We've only known about all of this for a week, so it self-evidently is new and we still don't actually know what went on last time, other than the ERCFA got some sort of grant from the Council to make up the shortfall (which on the face of it shouldn't have happened).
The rugby lads have grumbled for years about not being able to play their amateur finals at the KC, some quoting the costs required by the man they called 'Sadam' Pearson, before he became their saviour. I can't remember who was in charge, but according to them, for a long time, they were not even allowed on the pitch for kicking practice unless it was prematch.
Agreed den made that point pages ago. I imagine the ercfa will back down and issue a bit of a grovelling press release. They need City more than city need them.
Not taking them out of context at all. The reason the final is not being played at the KCOM is that the price was put up by the Allams to an amount the ERCFA didn't want to pay. Whether that was right or wrong is a matter of opinion. But it has nothing to do with PL standards, the pitch or anything else.
Why does the ERCFA need City more than they need them? Besides it is the SMC, not Hull City, which has caused the problem. And one of the teams is a Hull City one.
[QUOTE="Chazz Rheinhold, post: 10451285, member: 1002723" They need City more than city need them.[/QUOTE] That didn't stop them voting against Hull Tigers, that's if it is correct.
Any link to back up your assertions it was to do with stringent PL standards? Or the pitch not being able to stand 1 more game?
Just to clarify then, you don't? No neither do I actually. I have better things to do with my time than search for non existent links. As stated many times, the Allams are ****s (OPINION not FACT). But not every bad thing HCFC related is down to this. It undermines the arguments against their ownership if spurious or dubious claims are made willy-nilly. These are OPINIONS not FACTS, and I have no links to back these up.
Just to clarify then, you don't? So why did you make spurious claims as to why it was not played, going on about stringent PL standards etc? The only thing which as been stated is that the fee was tripled, the council paid the difference one year, weren't prepared to do it this year, and the ERCFA were unwilling to pay the full,amount. If this was not the case surely the SMC would have said so and pointed out it was stringent PL standards and 2 clubs playing on the pitch, which is what you claimed.