They will still claim it is a rugby tow. Once read an FC fan saying Hull is a rugby town because the rugby teams have won more trophies than the the football club. Going by that cockeyed logic Leeds, Bradford and Leicester are all rugby cities.
Not forgetting the mighty Wigan too. Yes, suppose his argument correlates when as someone pointed out, Hull fc have slipped to ninth, three from bottom!!!
Neither will have had anywhere near the atmosphere at City though, have they ever had all 4 stands singing and bouncing?
Another way of looking at it would be, there were between 35,000/38,000 watching live sport in Hull over the week end. Imagine if Hull were like erm, Norwich and only had one professional sport club to support and therefore no other professional club/code to compete with for crowds, sponsorship/media coverage etc, and it had been like that for ever ? Would Hull City, given those very favourable conditions, attract bigger crowds on a regular basis then a club like Norwich City, even with our limited success winning trophies and the like ?
Don’t know. Of course Norwich is smaller than Hull. Ipswich, a smaller place than Norwich had 26,000, Derby, similar size had 26,000 after the crap time they have had. Both of those were in League 1. Boro, smaller than Hull had 26,000. All one club cities. The big difference is people there go or don’t, but soon come back as only the football club represents their cities,whereas in Hull they get relatively easy success through a rugby club if we aren’t doing well and adopt a big football club to be involved in the biggest sport. We will never know but I have always agreed with you that rugby has always held this city back. Though many would disagree with us.
In a few weeks it's Hull v Rovers on the Saturday and City v Sheff Utd on the Sunday, and the highest attendance wins the argument.
