"There are many questions which need answering" - Group proposing independent trust runs The Shay responds to Huddersfield Giants owner Ken Davy's interest in the stadium

Calderdale Council revealed yesterday that they would consider two proposals for the future of The Shay.

One is from a group of interested individuals who would like to see The Shay operated by an independent, not-for-profit trust, while the other is from Huddersfield Giants owner Ken Davy, who has suggested several improvements could be made to the ground while it was used by the Giants as a temporary home.

In a statement to the Courier, the working party said: “We have read with interest Calderdale Council’s press release about the potential sale of the Shay Stadium to Ken Davy, owner of Huddersfield Giants Rugby League Club.

“On the face of it, there are positives to the brief information provided, including the much-needed investment and upgrades to the facilities such as the pitch and floodlights. However, there are many questions which need answering before we, as a working group looking at the option of a not-for-profit management of the stadium, and supporters of both clubs, can support My Davy’s proposal.

“The key aim of our working group was to protect the stadium to ensure it remains an asset to the local community whilst providing security to the two sporting clubs. This is something which is not guaranteed should the Shay become privately owned. There are various examples throughout the country where private stadium ownership has conflicted with what is in the best interests of the sporting teams who call it home, with Valley Parade a neighbouring example.

“This is not to say Mr Davy’s purchase of the stadium should be dismissed. However, we raise the following important questions.

1) What happens to The Shay when the Giants have a stadium of their own?

2) What happens to The Shay if the Giants ultimately don't secure a stadium of their own?

3) How does this impact on the requirements of both the Football League and the Super League that their member clubs must have "primacy of tenancy"? Are the clubs prepared to forgo any chance of promotion in exchange for upgraded facilities?

4) Have the views of the National League and the RFL been sought?

5) Has the council considered what happens to the town's professional sports clubs if this deal goes wrong, or are they unconcerned?

“Our questions are raised with the best intentions, understanding the financial difficulties Calderdale Council continue to face. But any sale of the stadium needs to also be in the long-term interests of our two sporting clubs and its supporters.”