Sorry I missed out. Not all supporter groups are included. Just an example will Hull City Southern Supporters be invited into the consultation? I formed Hull City Hampshire Dorset and Isle of Wight (Hull City HDi) some time ago, we have three members. We had a web site and everything. I demand that I am included in the consultation. I'm a supporter group after all and I have rights you know, I mean we have rights of course, I should have taken a vote on where we officially stand, but I know for sure that I am against the name change, one other is for it and one doesn't care either way. So when I write to the FA I can make my I mean our feelings quite clear.
Are we saying politicians tell the truth now? The FA have specifically stated in their press release that fans groups will be consulted as stakeholders. Wait a minute, am I saying the FA tell the truth now? ****ing hell, we have to decide whether a politician or the FA is telling the truth, is there a way they can both be lieing? Stakeholders can be determined by any entity with the authority in the decision, or even the courts if someone felt that they were a significant stakeholder who was not included*, it is not the business of the club to determine who it's own stakeholders are. *that would be a challenge against the FA's decision by any member of the FA (professional or amateur on the grounds of failing to follow it's own procedures which then required the status of the potential stakeholder to be assessed and then the decision either upheld or put back to the consultation stage. With Coventry the situation is entirely different, clubs are allowed to play outside of their catchment area for a limited time when there are issues with their ground and there's precedent. Coventry couldn't afford to keep playing at the Ricoh so were allowed to move out of catchment until they found a ground they could afford. Who was it went to Don Valley Stadium, was it Rotherham? Guessing at the next example, if you want to take the extreme example of MK Dons you had a failing club that was allowed to permanently move in order to survive, that however was based on a properly organised business plan and not on some random idea plucked from thin air with no supporting evidence. In order to demand an inclusion (as per the challenge I suggested above) you'd need to be a significant stakeholder, that would require a decent sized group. 3 wouldn't count. OSC would have to, how large the other groups are would determine their chances of inclusion (I don't have figures for any of them), it's just a case of what constitutes significant and how many bodies would be required. You'd be hard puched to argue that the OSC on its own would be suitable though, there are/have been far too strong links between the leadership of the group and the staff of the club itself for it to be considered an independent entity.
IMO you are right, the FA would be stark-staring crazy not to include CTWD and HCC, as it leave them open to criticism of a job half-done. It's just a Brucey-Bonus that it will really annoy AA. I wonder if, as a result of the uncertainty and the lack of a restraining hand (such as NT), if we are in for another bout of lies, bullying, deceit and manipulation? Did you see the Tony Fernandes opinion piece, as there must be good strategy support in that?
The FA decide who the stakeholders are. They have said the consultation will include supporters' groups. We are a supporters group with a high profile. I am assuming the FA will consult us. I think the announcement re consultation shows the FA have accepted some of what the Sports Minister is saying. The City Council are a stakeholder with an interest in the KC. Whether the name change affects them is irrelevant, they will be allowed a say if the FA decide to ask them. I have no idea who the FA will include in the consultation, but I have a feeling that they won't let Hull City Tigers Limited decide who to ask, or who not to. Neither CTWD nor Hull City Tigers Ltd have any control over the process the FA decide on. So why worry. If we are included great, if not we campaign to oppose the name change and be heard. I don't think we'll have to do that though.
I don't know if I'm reading wrong, but I think every man and his dog will have an opportunity to be heard in a full consultation. It won't be so much who the FA go to, but who goes to the FA, in the form of letters/reports/emails etc. It cannot be as simple as defining a relevant sample group and going with the majority of that group. In a consultation, there could be one individual that makes such a significant point it pushes the outcome one way or another. We'll ALL get a chance to be heard to some degree.
Allow me to summarise for you then Dutchy: Regarding the consultation, it will be one from the following; 1. Anyone who wants to be consulted, sends in emails etc 2. OSC 3. Any supporters group that wants to be and HCC 4. Anyone the Club says will be consulted 5. Anyone CTWD says will be consulted 6. The FA will just announce after careful consideration and consultation, they agree to the name change Simple truth is, no one really knows. We don't even know when this will take place, in what format and with whom. It might start in March a week before the meeting, it might have already started. For some reason both sides seems to be keeping their cards close to their chests, with suggestions of inside info, of FA contacts, just suggestions or maybes mind, which is ironic given the charges of deceit, lies and treachery.
Well that's all right then. Mind you, on what basis can a Local Authority give a valid opinion? As the fan base extends beyond the boundaries of Hull, will the East Riding have a say. Is there an Economic Regional Area? Will it be consulted? As the PL is a nationally based league will the UK Government be consulted, oh wait we aim to be in Europe in the future, this is an EU commission level problem. I think that you are wrong about HCC, they may be asked for an opinion but they will not have any part in the consultation process as such. I also think that being recognised as a supporter group is not as easy as some believe. There are difficulties in establishing representation. Group A has 2000 members with voting rights Group B has 200 members with voting rights Group C has 2000 members with no voting rights If all three groups state that they are against the name change, does that mean that 4200 supporters are against the name change? When in reality supporters could be members of all three groups. Only the ones who have conducted a poll of their members may be considered and only then as a percentage of each groups membership. So if a poll shows that group A members vote 1000 against, 500 for, 500 abstained that leaves a big issue. Anyone could argue that only 50% of supporter group members are against the name change. That's why the HDM poll has a big hole in it. Assem Allam already say that it is the minority that are against the name change and until he is proved beyond doubt that that is not the case, his argument will win. I am not saying that I am right, but surely it is not wrong to ask the questions?
The FA have a finite number of resources and funds. Similarly no-one at the FA is employed in the capacity as a full-time "Name Change Officer". The FA also have their own priorities (World Cup year, maximising revenues, newly appointed Greg Dyke commission). Therefore it is likely that this issue is far down the pecking order on the agenda when it comes to be voted on. Therefore I would expect the poor sod who is given this to be more focused on task and process rather than seeking opinion from all and sundry.
Obi says he assumes the FA will consult CTWD and OLM says they will? I keep saying the same thing " if you haven't already been asked you ain't going to be invited any time soon". None of this it's early day's nonsense. The process has started. It started on the day the club made its formal application.
At our public meeting, Malcolm Clarke stated that HCC would be considered stakeholders and we should start lobbying them, I trust his opinion on such matters. There are no fan groups with 2,000 members, so that's hardly relevant, there are two fan groups with over 1,000 voting members, they are the OSC and CTWD and I expect both will be consulted. There is no sizeable fan group that is pro-name change, so whichever fan group is consulted, they are going to be anti-name change(unless someone starts a name change fan group). The OSC have conducted a poll and have a majority against the change, CTWD members are obviously 100% against, or they wouldn't be CTWD members. Anyone who contacts the FA can have their say personally, but when it comes to fan groups, it's going to be overwhelming rejecting, whichever group they speak to.
It could be me, but I suspect some mistake a consultation exercise with an exercise in determining a majority view. A consultation should be aimed at getting the correct decision, not the one that a majority in a particular sample set prefer. The key is deciding who the decision would be correct for. The FA, to some degree, represents its members, and also includes the Premier League as a seperate set. The opinion of any one member of that group could carry more weight than all of the groups you list combined.
So they only have one meeting and will most likely decide then? You would think that all the preparatory work would be done before and it would be more rubber stamping in April. If that was the start of the process there would only need to be one person to come up with an idea that needs to be investigated and that would set it back 6 months!
The decision will likely stand and fall on how credible they believe Allams arguments are for changing the name, and what impact that could have on stakeholders such as Sky, Premier League, and the FA themselves as the change will have cost implications for these organisations. Personally I believe this is why the FA will reject the argument, and they can also then throw in the argument afterwards also that the fans didn't want it either.
One group that will definitely be consulted is the FSF, who be conducting a poll of all it's Hull City supporting members. So if you haven't signed up yet... http://www.fsf.org.uk/join/
I gave an simple example and you come back with its not relevant, its an example what part of that do you not understand? You post to me that CTWD WILL be consulted and then post "I expect both". So in reality you don't know do you?
Agreed. They may talk to three supporters groups that might claim to represent 4,000 people but there could be people who are in all groups. I'm not saying that their views are not important but if they get 20,000 emails with 19,500 of them against the name change I would think that would have more sway.
