Name change discussion
- Thread starter RicardoHCAFC
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I don't need minutes to realise that as a business decision and a sporting decision, a rename exercise is stupid, pointless, and counter productive. Personally I think the minutes should be published because non publication is getting in the way of the debate, if they show AA to be a bumbling idiot or a financial genius then so be it.
The minutes would be damaging to the club. Why would anyone , supporters or the Allams want to damage the club ?
But if a name change, potential or not, is damaging the club then how much worse can it get?
How do you know it would be damaging and, if true, to what degree and how lasting? I find it hard to believe that Assem Allam would have sat for three hours in a room full of relative strangers and discussed issues harmful to the club without asking them to sign a NDA.
We know from OLM that there is nothing damaging to CTWD. We also know that some of that previously suppressed content has since been drip-fed into the public domain by CTWD.
I believe that the failure to issue the minutes has damaged the position of the anti-name-change campaign, it has unnecessarily protected Allam and it has given reason to question some of the posts issued by reps, when, if the minutes were issued, it would have been a case of referring back.
It's all about opinion and by far the weight of opinion I see on here says publish.
The whole point of the campaign is to stop the name-change, this is a failure in that campaign.
Every action that is committed to by CTWD should be to prevent the name-change, not look back and 'perhaps we should have done that. If someone can show me some sign of gratitude from the club, some advance in communication or some advantage to CTWD, then I might reconsider.
I fully support ctwd Fez, i have to because we need such a campaign if we are to succeed in stopping the name change. So i need to trust them when they say releasing the whole minutes would be damaging to the club.
I've been very impressed with the way in which they/we have gone about our business, and see no reason whatsoever to doubt them.
I know they are real Hull city fans, and want the same bright future for the club that i do, so why would they hold information back, if it might be useful to this end ?
I have to trust them,it's as simple as that.
I've been very impressed with the way in which they/we have gone about our business, and see no reason whatsoever to doubt them.
I know they are real Hull city fans, and want the same bright future for the club that i do, so why would they hold information back, if it might be useful to this end ?
I have to trust them,it's as simple as that.
This is the key for me. I don't know most people on here personally but I know of the CTWD guys a bit and they really are the core of our support.
I think you both know that I support CTWD and I agree with the essence of what you both say. I suppose my concerns are best stated as:
AA (the club) did not feel a NDA was necessary, so why do CTWD; we know he subsequently asked for the subject of fan-ownership/sharing to be with-held, we also know that fact has recently been divulged by CTWD (or a member).
It took a fair bit of tugging for folk to get the priorities sorted for CTWD; there was a point were it appeared not to be the name-change.
I can think of nothing that will compromise the club more than the actions of AA. If a bit of unpleasantness and scandal will torpedo the name-change then let it happen; it's a fact that AA (the club) don't give a ****.
I use AA (the club) as, until this is sorted, they are one and the same. I have no interest in protecting Hull Tigers; why would I?
I can trust folk but I don't have to trust their judgment in all things; especially when some explanations don't add up.
This is the kind of action which earns respect for Allam. It did when he put his money into the club and provided its resurrection:
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Stev...ansfer-kitty/story-20432827-detail/story.html
What is not needed is the name-change nonsense - and it only brings him a very sizeable dis-respect. It's the players and their performance which will lift the club's (world) profile/status; not the name Hull Tigers.
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Stev...ansfer-kitty/story-20432827-detail/story.html
What is not needed is the name-change nonsense - and it only brings him a very sizeable dis-respect. It's the players and their performance which will lift the club's (world) profile/status; not the name Hull Tigers.
Perhaps you need to start your own campaign instead of just niggling away at the current one with 'what ifs and maybe's'. It's clear from your comments and suggestions that you've not had dealings with Mr Allam, because if the group acted as you suggest, there would be no Hull City irrespective of the FA decision.
Me I think the campaign group are doing far better than I expected any of us to manage and they're certainly raising our global profile as fans.
What is evident is the HDM bias on this.
You get a report from HDM
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Stev...ansfer-kitty/story-20432827-detail/story.html
and in the YP
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spor...ot-put-tigers-in-financial-jeopardy-1-6368489
Part of Steve Bruce statement is missing in the HDM.....
Its better in this, and more reflects what he said to Burnsie.
http://www.football365.com/hull-city/9114027/Bruce-hails-Allam-commitment?
You get a report from HDM
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Stev...ansfer-kitty/story-20432827-detail/story.html
and in the YP
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spor...ot-put-tigers-in-financial-jeopardy-1-6368489
Part of Steve Bruce statement is missing in the HDM.....
Its better in this, and more reflects what he said to Burnsie.
http://www.football365.com/hull-city/9114027/Bruce-hails-Allam-commitment?
Fabulous statement of support from Brucie in regards to Dr Allam. Spot on too. He's also honest enough for me to not think "he's just covering his arse for his job".
One paragraph in the YP report slyly reveals that the Allam family's outlay has actually been far, far, far smaller than people think...
The Allam family bankrolled City’s promotion success last season and similar capital has been introduced this term in an attempt to keep the East Riding club in the top flight. Should the double offer for Long and Jelavic come off, sources at the KC have indicated this would take the Allam family’s spending on Hull to around £90.
Thanks for the YP link, John - I hadn't seen that before. The HDM are trying to stay 'neutral' as far as can be seen.
But....the YP still differentiates between AA's financial support and his crackpot (= controversial) plan for changing City's name. Brucey is merely stressing the positive, whilst apparently trying to ignore the negative, in the best interests of the Club and team. (It shouldn't need to be done by him, but it was AA who made it necessary).
I don't like that statement by Brucie. Most of it is just the usual stuff he pretty much has to say but he's gone from saying "Look we're are traditionalists in football and I can see where they're coming from." to now saying "There's a lot of nonsense over a name change."
He seems to be saying our owner can lie to and insult us as much as he likes as long as he spends money on players, even though he's told us the club already can't afford the current lot even without two new record signings.
Thank you for mentioning Allam. Everyone is praising Bruce, but amidst all the anger at Allam we do have to remember the man is putting a lot of money on the line for this club's success. This doesn't buy him forgiveness for the name change, but it should at least be recognised for what it is, and that's a huge step towards establishing us in the top flight.
Just got an email from the FSF. Didn't even know I was a member. They want me to fill in a short survey about the name change.
1) Are you a Hull City fan?
2) Do you support the name change.
Having completed the survey it seems I am free to fill it in again...
Also this highlights the problem of surveys. This one in particular is clearly worded by an anti-change person/group. If I say no I am not supportive of it does that mean I am against it? If the question was are you against it, would a no vote mean I am for it? There's no middle ground option.
1) Are you a Hull City fan?
2) Do you support the name change.
Having completed the survey it seems I am free to fill it in again...
Also this highlights the problem of surveys. This one in particular is clearly worded by an anti-change person/group. If I say no I am not supportive of it does that mean I am against it? If the question was are you against it, would a no vote mean I am for it? There's no middle ground option.