Worzel

Agreed. I said that from the get-go. In public, and to the club directly.

I look forward to you contesting the facts in my prior message. You've not managed it so far. I mean, I appreciate reality can be challenging at times, but still. Tick tock, tick tock...

No, that isn't a defence. You know that murder is worse than stealing a packet of lemon sherberts from the local newsagent, right? This concept isn't a hard one to grasp. Gradation of misbehaviour is pretty standard in civil society. Everyone is going on about P&O like they're Hannibal Lecter. That doesn't mean I think that stealing lemon sherberts from Brian on the corner is justified, which is what "defending them" would mean. So like a say, a straw man of your construction. Life isn't black & white. Well, for some unfortunates it is, but the least said about that lot this season the better

Again, it is possible to believe that much of the criticism is fair and earned, whilst also pointing out that some of it is cynically club-based and not coming from a position of genuine reflection. Those two things are not inherently contradictory. But then you know that.

Nope. Doesn’t wash. My response was to a specific poster, with a specific pont. My later response to you was to dispute your attempt to paint that reply as a deflection. It wasn’t, it was directly relevant to that chain of debate. It was a fact-based response to a specific point.

P&O were owned by Dubai Ports at the time, and indeed were employing foreign workers on sub-UK contracts where they could (and indeed far worse things). Feel free to correct me on that, or on my assessment of Dubai Ports business ethics. I’m happily waiting. I’m not drawing an equivalence. Merely pointing out how nauseating the whole “will nobody think of the children…” FC fans holier-than-thou act is. Just doesn’t wash.

I’ve not defended P&O, that is a straw man wholly of your invention. Agree or disagree on my points, but you don’t usually do that sort of nonsense. Surprised at you.

No, Rovers are embedded in the East Hull community. Even if Hull FC didn’t exist, and so it wasn’t about ground sharing and all the psychology around the rivalry, if Rovers moved to play their games on the West side of the city I doubt that they’d get greater attendances. Probably less. It would be like Spurs playing south of the River Thames. Just wouldn’t help.

No, it's all wholly factual. I'm open to any correction, and not deflecting. My position is simple, and consistent. Others is demonstrably hypocritical, and cynical opportunism. I'm calling it out. 1. Rovers should never have accepted this sponsorship. I said so, still say so, and I acted at the time to influence change. 2. The club reconsidering after fan feedback and cancelling the agreement was a good thing, to be respected albeit it should never have been needed. Others may not have done that, and I appreciate it. 3. Many sponsors have questionable ethics. Hull FC fans have been very noisy about this one, as if they had some high ground, when in fact they have also been sponsored by the very same organisation at a time when they were no better. DP World and P&O has done, and still does, far worse things than laying some people off without following the proper process. I'm very happy that my position here is balanced and reasonable. That's far more than I could say for others.

Here's Hull FC's kit, 6 years after P&O had been bought by Dubai Ports. That company had at that time used bonded labour in its ports for years (locking immigrants in to their contracts), and was serially using cheap labour across its shipping workforce. The White House almost didn't allow the transaction to take place, such was the level of US concern at DP operating critical US port infrastructure. So no, it's not unusual for sponsors to have ethical question marks about them. P&O did in 2012 when they sponsored you, I don't recall any concerns at the time. Doubt you gave it a second thought. Yes, they then later terminated 80 Hull-based employees without proper consultation (although with compensation beyond what they'd have got had a process been followed), but personally I put no greater value on a Hull worker's rights than I do the lives of Indian or Pakistani workers held to contracts against their will in the UAE. In fact, I'd say the latter was far, far worse behaviour. That's before we even start to look at the actions of the UAE government, who wholly own DP and so owned P&O at the time. Like I said, all this holier-than-thou nonsense doesn't get past 5 minutes of thought. I objected to Rovers sponsorship, and complained to the club directly. You did nothing about yours.

I did criticise them. Look, you may expect perfection, and think that both you and your club's leadership are capable of it. I on the other hand, do not. That's life. Let's be honest, a lot of the "will nobody think about the children..." hand-wringing around here is just fans of other clubs taking an opportunity to have a crack. It's a bit nauseating really, but good luck to them.

See my later response ^^

It's possible to criticise the club for taking the sponsorship in the first place, and also to recognise that they've done a good job in recognising their mistake and correcting it. Life isn't black & white. I criticised them at the time, and also emailed people I know there in the back office team directly. I'm pleased that they reviewed their thinking around this, and chose values and the preferences of fans and small-scale commercial partners like me over the money. What would you prefer? For me, I respect that. There are lots of organisations with questionable ethics who sponsor sports teams, including many rugby league ones. My issue with P&O was one localised to East Hull community, and I'm glad the club listened.

They weren’t forced to do anything. It would have been simple to ride it out, at most there would have been a week of noise. The P&O events weren’t even that horrendous by the standards of many modern companies. But instead, the club listened to its fans and corrected their mistake. I’m glad I have a club like that.

Hull KR had plenty of options. It would have been tomorrow’s fish paper soon enough, and everyone would have moved on. Instead, the club did the right thing.

I’d have gone with Hadley over Whitbread, but pleased to see Sky pick one of the forwards. The pack put in a real shift today I think.

Last two games have been brilliant. I said a fortnight ago we’d had a soft start to the season, favourable draw with hindsight, and the next month was the better measure of whether we were really at the races. Looks good at the moment.

God can you imagine? We were abysmal that year, defence like Swiss cheese.

If only all our away matches were at the MKM we’d be alright

Niall Evalds has been watching some Benji Marshall videos in the week. What a ball that was.

It’s not very complicated. Agree or not, but what I’m saying is perfectly clear. Myler had the option to allow the admin error to slide. He chose not to, to keep the advantage Warrington’s error had given Hull. It would have been the sporting thing to do. I would be disappointed if Peters had said no in the same situation, better that both sides start on minute zero in the same position.

Well seeing as Hall didn’t knock on when playing the ball last time, as shown twice in the replay, the idea that the play the ball before this Saints try was OK is hilarious

I disagree. Warrington made a mistake, that’s only human. Myler made a decision, when given an opportunity to show his values. That’s a quite different thing entirely.

It’s an awful ground to watch sport in. Even a State of Origin game there feels pretty lifeless. Just like any stadium originally built with an athletics track you’re too far from the action, and it’s all made worse by being an hour out of town and with nightmare queues post match for trains (although I guess there weren’t many for that last match ) Souths should be playing out of the new SFS.

Obviously someone at Wire made an error submitting the squad names, so that part’s totally on them. But if Burgess is right that Hull were given an opportunity by the match officials to allow discretion to be used and Wire to still have a full set of interchanges, and Myler said no, then that is really off. I’m with Sam on this. It’s a pretty weak act to not be generous pre-game and allow mistakes to be fixed, so both sides line up equal when the ball is first kicked. Doesn’t bode well for Hull’s future culture if Myler is so classless. But given what else we already know about him, is anyone surprised?