Be honest, it's not the sole reason attendance is diminished at the KC. There are many who don't like the rancid atmosphere in the stands. It's no fun paying to be in a crowd of people who do nothing but bitch and moan for 90 minutes.
Ever looked at Newcastle's away followings which are massive despite having longer journeys than most. It is still 140 miles for a midweek EFL game. How many would we take that far?
We shouldn't expect a fanzine article from one of the most bipolar sets of fans in the country to contain much sense or hard fact. A rare example these days of City getting it right. Remember Bradford 96 when they prioritised appeasing the away fans at the expense of home fans? No mention is made in the article of the toxic situation which has steadily drained away our support since 2014, and they are happy to portray us as tinpot as if there no other extenuating factors. So they don't like City's treatment of them? Welcome to our world lads - we've had 3 seasons of petty, spiteful and stupid decisions to contend with from these ****s. Welcome to Hull 2016.
Newcastle has more (in both senses of the word) dedicated fans than ours. See I'm allowed to say this, because it's very clearly true. So what exactly is your point?
. It's becoming a common theme that Castro doesn't reply to my questions. He was online for a couple of minutes after I replied to him. And then he'd vanished
1. **** 'em. Why would any City fans want anymore Jaaaawdeees than absolutely necessary in the KC. Just because not that many City fans want to bother doesn't mean we should invite anymore bloody away fans 2. It would increase income for the club...and? I couldn't care less, in fact reducing income for Ehaw isn't a bad thing anyway 3. I'm a bit disappointed they didn't mention the empty seats at Wembley too! Missed opportunity to highlight a fine empty seated message 4. They could easily sell more tickets than we'll give them, and for the amount of ****s I give about that please refer to point 1.
They have more fans than we have. They are prepared to travel further in greater numbers. Anyone coming out with such heresy is of course deemed negative and hostile to the city of Hull and the population of Hull as well as Hull City.
City didn't prioritise it in 1996. The police said if they didn't comply they would refuse to police the match. That would have meant serious repercussions for City, loss of the points etc.. The ****wit copper behind it thought it was such a good idea as they could park away coaches in a school ground and march the fans to the ground and back. It was only when someone told him it would look,a bit ridiculous escorting 50 Southend, for example, fans to BP to stand in the middle of a deserted Bunkers. Yes, some Newcastle fans can be full of it but I wish this area had the same passion for its local football club. They even took over our West .Hull neighbours.
Don't flatter yourself, Kempie. I remain logged in but may be browsing other sites in my quest for intellectual stimulation with equals. MENSA site, sites of Cambridge, Oxford, Yale, Harvard that sort of thing. Or similar.
Then tell me why you constantly slate my club and my City. It'll be relief for your brain, a kind of warm up, or down if you like. Too taxing?
I don't constantly slate your (my) club or your City. Point out things to blinkered people is doing them a service. My criticisms of the city are mainly directed at the clowns who run the place. The same with City.
Are those shape-shifting aliens putting them there? In the real world do we get larger crowds than Newcastle and take more away?
Bollocks mate. You're quite cleary obsessed with criticising my club and my City. You do it day after day, night after night, ad nauseam. You still haven't answered my question and you never will. Therefore I can only draw my own conclusions. I'm sorry for whatever hurt you in Hull. But I have to point out that whatever or whoever that was, it wasn't the wonderful people I know.
