No its not. If he came out and said on reflection we remain Hull City and here's £10 million for a striker we can all get back to enjoying our time in the sun.
Read the FA rules, they are on the internet and have been quoted on here enough times. The FA Council have the full discretion to accept or reject any application for a name change. Legally it is up to them what they do. "Football is a game that respects tradition Hull Tigers breaks that tradition and so we reject it" is a perfectly rational reason to reject the name change. "Its my business I can do what I want" isn't a very good argument to get it overturned. If the FA reject the name change he can still change the name if we walks out the Premier League and the FA and starts his own Football Association.
But he is responsible, he is the one changing the ****ing name. Where you born stupid or have you had to work at it
This campaign has had **** all effect on our performance this season so far. Saturdays performance was due to the team not turning up and Bruce making tactical errors i.e letting Graham anywhere near the football field.
Ok, what if any of those clubs had gone into administration? Someone comes along and says I'll pump £66m in, pay off all the debts, and make the club more successful then it has ever been in its history, but I want to change the name (to Newcastle Magpies etc). What do you think would be said by:- The Administrators = Yes The F.A. = Yes The Fans = Yes The Creditors = Yes HMRC = Yes. If you wouldn't support the clubs survival plans in that case then you are no football fan.
So - it was a pre-condition of Doctator Allam taking over the Club's debts, was it? Never heard that before, but it's all clear now. I must've just missed it at the time.....
Now you are being ridiculous. If Peter is going to change the colour of his kitchen we should all have a say in it. Your advice on the matter is silly. We should have a referendum and the some of us should put a few pence into the cost of one of the pots of paint and become part owners of his house. It's the only fair way!
I have heard this Tiger Beer connection but why would a brand that is not on sale in this country be bothered. It is already huge in the far east so would not need to increase its cover. With regards the North Ferriby purchase, if AAs money is involved it just goes to show he know even less about FA rules than we thought as you are not allowed to own more than one team.
In your opinion. Others may think its the fact that they are on telly and watched by millions of potential customers.
That isn't what has happened here though, is it. AA bought City with the expectation, or assumption, that he could get hold of the stadium too. The name change has only come to light since his bust up with the council - directly or not. The sceptics may believe that's a direct dig at the council, but regardless, it was never in his initial (or the public version of it) to change the name.
The only thick person here is YOU. If you deliberatly bankrupt a company you are committing fraud, why the **** do you think there has been all the **** about the RBOS in the press in the last few days.
You half wit. Many companies go bankrupt. Sometimes its down to bad management, sometimes it's trading conditions. Sometimes it no longer makes sense to keep them afloat. Very rarely is it fraud. If you are accusing RBOS of fraud, in a public forum, good luck to you.
I agree, as there is so much traffic on the boards the truth becomes blurred (not necessarily by intent). I would love to see these threads tidied up, but accessible, and a main thread started with clear positioning statement that are unequivocal in where the efforts are focussed - none of the legalese and bumpf, just good old plain English - it could start with the minutes of THE meeting.
