There's a difference between (a) "a vote of confidence" and a (b) "name change vote". Are they going to do (a) and then afterwards say it means they are entitled to go ahead with a name change? They might also count all season passholders who dont vote as part of the "silent majority" supporting them!
Even if they try to do a twisted vote, I believe the FA will be privvy to it and see right through what he is doing. It will be rejected regardless now.
Any idea what grounds they could possibly have for legal action? It's a members club, with rules they signed up to. They're perfectly at liberty to start a new team called Hull Tigers that, in their view, would make them a fortune, so hardly restrictive practice.
As the vote won't impact on, nor will it be used to influence the FA in respect of the name change, it's entirely possible the question could be nothing directly to do with the name change and could just be a vote of confidence in the Allams. They seem keen to know if they're wanted or not by the majority, and are happy to bugger off if they're not, so why bother with a waste of time "Hull Tigers Yes/No" poll when they're actually at this stage more interested in "Allams Yes/No". A lot of you are just assuming it will be a vote based purely on the name change, there's way more at stake and an issue now.
What would a vote of confidence achieve? If they won, Hull Tigers would still be rejected. If they lost, they are most unlikely to get the club sold immediately to then be able to walk away. No point in any ballot at this stage. Why bother?
I'm not arsed about a poll as it's too late to influence anything. I just hope the poll is straight forward, if it's "Hull City or Hull Tigers" or "Allam in or Allam out" then I hope it's presented in such a way. What I think we'll get however, is a combination of those two, which will be of no use to anyone.
If he tries merging the two issues, I think he'll lose big time. I'll vote for which ever option keeps the name the same. If it's a vote of confidence in him, I would have voted in favour but if it sounds like he'll use that to relight the name change, then I've no confidence in him.
I find it strange everyone seems to think that. If the Allams do fuse both questions they're undoubtedly shooting themselves in the foot as a good chunk will put precedence on the name where a separate question for Allam in would have their support, and they will know that. If it was as part of the submission to the FA I could understand the distortion in an attempt to manipulate votes, not that the FA wouldn't see right through it anyway and render it useless (actually that maybe asking a lot of that useless crock of **** organisation).
The poll will be an out and out vote of confidence. They understand their current popularity level and will sideline the name-change to give their overall ownership and public benevolence an opportunity to take precedence; they will 're-establish a position of authority and popularity. It is clear that, if done on these terms, they will have no problem achieving that short term goal. Medium term some form of legal action is possible, probably based on what they consider to be a restriction of trade through an ill-defined policy - the prejudged or prejudiced card. Long term they will focus on their original goal, which is development opportunities - HCC is key to this and we should expect the unexpected.
It's all a big conspiracy by the FA to enforce the rules , Surely the Allams aren't as stupid as they are now making themselves look ? Maybe they are
FA Rule 3 (l) A Club competing in any one of The Premier League, The Football League, The Football Conference, the Southern Football League, the Isthmian League and the Northern Premier League shall not be permitted to change its playing name (i.e. the name under which the Club competes in a Competition), as recorded on Form âAâ, save with the prior written permission of Council. Any application for a change of playing name must be received by The Association before 1st April in any calendar year in order for it to be considered by Council for adoption in the following playing season. Council will use its absolute discretion in deciding whether to approve a change in a Clubâs playing name Perhaps the Allams need to take note of the final line !!!
There has got to be a bit of that in it, John, although I think his arrogance is such that he sees no fault in his own actions, simply a failure of others to grasp his simple genius (arf). I think the real purpose of the ballot is to act as a 'time-out', to give pause to proceedings and for them to be able to stick a phoney label on the result and then start the next sorry session with new tactics that they will claim were always the game-plan. Get ready to rumble all over again!
Not bad Mr Fez, very perceptive. The council only offered a referendum on the sale of the stadium. Extending the stadium is at their own discretion. I have a strong feeling that you would never get extending the stadium past a citizens vote at the moment. But if Mr Allam could get a vote of confidence past his adoring fan base he would then be able to use this as a mandate to demand from the council an extension on his rented stadium. If they had the temerity to refuse he would threaten to walk away within twenty four hours and we all know that he is not the sort of man to go back on his word. Expect this one to run and run and don't be shocked when he reapplies next year and tries a bit harder with his FA procedures.
