No doubt I'll be accused of mudslinging again by some, and what is another positive comment, will be taken as a negative, but can you not see how your comments, and some from a few others, contribute to the manpower problem you mention? Describing people offering suggestions as 'ignorant' and just 'pissing and moaning' and the abuse people get if they dare to point out alternatives to the trust way, and you even suggesting they should start their own group presumably 'premier league whores united', is hardly likely to cause a rush of volunteers and forming additional groups is hardly likely to create unity or a feeling of being included or lessen your work load. I know the trust seem reluctant to, but you mention responding to issues on social media, yet the trust rarely post on here, CI or the Hull City fans facebook page themselves and most people are not on twitter, so few will know what you're doing. A look on the Trust's website doesn't reveal much more, so it's hardly surprising people are 'ignorant' as you describe them. You keep saying you need help, people on here are asking for dialogue and offering suggestions. It seems that there's an obvious solution that would probably take less effort than getting abusive, defensive and prickly. Contrary to what some seem to claim, I'm in favour of a strong fans group, and my comments are positive, constructive criticism, not just 'having a dig'.
Everything we do goes on our website. Facebook doesn't let non-individual pages post to groups such as the 'Hull City Fans Forum' one (for reasons related to advertising) but we have a director who posts on there pretty regularly. If you want someone posting on here regularly in an official capacity that again comes down to time and I'm sorry to say that we simply don't have the manpower for that. I come on here to catch up with things; I'm not a full time Trust director. This is my point again. You're listing things that we should do with seemingly no appreciation that it takes time and effort and that we're a small group of about 10 people with full-time jobs and other things to do. If any of the people, not just you, who are most vocal about what the Trust should do, were prepared to contribute anything beyond just directing us from a distance then they'd have a much better chance of getting done.
Was beating Leicester City and Southampton enjoyable? What about going 3-2 up against Crystal Palace? Filling the KC with the name Hull City is a protest against the Allams refusal to use our name at the same time as showing support for the players. It isn't as sexy as a pitch invasion but would put a smile on my face if we did it. It would show the Tiger Nation getting organised and doing something positive together. Between the Leicester City match and John Oxley holding up a flag on the pitch I've seen no protests in the ground over the membership scheme and the lack of concessions. For me that is depressing. Every attempt at getting rid of a club's owners has failed, every one. Liverpool needed the intervention of the High Court to get rid of Hicks and Gillette and they are organised in a way we can only dream of. Do you see the High Court stepping in to support us, I don't. Genuine question, given the state of our fan base can you realistically see us forcing out the Allams? If they are forced out they will be walking away from £70 million, less what they've repaid themselves this season. That would take some effort by the 10,000 who have walked away and found other things to do on a match day.
You're reinforcing my point. If you want people to get actively involved, you need to be making it possible and welcoming and demonstrate that you listen and are representative. I DO appreciate the time and effort it takes, it seems you think only the inner core can decide and act, whereas I feel that a more open regime would help it grow as well as being more inclusive, and take some of the burden from you. You know yourself I don't sit on my hands, and I'm more than willing to act when I can, as do others, to imply otherwise or that only you do anything is hardly constructive, and lots of individuals working independently is generally less successful than a united front. I looked on your website, facebook and twitter btw and the campaign seems to be almost singularly about a regime change. Assuming you're successful, do you not think it would be beneficial to have something to offer any new owner?
Of course beating Leicester and Southampton was enjoyable but it was winning a football match, it was a good feeling for that day before back to the reality of our club being run into the ground. Leicester was also a bit different as there was the Chinese consortium there and it looked like everything was going to change so there was a more positive mood. There's little point in protesting in the ground, the Allams aren't there and neither are the fans that would be most committed to the protest. You saw how hard it was to get people to hold up a red card on the opening day against Leicester so the idea that they're going to suddenly reclaim our identity in the ground I think is unrealistic. Of course your not going to force them out at a loss but you can influence them to sell sooner or perhaps at a lower figure if they see things are getting worse. Fact is until the Allams are gone it's not going to be the same, so that has to be the target. It won't be easy and efforts might not work, but it's better to try something than just watch fans trickle away slowly.
How? What is it you're telling me we need to do? Please just state the required actions clearly without any mysterious hinting. I'm saying the complete opposite of that. There's a few people who choose not to be involved themselves but spend a lot of time telling us that what we're doing is wrong. Well FFS give us a hand then. Tell us exactly what you do want, not retrospectively cos that's useless, or maybe even help do it. This boycott for example, was entirely an idea from outside the Trust. A few people on Twitter and on here wanted it and the calls were very loud for it, particularly on Twitter. There barely seemed to be any objection. Until we decided to go with it when suddenly everyone pipes up with what an awful idea it is and they would have done something so much better. The time to say that was when the idea was being discussed. There was more than enough opportunity for anyone to disagree with it back then but they only did so after it was adopted as a Trust policy. I have absolutely no idea what you do. You've always made out that it's a lot behind the scenes, but even if it's true that hardly lends itself to a united front.
I agree wholeheartedly with most of that Only thing regarding 'forcing' them out though is that isn't really what people mean. They are hoping protests such as a boycott just tip them over the edge during any negotiations with a potential buyer enough to think 'bollocks to this, let's just take the profit and get out of here' No one is suggesting any protest could make them walk away from their investment As you know I don't think they'll sell, and didn't think they'd sell if we got promoted, but I still hope they do get tipped over the edge if there is anyone left their negotiating with I agree that in ground protests / reclaiming the brand / having a good time are important though
You're STILL doing it. If you can't see what it is you're doing, and from previous discussions with you, I doubt you will, then this will go round and round and the problems will remain. You seem to be implying that I'm against the boycott, and I haven't mentioned it. You say anyone that was should have raised their concerns when it was being discussed. Can you point me at where this 'discussion' took place? As I said, I've looked on the various outlets for the trust, and I can't see much discussion, and there is a big part of the issue. I haven't mentioned anything about past events, only to say that they are what they are, and we draw a line and move on, sadly some are still stuck back there. What I'm suggesting is that the trust fully engages with fans. As it stands, you're guilty of many of the things you accuse the Allams of.
I think with the way things are structured it's very difficult for the Trust to discuss protests beforehand, or any element of surprise (if important) is lost I'm actually fine with that. I joined and am comfortable to let those who put the time in to make the calls. If I wasn't then I'd either stand for a position on the Board or leave On the other hand I can see how others might want to be more involved to try and assist without necessarily taking a formal role in the Trust, particularly when things get leaked anyway. I mean everyone knew there was going to be a billboard appear, which I think is excellent, but there wasn't any opportunity to contribute to it which some may have liked Maybe one idea would be to have a thread on here, and other forums, for the Trust to simply post thoughts, things they are considering, discussion topics. And then simply sit back and allow others to reply to it and debate it. That shouldn't take too much time, even if the Trust's poster occasionally asked for clarification on a point made. I don't actually think after doing that the Trust's poster needs to offer an opinion on the points, and I can see they wouldn't want to as they may pre judge a Board discussion. Everyone knows that any decision can't please everyone (or often on here anyone ) but that would allow debate, and the Trust to gauge opinion, also then after a decision a route to explain why that decision was taken (as a statement rather than a reopening of the debate!) For example the billboard debate might have been a Trust post saying they were considering exposing the fact that the Allam's haven't followed their own pronouncements as publicly as possible, and not just online, and then sitting back and watching the debate. As I said I think it's excellent, but who knows if another gem might have popped up too. If people then didn't contribute to that debate they really would have no reason to moan afterwards (even though I/they will...naturally!) Having said all that I demand that my opinion as a member is given more credence than non members ... I'm planning a gin related protest as we speak
Do you think this is a good idea? A group of children, young people, pensioners, people evicted from their seats, representatives from the sports kicked out of the Airco stood outside with placards (like the old newspaper sellers). The placards could say "Assem and Ehab Allam increased my season pass from x to y"," Assem and Ehab Allam evicted me and my friends from the Airco Arena", "Assem and Ehab Allam refuse to call us Hull City"etc. It would make a very good photograph, in my opinion, and get our message across. I think it would be a lot more effective than Allam Out.
I think we both agree the Allams are killing Hull City. I think we both agree we should be trying to stop, and reverse, the number of people walking away. I think a campaign aimed at tipping the Allams over the edge in the ways suggested may take years and will ultimately fail. In the meantime many more will walk away. I see having Hull City banners, flags and scarves in the ground as a protest. A protest that supports our players in the relegation battle we face. There are two reasons for this. First, the club refuses to call us Hull City and it is our way of putting two fingers up to all that The Tigers, Tigers rubbish. Second you can't buy Hull City merchandise in the shop so we have to produce it and sell it. The sales provides us with finance to campaign with. It also shows our influence within the KC, just like the "No to Hull Tigers" badges and "City Till We Die" scarves did. It is a visual sign of our strength. At the minute we are weak, the question is how to make us strong. For me we have to convince the people attending the KC to stand up and reclaim our club. You may disagree that its a protest. But to me it says the Allams are no longer part of the Tiger Nation, they may own the limited company, but they are not Hull City AFC, we are. In effect they become irrelevant, their only job to collect the money, sort out transfers and repay their gift to the people of Hull at 4% per annum. I thought the red card protest was excellent but it wasn't done at the home game with Derby County in the play-off semi-final. It was also missing at Wembley. A protest isn't something that can be turned on and off like a tap, so come Leicester City it was always going to be more difficult. Although I thought the numbers holding the cards up was still impressive. The difficulty was the amber NO made it look like less cards were held up than actually were. But you had to look closely to see that. After Leicester City we have had nothing until the billboard and John Oxley. The price promise for the family stand is due to expire at the end of this season so it will rear its ugly head again soon. Turning Hull City into an Allam free zone were their only role is as office clerks may encourage them to sell sooner, if it doesn't we'll know the KC is ours. For me the alternative is more of the same, and if the Allams remain, a long slow death for Hull City as more people find other things to do on a match day. My suggestions aren't sexy, they are not as photogenic as a pitch invasion nor as thrilling, but I think its the only way we can unite Hull City supporters and start getting our club back.
That may be a by-product of what I'm suggesting. At the minute its all about them and what we can do to them. I want to replace them with us. So Hull City becomes the most important thing and they are re3legated, in our eyes at least, to the role of Hull City's bean counters. Not very good ones admittedly, but bean counters none the less. If we achieve anything like what I'm suggesting it would put us in a much better position when the next saviour bearing gifts comes along.
I think the comment about the interaction with the next owners is one that really needs to be considered and built upon
