by the Allams, how is that "maximising the commercial revenue", having a community asset empty 300 days a year is not a sound and
sustainable business model.

How much are they paying to use Johnny Whitely's name?

What is next, rent for the Jack Harrison memorial?

Since FC's memorobilia has been replaced by City, do they pay double?

What does the arena actually gets used for, now that the local community cannot, apparently, afford to utilise it?

Why did the Council and FC flags went up about an hour before the game on Sunday, was that because of a call from Cllr Geraghty?

My final point would be, does the Allam family not understand that the people of Hull are not stupid, his comments about Hull Fair, wanting to build a hotel, Olympic swimming pool etc etc have been seen to be a flimsy smoke screen for what is, in effect, a good old fashioned land grab, an attempt at an asset strip.

Surely if it was already in the contract the club would have already being paying for displaying our stuff.

This is something that neither club has had to pay for in the past.

Precisely the opposite, if the club moan and it is a nominal fee (define nominal, nominal when you're moving it between your own pockets, or nominal because you can get it from a cash point?) then thy look petty.

This isn't a commercial issue, it's a rights and equality issue, the Stadium BELONGS to the people of Hull, to have a suite named after Johnny Whitely with no images of Johnny Whitely is simply absurd. If we don't voice an opinion now then what will his next "commercially driven" wheeze be?

Some may not see through this, fortunately enough of us do, and are willing to do something about it.

That's my point, maybe the clause to charge has always been there but never implemented and maybe now the have decided to enforce it and AP is not accepting it?

I think the City stooge they had on after the game Sunday said that Pictures were not included in the agreement and it was a new thing.

Of course there is a bigger picture, no one disputes that. However you or anyone else on here don't know the agreements in place regarding displaying things. Maybe club are right to say nothing but right now we only stuff had been taken down and we don't know the clubs stance on it.

What are you doing about it?

It's Good To See That When Issues Like This Happens.. Fan's From All Clubs Can Come Together And Fight For What's Right..

Regarding The Bunch Of City Fans Who Find All This Funny, I Hope City Don't Get Promoted And Get In Trouble With Fifa With The New Rules

Quote ="PAUL M"That's my point, maybe the clause to charge has always been there but never implemented and maybe now the have decided to enforce it and AP is not accepting it?'" This is a new charge as stated in this article www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... story.html I also think he'd better check what he says before stating the stadium has never made money, the fact is in the previous 10 yrs before the Allams took over it always posted a profit not a large profit but a profit.

Quote ="PAUL M"That's my point, maybe the clause to charge has always been there but never implemented and maybe now the have decided to enforce it and AP is not accepting it?'" This is a new charge as stated in this article www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... story.html I also think he'd better check what he says before stating the stadium has never made money, the fact is in the previous 10 yrs before the Allams took over it always posted a profit not a large profit but a profit.

what new rules are theses?

He said something along the lines of "elements that are additional to the lease agreement need to be recognised commercially", I very much doubt, when they were hammering out the original lease agreement someone had the foresight to say "pictures, you gotta pay to put up pictures". Advertising, yes, of course, but not historical images directly linked to the tenant of the property, let alone images of the players the flaming room is named after.

Is there a picture of The Circle in The Circle Restaurant, who is paying for that?

Can you imagine renting a house and having to pay to put photo's of your family up?

The fact you even ask that question shows you up Paul.

All good and fair points which need answers.

However in a 2-3 minute fans' TV slot the best way to undermine this is to 100% play the community card. When this Allam guy surfaced he made a point of telling us in every other sentence how he wanted to 'give something back to Hull' and 'encourage sport amongst deprived youngsters' etc. etc. How does removing the pictures of current and historical icons and events at the COMMUNITY stadium help achieve that ?

How does the removal of pictures of Hull RL icon Johnny Whiteley (please all note all the ley ending to his name) square with Allam's so called agenda ? Johnny Whiteley is a man who has served the sporting community in Hull for decades and done much to help the very people Allam was supposed to want to help. These are the angles that fans should take - the Council should be the ones asking direct questions of the SMC of the type that you list.

id love to know Johnny Whiteleys take on all this

That response shows you as a cretin but hey ho.

You indicated you were doing something about it, I asked what?

It wasn't a loaded question, I was interested. I stand by the first sentence.

Financial Fair Play.. They Can Only Spend What They Receive On Income.. Something Along Them Lines

You clearly haven't read the majority of the thread, and the first sentence is against the AUP, Mr Moderator.

Hull FC are not allowed to speak on the matter due to contractual obligations

Johnny is too much of a gentleman to get involved. I'm sure he will be disappointed but wouldn't want to lower himself to discussing anything Allam based.

To be fair too Standee he has mentioned throughout this thread what he is doing

About time that happened