Hull may be in a spot of bother

[pieaddict]

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 54,00.html

[pedro]

should be expelled as Whitehave also left out cuptied players

[butt monkey]

Wasn't there an amateur side thrown out of this year's CC for exactly the same thing?

Either way, Hull should be in a lot of poo!

You can sure bet one thing, that Kath at Hull and Gary at Leeds are busy "altering" paperwork to clarify that Jamie Thackray signed for Hull at least three months before he was released by Leeds!!!

[Bear]

Scum of RL Throw um out

[ancientnloyal]

Should bring back hanging for that piece of cockswaddle1!!! Should ban Thakray for life and ban him from employment untilretirement and ban his state pension.

Saw it on skysports news today could be quite serious but... I doubt the RFL will do anything major about it

[GeoffN]

Well, if Hull are thrown out, and Widnes reinstated, then really Rochdale should be reinstated too, since he played against them as well.
Then those two should play to decide who goes on to play Bradford in the next round.

[DaveO]

Widnes aren't pushing for the result to be overturned saying the best team won on the day.

So I am sure the RFL will see that as enough reason to let the result stand.

Really it should not given as someone else said other sides have not played cup-tied or ineligible players.

Shows the RFL and Hull up as very unprofessional. The RFL should have spotted this after the Rochdale game and Hull look ridiculous.

Makes you wonder if Hull realised after the Rochdale game and thought if they drop him for the Widnes game they would highlight the problem, so they played him again and hoped no one would notice!

If the RFL let the result stand will he be eligible for the rest of the competition? I'd hope not and at the very least a big fine for Hull and and any share of prize money Hull get should be divided up between Rochdale and Widnes.

Dave

[butt monkey]

From the Widnes site:

Following intense media speculation today regarding the apparent inclusion of an ineligible player in the Hull FC side during Sunday's Carnegie Challenge Cup fixture against Vikings, Widnes officials wish to re-iterate their position that the club is not contesting the result of the match.
Widnes Vikings have not made any formal complaint to the RFL and are happy to leave the RFL to adjudicate on the matter.

However, in Skysports, here appears to be a different "tune".

Hull have refused to comment but Widnes, who left out Richard Fletcher and Sam Barlow due to their ineligibility, would be quite happy to take their place in the last eight.

"We did a lot of work prior to the game checking the eligibility of our players," said operations manager Pat Cluskey. "Had those two players been available, it may have been a different result.

"We are aware that Hull played an unregistered player and we're waiting to see what the League have to say."

[Matthew]

Wonder if we would get expelled if it was us that had fielded an ineligible player?

How come it took the RFL so long to work out that Thackery was ineligible? It can't be that hard to check the players against their own rules!?!

As Geoff said, Rochdale and Widnes should play to decide who faces Bradford.

This combined with the fixed draw has completely devalued the Challenge Cup - surely someone at Red Hall needs to resign!?

[mike binder]

some 1 on there said hull wernt cheats and never have been ,if i cast my mind back were thay not part of the first set of clubs pulled up for breaking the sallary cap ,and missed out on a play off spot.

When i watched boots and all the other day hull got a tick for no breach of the cap ,i may be wrong but im sure they did???