Blind side johnny

No doubt, but you seem to be implying it is another RL entity. Why can't you say what you mean?

A completion date for work on the S and N stands of February will be interesting. Mind you he did say that the builders told him it wouldn't be a problem, so that's all right I guess.

Who are you saying has control of their club?

Your knowledge is far greater than the combined efforts off the Huddersfield club over that 20 years then. I don't support them but do live in the town and there have been a host of projects/incentive schemes/initiatives to promote the club and the sport to people in the area. Many have had an impact but it has only been short-term. The biggest incentive is usually a winning and entertaining side and when they achieved that some years ago the crowds were still well below 10k. If there is no hunger for a sport in a town it takes a massive effort to persuade people to give it a go. I attended matches at Fartown with crowds of c500 in the good old days; it isn't a new problem. Finally, something of a millstone around Huddersfield's neck is the oft-quoted label of the "Birthplace of Rugby League". The meeting that was held to discuss and agree upon the formation of the NRU was held at the George Hotel in Huddersfield. The hotel is directly outside the splendid railway station and Huddersfield was a mid-way point for most who attended that meeting. In other words it was a convenient place, not a cradle of rugby. Now tell us again, what is your strategy for success?

No. Players have to be registered with the club for whom they play with exceptions made for loans. I believe that the maximum number of loan players in an 18 is 4, but may be one out. No two clubs who are members of the RFL can be owned or controlled by a single individual or entity.

It is on-line. Listen to it and make your own mind up.

Giants were decent but Catalans were woeful.

No, this is ground-sharing. It seems to work quite well in many European cities yet is deemed impossible in British sport.

I live in Huddersfield and support Dewsbury. It is a steady 25 minute drive, no dramas. I'm sure many Giants fans take longer to drive to the Accu nowadays. In addition Richard Thewlis was on R Leeds WY Sport this afternoon saying that transport will be laid on for next season.

Now you are just being silly.

Radio Leeds - Listen Live - BBC Sounds Listen to WY Sport RL start the stream at 2.00pm.

Not many, and Dewsbury folk don't like spending money, thank you for asking.

Laund Hill is owned by either Ken Davy himself or the Giants, I am unsure which. It is currently used by their academy as well as numerous other teams and not just for RL. I believe that it was placed into some form of community trust but may be wrong - maybe someone else more knowledgeable about it can clarify. Before anyone pipes up, it is a completely unsuitable site for a new Giants stadium.

Bulls weren't in SL then.

Many people fail to understand the costs of operating a RL ground nowadays. For Dewsbury it has simply become a money sink. Notwithstanding the other income generated from a number of commercial operations the nett costs far exceed the money that has been spent on the RL side. Increasing regulations concerning venues of all kinds imply a further increase in costs. Mark Sawyer has stated on numerous occasions that he was desperate to get another club playing at the ground, whether that be RL, soccer or any other. Being tenants, with a long-tern tenancy agreement, at a predictable rent and costs is actually a far better prospect for the club, I understand, than continuing to own and run their own ground. If the latter scenario had continued I doubt that the club would even have lasted your predicted five years. Reality is a painful thing for many RL fans.

Kirklees always owned 40% of the stadium until quite recently.

Turned down by whom? How many sites and where?

Dou really think they would be so daft as to do that? Just like with the Shay plan KD would have owned an asset at the end of the project.

We are long leaseholders with almost total authority over the ground and surrounding areas. A lease can be bought even if the freehold resides with Kirklees.

Indeed, a lot more detail is required. As to how can we be autonomous if we are only tenants? Well, aren't many clubs in the Championship and even SL also tenants, even if their landlords are soccer clubs?

It is built on the site of the Shaw Cross colliery. The old ground is now a housing estate.

It will be the Giants ground; Dewsbury will be tenants.

MS's statement says that it will guarantee our future and we will remain autonomous. To me this isn't a takeover but I have to agree, the details need laying out. It is possible, of course, that those details haven't yet been properly formalised. As we all know agreements only become real when they are contractual; it is unlikely to be a single agreement, more likely to be a discrete number; and they don't get produced speedily no matter how co-operative all of the parties are. I am as anxious as everyone else to know the fine detail but suspect that we will have to wait some time before they can all be revealed. A forum is definitely needed but lets' not all assume that every question will be answered.

Three straightforward wins there. Keighley are easybeats; Dewsbury will be playing their third game in 8 days; Salford will just be glad to see the end of the season.

It will be very hard to sell this vision to the Giants fans, that's for sure. I'm glad this isn't our problem, we have enough of our own already.