Name Change how about Allam Marine to Asia Marine with a Chinese Junk logo on all Brochures and Stationery it's bound to be a hit in Beijing and get those 9 million bike riding orientals to try messing about on the river.Might even give rise to a new song for Katie Melua,
Those claiming that it's just a name change and doesn't matter are missing and making the point at the same time. Cardiff were at least honest about the rebranding, the one a few claim doesn't matter, isn't happening according to.the club.
Flabbergasted that there are so many who don't care, or are even happy about the prospect. Why should we be the first club in Britain to get our club name and nickname mixed up? Hull Tigers? It's as appealing as Hull Sharks or Hull Stingrays. IE, not very. Why does tradition and heritage have to be stamped on? Whether it's richly successful or very unsuccessful is irrelevant, it's our heritage. It is as simple as a few on here basically bending over time and time again now because the Allams have invested heavily. A bad idea is a bad idea, even if it is the unquestionable ones who thought it up. I think it's maybe just a total failure to comprehend for some people.
I don't mind change, it's inevitable in most things and often beneficial, but change should always be accompanied by the question, why? But as recently as last night we have been reassured that the change does not affect our team name, our sporting and competitive identity. But the game poster immediately shows that to be untrue, a deceit or a lie, pick what you feel is appropriate. But why change? It's not for the current supporters; we know our club and embrace the name for the memories and history it has woven through our lives. Will it bring in more support abroad? No, that is pie-in-the-sky and the rationale of a dreamer. Will it increase merchandising? Probably, but only in the same way New players or, at best, a new strip would. It would most probably do most good to the retailers who sell originals in opposition to the club. So why then? We have all seen that many foreigners would like to own a PL club and that this rebranding is is more in-line with their idea of team identity. So, perhaps, we are being shaped for future sale and the can-of-worms that opens. All of you who say that is just fine and have started the normal name-calling, can you explain why you are happy with the blatant dishonesty of the club's words and actions?
With all the rhinos, wolves and giants etc in rugby league, I think it is admirable that the two Hull sides have resisted the temptation to go that route, and remain true to their roots. City have always been "Hull City", OR "the Tigers", and since I was old enough to notice (first match in the 50's), the two names have never been conflated until now. whatever the marketing advantage (and I haven't heard any convincing argument for this), it just feels wrong.
Agreed it's somewhat disturbing that we have these morons who can't see what's happening. As regards our heritage which some people seem to think is worthless, we were the first visitors to Stamford Bridge after Chelsea got elected (with us) into the league in 1905. We were playing league football before Spurs, West Ham, Millwall, Cardiff, Norwich, Swansea, Southampton, Portsmouth etc. Leeds United were not even formed until 1919. Even if some of these clubs were founded earlier, we were on the national stage before them- how is that a **** heritage? Does heritage only equal silverware? Seems it does for some of our plastics....
After sleeping on it, I think I understand now. The pitchfork wavers who are worried are also: 1. The people who said the club would implode after Barmby was sacked and it was a disastrous decision by the Allams. It didn't and it wasn't. 2. The people who said we'd end up with a **** manager, and we were doomed because the Allams don't live in a FIFA Fantasy World and wouldn't spend any money. We didn't and while they don't, they have spent their own money 3. The people who said the Allams were only in it for a quick gain, and were about to sell the club. They're not and they didn't. 4. The people who start sentences off with "Of course I'm grateful to the Allams for saving the club with their own money, but...." 5. The people who say stuff like "the club will be around long after they've gone". Without realising there wouldn't be a club at all without them. I also realised that I'll never ever be able to be as negative as you lot, or as excitable about made up stuff. I genuinely feel sorry for you if you believe the crap you seem to.
All it is is that people are sensing that, perhaps, we're being lied to. Nick Thompson hardly clarified the situation last night. People just require honesty, that this either is or isn't happening and, in addition, reasons why it's a good idea to change the 109 year identity of the club. It's fine to ask questions Clappy, it really is. I know when it comes to the Allams, for you they're unquestionable, but if they are intending to change the club name by stealth with no consultation and no reasons why, then why SHOULDN'T people ask the question? I think it's a bad idea, in fact a terrible one, so I think it's perfectly fine to query it. I also think they should drop it, why meddle with something where it is totally unnecessary to do so?
The team aren't being rebranded at all. It's the commercial side. No plans on changing our colours, team name or badge. At all. There never has been. I blame some on here for drinking too much squash. The e numbers are affecting rational thought. Sorry, do you have a point with this dribbling? There has never been any suggestion, at all, that the playing teams name will change. You're just making stuff up. What? Who has said there's going to be a badge change? Kit change? Who cares about Everton's badge, this is relevant how?? Now you're REALLY making stuff up. If you just need to be angry about stuff, try being angry about child abuse, inequality, injustice etc. They're all actually real. The rest of this is just in your head.
The only point you make that I have subscribed to (only partially) is #3. I never thought the Allen's were in it for quick gain, but I do believe they are preparing it for an eventual sale and have no problem with that. But why do folk who play on their local roots, who have constantly spoke of their desire to do something for the city, why do they seem intent to misrepresent their name-change intentions? If there is no problem, why are they saying one thing while actively doing another? It appears that they made a falsehood during a Radio Humberside interview and RH should be quick to chase that down; as should the HDM & YP.
If we ignore the evidence to the contrary and accept the argument that it's only the financial side as being real. The very fact that the chairman and his associates are already confused as to which name to use when shows why it's a nonsense. It probably slso explains why no other clubs do it. Ther seems to be no commertcial upside. The Club already has a corporate image, supposedly adding another is just causing unrest and confusion at a time when we should be rallying together for the future.
People are obviously not going to change their minds on this, some don't give a **** about a name change(as they're a bit dim), some think the Allam's have invested so much that they can do whatever the **** the like(which is at least a more understandable position) and some of us are right. Takes all sorts. I'm particularly disappointed with NT's performance last night, I like the bloke and I think he genuinely has the clubs best interests at heart, but at the end of the day it's not his club and he has to do what he's told and last nights performance was unconvincing, if not embarrassing.
Call it a tie? Why, we've always called it a draw in the past. Is there something going on that you aren't telling me? We've called it a draw for 104 years and now you want to change? I sniff the whiff of conspiracy in the air.
