I read earlier that AA should be blamed for the lack of support and ultimately spilling onto the pitch and effecting the players. I never said blaming AA for their actions is wrong, I didn't say that once. AA is the cause for all of this and should be held accountable. But CTWD and the other "protestors" should also take some responsibility for the effect it is having on our season.
I think it's a bit rich blaming protestors for a slump in form to be honest, it could well be that people who don't protest and sit there like lemons at matches might have an equal negative effect
We'd have scored more if I'd gone to pub before the game. Extra beer, more pees and they score when I go to the loo. Bad news is, I won't be drinking Sunday either.
Again, were did I say the protesters were the cause of our slump in form? You can't possibly say they weren't a factor and have no effect at all? On Saturday, it was hard to tell the difference between the two.
There is no negative effect to be had by singing and appluading. If the supporters did have any negative effect on the team then it would have been the usual groaning every time we lost the ball that did the damage. This needs addressing.
Yet again, If you think that a player will be listening out for what the pro-city chants are, and why we are singing them, and then it will affect their performance, then you are a complete and utter ****** of the highest order.
Oh god, we have an ignorant arsehole. So you're suggesting encouragement won't, you know, encourage the players?
This is the first reasonable argument I have read to support the name change, however my opposition is based on both sentiment and finance, and they are inextricably linked. In the 70's 80's and 90's people would ask why I still go to City and I would reply because its in my blood. I used to dream of seeing Hull City in the top league, and as decades passed came to accept that I would die never having seen the dream come true. I go with my wife, my children have been regulars when they lived in the area, I go with the same friends as I went with over 30 years ago. We meet up with friends, one of whom has three young sons who are becoming regulars. If the name change goes ahead it is almost certain we won't go. City is in my blood, if it is not Hull City it is not my team. I know there are many on here who can't see why that is, but as has been mentioned it is the only constant factor in all the years I have followed the club. If I don't go, my wife won't either. Our two friends who we sit with wont go. The friend with his three sons won't go, both because of the name change and because our match days are not just watching the game but meeting up beforehand and just having a laugh. We have all already stopped spending money at the club. A customer of mine told me today how his son and three friends have already returned their passes. These are lads who followed City to Beijing not long ago, they have had enough of the club that they thought valued their unequivocal support, only to be told that the lure of faceless and imagined funds from foreign lands are more important than a lifetime of unquestionable faith. The point of this is just to say that this change of name, supposedly to give us the funds to compete at an even higher level than we currently are, has already begun to cost us money, and will cost us more in both finance and fan numbers in future seasons. I have been a pass holder every season for over 30 years and have seen us play at virtually every league ground in the country. If someone of my passion can consider never going again, how will it affect those with lesser allegiance. If Hull City is no more then for me the club is dead. It's reincarnation will just become another Hull sports team.
The players will hear noise that sounds positive (i.e. not boos) and will be encouraged just as much as if we were singing CTID pre-name change. The reasons behind us singing will not factor into how enthused they are.
When was it said the substance of the song has an effect? PLT said, the lack of singing has and effect.
Yes but how did the protesters cause a lack of singing? The singing of CTID was as loud as the KC has been since Cardiff. It was quiet second half just as it always is. Yes people should sing all the way through the game, but without the protest there would have been even less singing like there normally is.
The atmosphere was **** on Saturday. There was a 20 minute spell in the first half and that was it. I don't really how you're arguing against this?
Not arguing that it wasn't a **** atmosphere, I'm arguing that the protests made it better not worse than it would have been otherwise. People were singing CTID as a protest, and they didn't stop singing because they were protesting, they stopped singing because our fans are not generally noisy.
Yes but that's not because of any protest and in fact the opposite is true. The support for the team at the weekend was better than it has been for ages when fuelled by the protest/banner/stewards thing but went quiet again later on when the protesting stopped.
