Thanks for your comment on our aims and objectives Chazz. CTWD is to be represented at the Fans' Group Meetings, the next meeting of this Group is this Tuesday. So we are already well on the way to having a voice within the club.
Thanks ellewoods. Renewals will happen when the new Trust is formed. Until that time, all existing and new memberships stand.
Will you continue to dodge difficult and uncomfortable questions? The cherry picked responses and ignored questions stick out somewhat.
So you're only answering the questions you want to. Well done. If this is how you answer questions with smug brush offs then there's no point. Is Allam there? No.
"(5) Giving supporters a voice on the Board We don’t imagine that the current owners are interested in giving CTWD an official seat on the Board, but in football things can change fast and we need to be ready. This isn’t about grabbing power for the sake of it, this is about ensuring that fans become positively involved with the club and exert influence at the highest level" CTWD have just ensured the continuation of Assenile Allams stewardship of the club until his timely death. You pro allamist rebels should be thanking them for publishing that
Are CTWD the minority who sing 'we say no' or the majority who don't and can't understand why anyone is complaining when the club is so evidently successful. Saturday was another great afternoon, one of the many I have been lucky enough to experience since the Allam's and Bruce took control. Unlike CTWD, I don't want to go back to playing Shrewsbury on a wet Tuesday evening. Not ever. Even in the unlikely event we end up playing under the name Hull Tigers, I don't see it as being that different to changing the club colours, or having a stadium named after your owners business. It would be unfortunate, but not ruinous.
Whilst in principle I agree with the idea of fan representation at the club, I have a couple of questions regarding CTWD's involvement. First off, I am not happy for a group who publicly stated they were a single issue group (opposing the name change) suddenly claiming to represent all fans and producing several aims and objectives for their future. CTWD will always be associated with the protests and the subsequent fan division and I for one would not be confident supporting them as a result. Why was the protest group name kept over the supporters trust name? Secondly, out of interest, how many board members of the original CTWD group remain on the new CTWD supporters trust? Again, I would have difficulty supporting a group run by people who opposed the owners and am left wondering if this was their long term intentions from the outset.
These are the sort of posts that cause the bullshit arguments between posters on the board... CTWD wants Allam to stay, just drop the name change. You're more hurtful to the Club than any pro or against fan group. How about let's try and keep this thread relatively sensible and level-headed rather than beginning unnecessary flak for once...
Thanks for the questions Captain. The association with the name change campaign is something that CTWD members can influence in the future, and that includes the name of the Trust as well as what its position on various issues might be. At the FGM last April those assembled gave significant support for retaining the CTWD name - but this is a matter for further debate when we get to point of forming the Trust. The current committee and supporting sub-committee is 2/3rds from the NTHT campaign group and 1/3rd new blood. But of course all posts are up for grabs and voted for, so who leads the Trust is ultimately down to its members. There was no intention to form a new Trust when CTWD first formed - this is something that evolved asa result of encouragement from campaign supporters. None of the current elected committee wish to be on the board of Hull City, but we think that having a fans' rep on the board is a good thing to seek in the future.
Why dont you have a vote for all passholders to see if they want you to represent there interests as your intentions are to try and get on the board as supporters representatives . Because as a passholder if a supporter was ever elected on to the board i would want to have a vote on who is representing me. My limited knowledge of supporters trusts are that they are normally formed when a club is in trouble or going through financial problems not half way up the premier league.
So what CTWD is saying is that they want a person on the board of hull city to represent 1800 people some of which are not even hull city fans and many who are not pass holders.. now thats what i call a supporters trust
How surreal to have a born and bred in Clitheroe, Lancashire County Cricket Club supporting Lancastrian, seeking power and influence amidst a fan pressure group of a proud Yorkshire Football Club. My enemy's enemy is my friend? Not in this house.
Wait... so what you're saying is that those who have no pass are not entitled to have their say on the club?
The simple answer is to join CTWD yourself if you want to have a say. If you don't care, then don't. What a stupid post
cant be arsed to read any of the replies to the OP as im guessing its turned into playtime . But for the record as a CTWD member i support the proposals here ,
I admire your passion to defend your stance but you are incredibly delusional. If you're implying that Bruce is solely to thank for the success then I cannot agree. Bruce isn't a miracle worker, without AA opening his pockets he would not have achieved anything. You seem so far up CTWD's ass that you're as delusional as AA. Both Bruce and AA have been crucial in instrumenting our rise. There's no way you can quantify their efforts , neither could have done their job without the other and you can't take AA's good work away because of the s**t things he's done. That's being incredibly hypocritical and pretty much weakens your and CTWD's argument.
My problem with this statement by CTWD and their plan is that they're effectively doing the same mistake as AA, in thinking that they speak on behalf of me. Reading all the comments about "giving the fans a voice" just translates as giving our little members group's agenda a voice. From that point of view, I see no difference between each side. Maybe that's because I'm somewhere in the middle or maybe it's just because nothing good ever comes out of someone assuming they speak for the "majority". If I joined CTWD but disagreed with one aspect of their proposal, I suppose that would be irrelevant and they'd push it through anyways. So unless you happen to agree with every single thing MG says then it is pretty irrelevant .
