Steve Bruce

So because papers say something it must be true?

What did they say they had in common then?

Hull is one of the most deprived areas in the country. Where as Saints are based in relatively affluent Hampshire.

Nonsense, between 1973 and 2002 Hull City didn't average above 10,000. At times it went below 4,000.

Last season, with both in the same league fighting for promotion, Saints averaged 8,000 more.

 

Don't talk like a ****.

You shouldn't believe everything you read, or every channel 4 documentary that's made.

It's boring to keep on hearing this kind of stuff from people who do not know what they are talking about.

 

This carries a little more weight than a C4 documentary or tabloid story...

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/pdf/1871208.pdf

 

Matthew Le God, you are quite amusingly making yourself look a complete tit. Please keep it coming, I won't hold any grudge towards Southampton FC as your fans are some of the most reasonable around, but there's always a minority. Funny how it's always the thick pig brained cretins who make up the bad smelling minorities (exception being Leeds of course).

 

How exactly does the level of deprivation affect the likelihood of successful football?

Manchester isn't exactly Kensington is it?

Anyway, if you're going to have a go at Hull, you need to consider the full area, Have a wander around the East Riding, and tell me that's deprived.

 

I didn't say it did, Mel U did.

In any case you could say it has an effect, a more affluent area can afford to meet higher prices and generate more in the way of revenue. This can then in turn be used to improve the squad. No guarantee of success of course, but it could help.

 

East Yorkshire is the richer side of Yorkshire. Have you actually been to South/West Yorkshire and then to the East?
It's not deprived compared to most other areas of the Country.

 

That was 2010, besides who cares you want to revert to poverty slander than drop to that level your choice pal. The simple matter is both clubs have a lot in common and its a simple statement suggesting we can achieve the same level of success again. Get a grip!

 

And in this case, I wouldn't say the area affluence contributes greatly to the Football team. The revenue made from foreign sales and foreign fan bases and the location of the team contributes greatly. London sides are the ones regularly bought by rich owners. Hull are lucky that we have the Allams who want to support the community really or else we would have had no interest of pull factors for richer owners.

 

Has a lot changed in the two years since then?

It was a Hull fan that brought up the comparison between the cities themselves, not me, I merely responded to it.

 

On Hull's return to the top flight how do you think news of season tickets in the first season back of £780 for 19 games would be met by the fanbase?

Already happened here.

 

As I always say, asll this history bollocks is totally irrelevant. What ****ing difference does it make if they won an FA Cup once? Or if they spent 27 consecutive seasons in the top flight (when there were 22 teams) at one point? It doesn't help them now. The most important thing about the 'size' of Southampton compared to us is the fact they have a **** load of money.

Also, being a researcher for FM2012 is not a location.

 

Why would that happen? We had tickets of £380 in the Premier League, and we have an owner whose aim is reducing the cost of football.


Our owners are hardly poor, you know.

 

I didn't say it would happen at Hull City, £780 is the price of halfway line adult tickets at a Hampshire club next season.

I know they aren't. But the Liebherr estate is on a different scale altogether.

Hard to say that without sounding like this...

[video=youtube;AHo2pXO_XAI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHo2pXO_XAI[/video]

 

I actually took part in the Echo's and the Hull Daily Mail features, so thats how I know the atricle has some merit.

I am a holder of a season pass for Hull City and my family have season passes (cards) for Southampton.

Southampton is not as affluent as you think, it is the surrounding areas that are. Next time you walk through St Mary's, Shirley, Thornhill, Lordhills and Coxford remind yourself how affluent Southampton is.

I work in Southampton and I can safely say that the only difference socially is in perception. I happen to live in a relatively wealthy area and I would not want to move home.

But all of that is taken out of context, Steve Bruce was talking about in footballing terms, with us being in the PL for keeps not just up and down like a yo yo. Southampton have got there but will they stay up, no one knows the answer to that mate no one.

 

I am a professional in the telling people to **** off industry, and Matthew I must tell you to **** off now.

 

Matty old love. You may want to try your figures again, this time with comparable boundaries. Before you ask, no, I'm not explaining that. Looking at your Location, I reckon you're due to be sacked for incompetence.

Is this someone's therapy at the loony bin?

 

living in the north west of England - I've had it with people with Southampton and their complex that they are better than other towns/cities. They whinged on for a lifetime about Liverpool (a far better port to sail out of than that dump down south) getting a supposed government subsidy for a turn-around ferry port, while forgetting how much government money the port and various infra-structure relating to the port their terminus got.

Has anyone got any pictures of say Newland Park compared to the council estates in Southampton - so we can clearly see how much better all areas in Southampton are?

All Mr Bruce was saying is that if unfancied teams can get to the PL, then why not us. And claiming one FA Cup is nothing - remember how many Old Etonians won in the 1800s, more than a poxy Southern club who's fans think having a bit of money to spend entitles them to finish in the top 8 (realistically they may finish 15th), and as for league attendences to the OP. Remember Hull has always been first and foremost a Rugby League city, whereas Southampton has always been foremost a Football city so you can not compare the meerkats here mate

 

Don't be feeding the dopey sod duff information.

Hull has never really been a rugby league City. There have been some occasions where the RL teams had slightly higher attendances than City, (but over fewer games so the figures are misleading) but whether watching or playing, football has always been the number one sport in Hull. You only have to see the pubs when a RL games on compared to football.

 

ok, but we are not exclusively a football city unlike them down south where there is no competition to football on team based games. but on city populations (ukcities.co.uk) Hull has more population - strange if Southampton is such a "wonderful place", surely everone should be moving to that city.