Without wishing to cause another ****storm on here, with the Hull supporters, I couldn't help but be interested in the situation regarding the 'renaming' of the club. (Any of the text below may be incorrect or just an honest opinion but this is a serious football question on a football forum.) It seems to be a mini-Newcastle situation whereby a rich owner 'rescued' the club and made promises that were lapped up by the supporters. There are also obvious comparisons with a name change and the renaming of SJP. In the case of Hull some of those promises were actually fulfilled with significant 'investment' and promotion to the Premier League. The club progressed from being a relegated club with a reported transfer block, a wage bill around £40 million, debts and an air of gloom, not even being the owners of their own ground. The owner, Assem Allam, wanted to make a further investment and buy the ground from the council so that the club could prosper and the KC extended. (Or so he claims.) His attempt to buy the ground from the council was refused, as far as I'm aware, "to preserve the annual Hull Fair held on the adjacent car park." Whether a fair is sufficient grounds to stifle the ambitions of a top flight sports outfit that brings in money & prestige to the city I've no idea. It seems to me, imo, that the city council have other motives and may not trust Mr Allam. Anyway, the foreign owner has now renamed the club and I'm now quoting Wiki, "Assem Allam announced that the club has re-registered as "Hull City Tigers Ltd", and that the team would be marketed as "Hull City Tigers" locally and "Hull Tigers" nationally." Some of the supporters are enraged, although it's obviously impossible to know how many and how upset they are, as the home games are almost all selling out. Various action is occurring including the efforts of a campaign group which is in 'consultation' with the owner, council etc. Wide and varied suggestions have been made from 'attacking the owner at all levels' to 'starting a new club and starting off in non league to preserve the name of the club'. The club has been known as the Tigers for decades and started using a tiger emblem after the war. However, changing the club's name to Hull City Tigers, or whatever, seems to be a step too far for some supporters. The CTID campaign group are hoping the football authorities will stop the name change despite them allowing a club to be moved 60 miles up the motorway and renamed MKD. So, after all that, my question is, If Short renamed the club 'Sunderland Black Cats' would we accept the need to promote Sunderland on a global scale, including the USA, or would people be outraged and take action? After all, the supporters have accepted the new badge, new marketing and the naming of the ground while carrying on much as before. If it didn't bring in more income stream it could be dropped as it could if Short sold out. Just interested as this seems to be the shape of things to come and something we may have to face in the future.
'Sunderland Black Cats'....Wouldn't be that bothered personally. They can change the name to anything they like. As long as home games are played in Sunderland and they where Red and White they will always be Sunderland to me.
Dont know how i would feel, if it helped boost the coffers by attracting us sponsorship i think the same as cyprus
I agree with smug's penultimate paragraph and Cyprus. no brainer really if it moves the Club forward.
I think the name change would've been more widely accepted if he'd acknowledged the fans, and given us a vote on it. Like Everton this season with their crest. But I don't see how a club like HCAFC can compete on a global market. We haven't won anything of note. And that's what people want- it's why Barcelona, Liverpool, Man Utd, Real Madrid are massive the world over.
TBH mate, I'm suspicious of every 'club poll' or 'discussion'. I think the way it works is this, A - Make a decision. B - Set us a poll/discussion/working group so the supporters can have their say. C - Ignore the supporters and claim the majority support decision A
I wouldn't be surprised. Apparently he's got to give the fans consultation, according to the FA. I can see him getting a designer to produce 4/5 new crests all with Hull Tigers on it, some will boycott this, but some people will vote. And there's his consultation. All this will happen unless we get relegated of course.
He talks a load of tosh if you ask me http://www1.skysports.com/football/...hange-name-or-risk-uncertain-financial-future Hull City owner Assem Allam says it is vital to change the club's name because it is losing so much money. Allam hopes to change the team's name from Hull City AFC to Hull Tigers, having previously described 'City' as a "lousy" and "common" word. He will have to persuade the Football Association's council to allow the name change but said the club made losses of £28m last season when it was promoted to the Premier League. He told the Guardian: "I know it will make a difference; shorter names have a quicker impact, it is textbook marketing. "Hull is relevant. City is not relevant. Tigers: are you telling me you would drop the symbol of power?" Assem Allam "Hull is relevant. City is not relevant. Tigers: are you telling me you would drop the symbol of power? "I cannot keep throwing money into it. There must be a limit. Our target is for the club to be self-financed, relying on its own resources. "Manchester United are selling shirts in the Far East, selling commercial activities all over the world. We need the club to be known globally, and shortening the name will make the club known globally." FA rules however say any change to the 'playing name' - in this case Hull City - must be approved by the council and an application will have to be lodged before April 1 ahead of a proposed change for the following season. The rule states: "A club competing in any one of the Premier League, Football League, Football Conference, Southern Football League, Isthmian League and the Northern Premier League shall not be permitted to change its playing name... save with the prior written permission of council. "Any application for a change of playing name must be received before 1st April in any calendar year in order for it to be considered by council for adoption in the following playing season. "Council will use its absolute discretion in deciding whether to approve a change in a club's playing name." Fans' group 'City Til We Die' hopes the FA will block the change. It said in a statement: "Our group has already had extensive contact with key figures at the FA, and we anticipate they will take a dim view both of this announcement and of Dr Allam's rubbishing of our club's proud history at the meeting we had with him last week."
He's doing my nut in with all the daft stuff he comes out with. Yesterday he claimed "nobody can interfere with my business" & that Hull Tigers was shorter than Hull City. I think he needs to sack his PR Manager.
It wouldn't bother me too much, We're AFC but I rarely think of the AFC. We are Sunderland. if the name Sunderland Black Cats was launched as a New Company then that would bother me, but then, that would mean things have gone very very wrong.
Sunderland are big on the continent (as are Newcastle) and widely followed in Africa and Asia and it's 40 and 50 years since either of our clubs won anything. Global marketing and promotion is not about saying "we're a big club look at us" - it's more about promoting the side in foreign lands to gain income. When we signe Ji Dong Won we became the second biggest followed UK club in South Korea (After Man Utd), Our recent "Invest in Africa" sponsorship deal built bridges over there too. We're a small club in a "modern success" vein but still widely acknowledged abroad. There is no issue with that. If Short kept the name Sunderland and added something to it to make it more marketable it would only be to boost takings so it would get a big yes from me. As long as we played in Sunderland and wore Red and White - (And still had Sunderland in our name - i.e. he didn't change the name to Wearside or something!) no problem
Doesn't he just remind you of Mike Ashley's dafter half-brother? I can understand why the Hull supporters are incensed but not so sure why they believe that prodding an unstable madman with pointy sticks will help. The lesson from Newcastle is that death threats & mock funerals are met with retaliation such as the appointment of already failed and hated Joe Kinnear.
You also need money to invest in promoting your side, but we haven't got much of that, to be fair. At the end of the day, it's all a load of bollocks brought about by his little tiff with our council. How the hell it's got to this is mind boggling. Some people just shouldn't take over football clubs.
This part of the whole saga is a bit of a mystery to me, what's it all about? I've tried looking on your board but the explanations are endless, confusing and contradictory. In a nutshell ....... are the council acting as badly as the owner and why do they want to keep hold of the ground? Is there some kind of rugby/football ground share scheme lurking in the background?
Agreed, if you own a premiership club, doesnt matter which one, you are playing with the big boys, dont know how cardiff took the strip change on the chin, could be worse even, the venky's
The only name change I can remember is when Swansea became a city , and changed their name from Swansea Town to Swansea City. Pretty valid reason and caused no uproar at the time. If Hulls owner wants a shorter name for the club his options a bit limited , LA maybe , or Ely in Cambs. MK Dons ? Was that a name change ?
I can't see a reasonable argument for blaming the Council. But some do. He wanted the ground to build a sports centre/ business park, and he wanted the council to hand over the land for nowt. The Council refused to negotiate with him & told him where to go. The local paper ran the story and said it was due to the Council favouring not moving the travelling fair, that comes here every year, from the Walton Street site behind the ground, but I think it's Mr Allam talking rubbish. Part of his "gift to the people of Hull" when he became chairmen, was to lower prices (not done), expand the ground (not done & won't ever because we don't need to) and to get rid of the RL tenants. The latter has been a massive thorn in his side. After that knock back, he tried to rub them up the wrong way by getting rid of pictures of their best players, who'd excelled for Hull Fc and the England/ GBR RL national teams, from the Executive Boxes/ various areas around the ground. Which didn't go down too well.
Thanks, I thought he wanted to buy the ground, not have it given to him. Does he own the stadium and the club own the land?
