The point is, that if they allow one, they have to allow them all and if some nutter takes over Fulham and wants to change their name to the Cottagers, they won't be able to stop it.
If our name changes, then in two or three years we start seeing Newcastle Magpies v. Liverpool Redsox etc, do you think it will seem as attractive to either the British or overseas market? Seeing as most football fans, pundits, and journalists in this country are against the name change, doesn't that suggest that the football club owners who were almost certainly asked their opinion, would be against it? Would you be as excited about tomorrows game at Old Trafford if it was Manchester Devils v Manchester Hunter? Would someone in Singapore think it sounded as attractive? If the product is less attractive, it devalues it and everyone loses out. That would include our club.
But why do they need to stop it? It will change nothing of importance to the FA. If a team has a strong name already why would they want to change it? We do not have a strong name/brand. Most people don't give a **** about Hull City as a city or a football club and have only bad things to say about it (Unfairly IMO but its true).
The point you are blatantly missing is that Allam's proposed name change is **** all to do with making money. It's all to do with the petulant tantrum he's having because he didn't get his own way with the CITY Council when attempting to acquire the stadium. Thankfully the FA have seen through his guise & realised the two bob business plan he presented on a lined pad he bought from Lidl is bollocks.
Personally I think we do have a strong brand, we are already known around the world. However, as OLM said, once one club is allowed to change there is nothing to stop others. I think we have a strong brand but you would change it, just because you think Tottenham have a strong brand doesnt mean someone else couldn't come along and think they can do better with Tottenham Cockerels.
This is a bit of a pointless debate, you don't it won't make any difference, most other people think it would. You think AA's plan might work, pretty much everyone else doesn't and as Ben has just said, this has **** all to do with marketing and everything to do with an old bloke sulking.
How am i missing this point. True or untrue i'm pretty sure Allam didn't go to the FA asking to change a name over a dispute with the local council. He has asked them to change as he feels it will improve the clubs brand and generate more income. Now their feelings toward it working or not should not really come in to it. He should be allowed to try to generate more income in this way if he see it the best thing for his business. I'm not sure a court would side with the FA. Besides even if he is trying to get at the council, so what? I have no affinity with our council and am not particularly impressed with the way they run our city. Whats so wrong with Allam getting one over them?
It's not the best thing for his business, everybody knows including himself. As for the bit I've highlighted, it shows where you're coming from & the level of intelligence you possess.
Post a question. Ignore answers. Post different question. Ignore answers. ad infinitum. Nope, I can't see how that's discussion or debate.
The FA will reject it because they don't want to see a club like us breaking the shackles holding us back and earning success through vision and ground breaking attempts to make us financially secure. It's in their interest to rename anything they own, if it makes them money, but anything that could upset the status quo of the "established big clubs" in England will not be sanctioned. We're not trying to rename the club after a sponsor like "Red Bull", so there's no floodgates opening for that despite the scaremongering we see and hear about this. It's not about franchising. It's about a bold attempt to try something new. The FA could easily say "sure, go for it, you can't change it again for 10 years, and we'll see what happens". That however is too risky for them, in case it actually worked. The council is a side issue to this, used as a handy excuse by the people trying to hold the club back, and making sure it remains in its proper place and doesn't upset the applecart. Tan has caused far more trouble and problems at Cardiff but the FA won't do anything to protect that club. Why would they?
Gentlemen we have a winner. It's pointless us accepting anymore entries to the "who can get the most wrong in one post contest."
I have not ignored your answers, i could easily say the same with your argument. You are ignoring my point. The fact that i keep being reminded that its all about history and tradition yet the FA seem to live by different rules so long as it makes them money. This is debate, its just a shame that anyone who has a different opinion to CTWD on this board are challanged to the point of there inelegance being questioned. (See post 2428). I am apparently a plastic thick prick (is that a dildo?) just for having a different view on the future of our club. I want what is best for HULL CITY/TIGERS. In my opinion the CTWD campaign is doing more harm than good. I know you say you don't want him out but your actions are pushing him closer to it. Yes he is stubborn. I seem to remember lots of you liking his stubbornness when dealing with Leicester over NP. Now he is being stubborn with his name change idea and because you don't agree he's the devil. I like the fact he is stubborn, i think it is part of the reason he is successful. Well i want him to continue making this club a success and i trust him to do it.
I'm going to post something shortly that will prove otherwise, this is absolutely being driven by a hatred of Hull City Council and AA's made no secret of that fact with everyone who meets him. I'm not just talking about the meeting with the fans, but his meetings with the Premier League, journalists, everyone he meets to discuss the name change, he just bangs on about the council. It would be funny if it hadn't led to all this nonsense.
You're not being insulted for having a different opinion, people are trying to point out what look like errors in your argument,but you come back with strawman arguments, because you're claiming a position for other people that they don't necessarily hold. For example, it's not ALL about history for all of us.
Its about our history, tradition and our community. Nothing to do with the FA Cup, or the League Cup or sponsorship. It is solely about the community past, present and future that is Hull City supporters. We cannot influence the FA Cup with Tiger Beer, yet, but we can do something about Assem Allam taking our identity because he thinks it is irrelevant and lousy.
It may not be all about History, I am pointing out the errors in your argument. That is all. I would not start throwing insults around because of your views. You are entitled to your opinion. The truth is you just don't like the idea, and this is fine. However I believe you are putting to much emphasis on tradition and history and was merely pointing out that to the FA the importance of tradition is selective. Changes have made no difference to the popularity of our sport and in some instances have enhanced it.
