Im not going back through 111 pages to see if anyone pointed any of this out. I figured out where the Allams got the name change idea. Our new badge is also featured as is next seasons away kit. Further more after the name change steve bruce will be forced to wear this "improved" track suit. Uh and everytime we score Bruce will be forced to do this celebration dance. Here is the trailer. [video=youtube;JQANbc7nPjY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQANbc7nPjY[/video] Or just watch this short clip of the goal dance, the track suit, away kit and the new logo. [video=youtube;fxudxiA8odw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxudxiA8odw[/video]
That's a remarkably naive post;the fact that a possible outcome (lack of noise - tribal association) of the name-change would lead to you deserting the football club, previously known as Hull City AFC. After all of your endless mutterings across the boards, it is simply daft. The thing that really makes me laugh is that should your own scenario be played out: do you really believe that those loyal Hull City AFC supporters, probably members of CTWD, would want the rank smell of an Allam Quisling amongst them; a shallow, excuse of the name-change whose only self-interest is PL football? I think, that if ever such a new-order came about, those admirable folk (using your implied esteem) who embody "The spirit of Bunkers and the Kempton" would surely know who you are and how you contributed to their enforced move; they would scowl at your lack of tribal support for their most basic standard - club name, identity and heritage - and they would spit on you (and cast you out) for your shallow, self-serving betrayal of who they are. You would be unwelcome, a pariah, a bad-taste-in-the-mouth. All hypothetical, of course, but the outcome of your actions are far more likely than a name-change. It's fine living in the past and it's great living for the moment, but you should always keep one eye on the future - which is why your own sentiments and aspirations to belong to that 'in-crowd' of chanters and ranters is best served by supporting their core identity and not calling it unimportant. I look forward to your response; please give it proper thought.
Anyone want any nice dart flights? please log in to view this image Only £3 from the CTWD shop... http://ctwdshop.com/ I'm currently using them on one of these... please log in to view this image
----- I know that Macca. We all have our own views and opinions . Nothing will change yours....or mine . Nowt wrong with that .
If I’d written something I believed in, something to help sway the minds of the FA, I’d have confidence in it. Therefore, I’d want to show it to everyone, or anyone who wanted to read it, as I’d be confident it would further the cause I believed in and potentially persuade others round to my way of thinking. John has had a great opportunity to present his report to the forum which he has wilfully ignored. Why? I’d hazard that it’s due to one of these two reasons: 1. It’s bullshit. He authored no such report. 2. He has no confidence in his own report and I’d suspect, if it does exist, it’s built upon falsehoods masquerading as proven fact: such as his 30% claim on this very thread. If he has gone down the route of making up figures and presenting them as fact then the FA will obviously see through this and it possibly will do more harm than good to the cause he supports. At best it will have no impact. Of course, he still has the opportunity to ram these words down my throat by letting us all read a solid, reasoned amd well argued report written by him. I sincerely hope he takes the opportunity.
Football clubs are part of this country’s National Treasure and should be equally protected in Law There is a law regarding Treasure Trove in this country, which says that certain items of unearthed treasure are of such immense historical, scientific or cultural importance to the nation that they must be saved from being lost, transferred, broken up or sold overseas. The law says all such Treasure comes under the protection of the Crown to be saved for the nation. No matter that you found it on your property, that it was unearthed by archaeological excavation or by enthusiastic treasure hunter, an individual cannot profit from ownership of such treasure to the detriment of the nation. Football clubs are of no less value to this country – being just as much part of Britain’s cultural heritage as the bones of Richard III or the gold and silver of the Staffordshire Hoard. Why can’t they also be protected by law from being lost to the nation, sold to overseas investors or traded for profit, and then abandoned when the money runs out? When the skeleton of what we now know to be King Richard III was disinterred in Leicester in 2012, or when the vast hoard of gold and precious metal dating from 600 AD was discovered in Staffordshire in 2009, there was no unseemly dash to assert ownership or to profit from the finds. Yes, there were – and are – ongoing tussles over the most appropriate parish for Richard III’s bones to have their final rest and yes, the finders of treasure trove should be suitably recompensed for their efforts or plain good fortune. But because we are a cultured people, we have recognised for many centuries that valuable items of antiquity – whether lost, buried or hidden with the intention of later recovery – belong to all of us and should be protected by the state for the enjoyment of all the generations. If you will bear with the history lesson a little longer, the English law of Treasure Trove dates from as far back as the 11th century and it has naturally evolved over time. So, whilst it may have been easy for Edward the Confessor and his ilk to claim title to all buried gold, silver, bullion or plate with the force of an army behind him, in later, gentler times it has often been necessary to amend or re-interpret the common law so that loopholes cannot be exploited to unjustly enrich finders or to allow national treasures to be sold abroad – or only saved for the nation by the payment of a high price. And this is where the parallel between Treasure Trove and the nation’s Football Clubs becomes quite interesting. In 1996 the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (you see where I am going with this) was forced to step in to enact the most recent change in the law – The Treasure Act 1996 – when two particularly valuable finds (the Sutton Hoo ship burial and a hoard of thousands of Roman coins found in Lincolnshire) did not precisely meet the definition of Treasure Trove and so ownership could not be claimed by the Crown, and there was a huge risk they would be sold abroad. Effectively the Secretary of State said “To hell with that, if the law needs to change to protect what is of value to the nation, then the law will change.” And so the law changed to encompass all such finds and the Sutton Hoo treasure was saved, although sadly it was too late to save the Lincolnshire coins. There is no reason on earth why the same end cannot be achieved for an equally valuable part of our historical and cultural heritage, Football Clubs. That is not to say that someone who invests in a football club should not be entitled to make a profit on their investment, or indeed accept full liability when it turns a loss; of course they must, that is the nature of the free market. But there must be a clear distinction made between ownership of a Football Club and ownership of the shares in a corporate entity. When an individual, family, consortium, investment fund or foreign prince acquires the assets and liabilities of an English Football Club, what they acquire in fact and in law is the corporate entity behind the club – whether that is Chelsea Village Plc or Hull City AFC Ltd. But ownership of its shares should not confer “ownership” of the Club. A football club belongs to its community, its town, its fans. It belongs to its hundred years of history, its players, its moments of triumph and disaster, its goals, promotions, relegations, its chants and songs. It belongs to the very ground it was built on. It belongs to the nation’s cultural heritage, every bit as much as Treasure Trove. No investor – however generous, however well-intentioned – should be at liberty to make changes to a Football Club’s location, name, club colours or emblems, or any other paraphernalia which are the essence of the Club, anymore than they should decide that the club will henceforth only play 7-a-side games on a Thursday afternoon or, at a whim, decide that they have had enough of the ephemeral joys of ownership and take their investment away, perhaps selling to the highest bidder, perhaps bankrupting the Club at its heart. And the government can change the law, just as it did to protect buried treasure: We can have a Protection of Football Clubs Act, which would not only protect the history and nature and status of all of this country’s historic Football Clubs, but also require Clubs to subscribe to a universal trust fund or bond arrangement, a sinking fund for when a Club finds itself in difficulty. And the trustees of such fund would retain – along with the FA and Premier League – an audit responsibility to ensure compliance with the law, which should also reduce the chances of any Club going too far down the road to annihilation to be saved. Let there be no more Wimbledon’s, Accrington Stanley’s, or Halifax Towns, no more Portsmouth’s or Leeds United’s, no more failed “fit and proper” regimes, no more investors claiming “I own this Club and can do what I like with it”. Sir, you do not own the Club, anymore than the Chancellor of the Exchequer owns the contents of the Treasury. I have a two hundred year old ash tree in my garden. I enjoy its shade and its beauty, I spend a month every autumn raking up its leaves. Every three years I have to apply for planning permission and engage a tree surgeon to give it a health check and prune its branches. I would not dream of claiming to “own” that tree. It belongs to the community and I am simply its guardian. If the law of this noble country goes to such lengths to protect and preserve a tree, surely it is not too difficult to ask it to do the same for its Football heritage? Liz Heade http://fcbusiness.co.uk/blog/?p=832
What a load of ****e. Can the law also change when a bank or business continues to pay out millions in bonus' to bosses even though the bosses have failed. Can it be changed so *****philes are given 40 years in jail instead of a paltry 4-8-10 years?? since the 80's when all the abuse scandals came out its been in the paper countless times the judge can only sentence according to guidelines. Can they pass a law that every club relegated from the premier league, can legally enforce all their players salaries drop to 5 grand a week in the championship. Because thats what makes them go to the wall.
So it isn't a load of ****e then? You've just pointed out a load of other stuff which should also be changed.
