The Third Meeting.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Sir Cheshire Ben said:
Any protests that disrupt the game will be no more annoying than VAR.

Disrupting the games would be great, getting them abandoned would be better. There should be no boundaries.

It’s the West Park marches that I find futile. If a march is deemed necessary then make it to his house on a Saturday afternoon & protest outside it for the duration of the game & every game thereafter.
Click to expand...
spot on Ben, any protest should disrupt the game especially one on SKY. The cameras, commentators have no choice to show it and talk about it, a group of people walking to the ground wont get any national coverage. National coverage is what will get to the blundering duo more
 
ImperialTiger said:
1. What do the fans want? I would guess that, at a base level, people would be happy with new owners (who will bring back concessions and use the club's name) and the club still being in existence.

In short, the owners to leave without liquidating the club. I'm sure most would accept administration if those aims were achieved.

2. How do you make the current owners leave (putting aside that no one tells them when to leave and this question will be perceived as a veiled threat)?

They will go when they are ready and not before. They want their gift back and the only leverage the fans have over them is whether they can prevent the £77m owed to Allamhouse at the end of 30 Jun 2017 from being repaid. Outside of this, I'm sure the Allams don't care what happens to Hull City Tigers Ltd.

With every parachute payment that is paid, the ability for the fans to influence this diminishes (I personally would say that somehow blocking payment from the Premier league to the club is the ONLY way to influence the Allam's departure without resorting to nefarious means).

Getting the club fined due to pitch invasion will cost the club, but not the Allams (unless the directors get fined), so I doubt they care if that happens. As long as they get their last tranches of parachute payments, and clear the loan to Allamhouse, I reckon they'll be happy. If they bring in a 3rd party at the end of the season, it'll be with the aim of making the club break even with crowds of 3k (i.e. Get ready to see lots of cheap youth players playing 50 games).
Click to expand...

This is absolutely bang on IT. The club have been named/ sighted/ slighted in regard of parachute payments and other matters. (Someone more in tune with this could perhaps post about this) The FA/ EFL surely have the authority even as a precedent to step in and withhold/ withdraw the next parachute payment stating that the club have not used the money in the spirit for which those payments were made. Other than being as HCST member and an outsider looking in, I would be urging GB and other representatives to pursue this with the FA. I would take this club at any level without those bastards here and it means in the event of withdrawal of PP and pruning of playing staff, if they're gone... HAPPY DAYS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kempton
Geo10 said:
spot on Ben, any protest should disrupt the game especially one on SKY. The cameras, commentators have no choice to show it and talk about it, a group of people walking to the ground wont get any national coverage. National coverage is what will get to the blundering duo more
Click to expand...
SKY is all about scheduling. Lets not encroach during the game, that would cause hostility from Blades and thats not what this is about. At other times...?...
 
TIGERSCAVE said:
This is absolutely bang on IT. The club have been named/ sighted/ slighted in regard of parachute payments and other matters. (Someone more in tune with this could perhaps post about this) The FA/ EFL surely have the authority even as a precedent to step in and withhold/ withdraw the next parachute payment stating that the club have not used the money in the spirit for which those payments were made. Other than being as HCST member and an outsider looking in, I would be urging GB and other representatives to pursue this with the FA. I would take this club at any level without those bastards here and it means in the event of withdrawal of PP and pruning of playing staff, if they're gone... HAPPY DAYS.
Click to expand...

They have no rules in place to deal with any of these sort of issues, they never expected the mental owners that we've seen at various clubs recently, so there's no specific rules to stop them. They're addressing this at the moment, something that HCST are involved in and have been for some time, but these things take forever to get sorted. There was supposed to be a rule change after Blackpool pocketed all the parachute money, to stop it happening as it is with us now, but it doesn't look like they ever managed to get it into the rules.
 
Sir Cheshire Ben said:
You asked me why I think it’s drivel. I know like the rest of your posts on this thread that it is drivel. Why would it be different? (Don’t answer, there’ll be no reply)

You’re just here to take this piss, you’re a boring **** , I believe others call it trolling

Registered since 2011, around 150 posts. You must have some problem with people giving a scarf away to a couple of ****s as the subject has irked you enough to commit a third of your total posts to the subject.

In 7 years you’ve posted nothing regarding promotions, nothing on relegations, nothing on Wembley visits, nothing on Cup Finals, Semi Finals, Europe. Not much City related at all.

Cycling, Babes & giving a scarf to a couple of ****s appears to be your limit.

Count yourself important, as previously mentioned I have a tendency to give up on bullshit & bollocks but for you I made an exception solely to sate your desire.
Click to expand...

1. You do not have the monopoly on the right of reply.

2. You’ve done your homework. Allow me to fill in some gaps. You are correct, I am not a frequent poster believing in quality over quantity. For example, I am satisfied with forming my own views on team performance/ selection.

3. Work has dictated my ability to post (two deployments totalling 18 months) and where I was, phone signal was not a priority.

4. I have both values and standards meaning that my replies will always be measured and objective (even to your vective).

5. No, I am not a troll but if it makes you feel better.

MoH
 
Fez said:
Like you I think MoH talks some sense, but I don’t agree with all of his thoughts; although they do stretch the thinking, which is always welcome.

I am strongly against any protest that disrupts the game; for me that is not the way forward. It is very clear to me (and, therefore others) that GB is in bed with the HCAG - why else would he agree to the crass scarves proffering? I found certain parts of his interview contrived and insincere; all a tad glib, I thought.

I fully support protests, if folk think them worthwhile, although I have my doubts. I don’t support further dialogue and if GB thinks there is any future in it then he has dropped massively in my estimation - especially after the ‘couldn’t run a bath never mind a football club’ comment; funny yes, but gratuitous and damaging to any future dialogue - it all weeped of insincerity, something we all criticise the Allams for.

As for protests bringing the Allams to the table, I think that is only true in part. **** happened, they were surprised, but they reacted swiftly and took control - unless those who attended last night thought they were in control.
Click to expand...

Fez - I too reached the same conclusion having listened to the interview. The Allams are toying with the supporters representatives like a cat with a mouse.

MoH
 
Fez said:
Like you I think MoH talks some sense, but I don’t agree with all of his thoughts; although they do stretch the thinking, which is always welcome.

I am strongly against any protest that disrupts the game; for me that is not the way forward. It is very clear to me (and, therefore others) that GB is in bed with the HCAG - why else would he agree to the crass scarves proffering? I found certain parts of his interview contrived and insincere; all a tad glib, I thought.

I fully support protests, if folk think them worthwhile, although I have my doubts. I don’t support further dialogue and if GB thinks there is any future in it then he has dropped massively in my estimation - especially after the ‘couldn’t run a bath never mind a football club’ comment; funny yes, but gratuitous and damaging to any future dialogue - it all weeped of insincerity, something we all criticise the Allams for.

As for protests bringing the Allams to the table, I think that is only true in part. **** happened, they were surprised, but they reacted swiftly and took control - unless those who attended last night thought they were in control.
Click to expand...


GB in bed with the action group, hence scarf farce? Maybe, but I formed the idea that he felt he had a pally relationship with the Allams, a sort of joke between mates. Two different takes on it, on my part, purely a guess.
 
dennisboothstash said:
Hmm
Actually I can’t recall exactly (apart from the fact it’s often misquoted as him)
I thought it was someone else’s quote describing Voltaire’s general view on things
I didn’t think Voltaire had said it all, even as a quote of someone else

Ming might know ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right. It was Evelyn Beatrice Hall who wrote it as a description of her thoughts on his attitude in her biography of him.

Only half remembering things. Old age and all that...
 
  • Like
Reactions: dennisboothstash and MingofHarlem
Quill said:
You're buggered there then. :bandit:



Also - word of advice. Always signing your posts makes you come across like a bit of a pompous prick. Just saying.
Click to expand...

He's a troll. It's Lunchbox, Essex Gull or Big Vern or whatever the **** he calls himself. Nothing he has said has had any honesty or purpose.
 
dennisboothstash said:
My view on Ming is similar to Voltaire’s quote
“Think for yourselves, and allow others the privilege to do so, too.” (and no, he didn’t say the one about defending to the death people’s right to express views he disagreed with)
I don’t agree with his original position on how important knitwear was, but he has posted some interesting posts and it’s at least keeping the debate going

He has done exactly what you accused Ben of though, referring to others as ‘cavemen’ because he disagrees with their view

I think we all realise that you’ll get extreme views on here, but that’s often the fun of it. People will argue with each other, but nothing to get excited about...it’s not real life (these discussions over a pint would be much more conciliatory on everyone’s part...but not as much fun written down!)

I am interested in which part of Harlem he’s from though

Alllams Out
Click to expand...

My reference to “caveman” tactics was generic representing my personal distaste for the direct action being discussed on here.

MoH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back