Fans to return...

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
The club wanted the game played and you are forgetting they were invited by the EFL, only one of 10 clubs as a trial run. It was never intended to make money from it.
Out of the ten, two clubs declined because of the work involved leaving eight other clubs, only one council stepped into to put the mockers on it.

IF that is true then maybe the Allams can learn a lesson from it. If you constantly act like petty vindictive childish ****s people and organisations are unlikely to help you when you need it.
 
I am happy to share anything I can, and give reasoned responses to anything on this forum. You only need to ask originallambrettaman who knows me well. The only thing I can’t do is disclose anything discussed at meetings unless it is minuted and in the public domain. That is what the Freedom of Information Act is for. I fully support the return of fans to the KCOM and will do everything within the guidelines and legislation to make it happen.

Can you give a reasoned response as to why this was deemed safer?
You must log in or register to see images
 
Can you give a reasoned response as to why this was deemed safer?
You must log in or register to see images

My twopennerth, and I'm guessing. There are national rules. The Council can only act within them. If the game had gone ahead, the Council would be the ones held responsible, the market was allowed under national rules the same as other shops and retail outlets, so no comeback on the Council.
 
My twopennerth, and I'm guessing. There are national rules. The Council can only act within them. If the game had gone ahead, the Council would be the ones held responsible, the market was allowed under national rules the same as other shops and retail outlets, so no comeback on the Council.
That is the get out of jail card to hide behind obviously but how come the other seven councils took the risk ?
 
Any figures on infection rates compared to Hull where games did go ahead like Middlesbrough and Norwich? And why, if they were similar or worse, they got the go ahead and we didn't? Also why Walton St Market where there was less social distancinng and an absence of masks could go ahead?
Castro banging on about how superior Norwich is again
 
IF that is true then maybe the Allams can learn a lesson from it. If you constantly act like petty vindictive childish ****s people and organisations are unlikely to help you when you need it.
So are you claiming that Mr Sagman, Safety @ Emergency Planning Manager at HCC and Chair of the KCom Advisory Group makes decisions based on levels of vindictiveness ?
 
Castro banging on about how superior Norwich is again

Not mentioning it. Though it goes without saying. Got relegated and have 22,000 season ticket holders, a sell out of all those available. 95% ground capacity for the last 12 years including a spell in Div 3. The only times not a full house was when away teams didn't sell their allocation.
Their game got the go ahead as did Middlesbrough. Would love to know why it was possible there but not in the pioneering city of Hull.
 
The club wanted the game played and you are forgetting they were invited by the EFL, only one of 10 clubs as a trial run. It was never intended to make money from it.
Out of the ten, two clubs declined because of the work involved leaving eight other clubs, only one council stepped into to put the mockers on it.

I'm forgetting nothing and I'm obviously aware they wanted the fans to attend and they they knew they'd make no money from it, I've never said otherwise.
 
Just goes to prove that these forums are a place for speculation, opinion and not facts

So give us some facts then? Why did games go ahead in other areas with a much higher infection rate then the hull area for example? You could easily stop the speculation....

Why don't you tell us why it's deemed safe to have things like the council run Sunday market on Walton Street which has almost zero control on masks, social distancing and test/trace etc. But a fully controlled event of 600 people in an open air 25k seater stadium with all the appropriate measures in place?
 
I'm forgetting nothing and I'm obviously aware they wanted the fans to attend and they they knew they'd make no money from it, I've never said otherwise.
so what are we arguing about ?
Saturday was a trial one off.
The club bent over backwards to get it on and the council knocked it back.
Which puts back the chances of fans getting back into the ground on Oct 2nd.
If I were City I'd be asking Mr Sagman what exactly do they have to do to gain his approval ? Because they couldn't have done anymore.
 
so what are we arguing about ?
Saturday was a trial one off.
The club bent over backwards to get it on and the council knocked it back.
Which puts back the chances of fans getting back into the ground on Oct 2nd.
If I were City I'd be asking Mr Sagman what exactly do they have to do to gain his approval ? Because they couldn't have done anymore.
How do you know they couldn't do anymore, and 'bent over backwards'?
The only thing I have been able to see they actually did was volunteer. Do you know what else they did?
According to Luton the EFL had given no advice on what plans needed to be in place, despite being asked, so when they were informed they had been selected they decided there wasn't enough time to get ready. Sounded like they volunteered with no information as to what would be needed, so I assume City will have been the same.
What was it that City had done before they were informed that meant that they were more ready than Luton?
 
How do you know they couldn't do anymore, and 'bent over backwards'?
The only thing I have been able to see they actually did was volunteer. Do you know what else they did?
According to Luton the EFL had given no advice on what plans needed to be in place, despite being asked, so when they were informed they had been selected they decided there wasn't enough time to get ready. Sounded like they volunteered with no information as to what would be needed, so I assume City will have been the same.
What was it that City had done before they were informed that meant that they were more ready than Luton?

Other clubs in areas with worse infection rates got the go ahead.
 
How do you know they couldn't do anymore, and 'bent over backwards'?
The only thing I have been able to see they actually did was volunteer. Do you know what else they did?
According to Luton the EFL had given no advice on what plans needed to be in place, despite being asked, so when they were informed they had been selected they decided there wasn't enough time to get ready. Sounded like they volunteered with no information as to what would be needed, so I assume City will have been the same.
What was it that City had done before they were informed that meant that they were more ready than Luton?
Luton chucked the towel in straightaway and didn't take part. They made no effort to take part in the trial.
City had put the precautions in place, even at the short notice given by the EFL, because they wanted to take part. They also want fans back in the stadium on Oct 2nd. You believe me or you don't, but why would they go to the trouble of issuing invites if they expected to be knocked back ? The match programmes had even gone to print.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.