Why does it matter how many people want him gone or even hate him? It's not a taboo and shouldnt be controversial. He's fully earnt any hatred he gets through his own actions. The worst thing an owner can do is turn the club against its own fans and thats what he's done. For you, Tobes, good results on the pitch might outweigh that, but not for me. We're not used to success at City and it never stopped us supporting the team before we had it. The important thing is having a club to support and which appreciates its fans and itself as a part of the community. The results mean nothing if it's not your club any more. The damage that has been done to our club over the last year has been far more significant than relegation would be. Even if he leaves today, there's an air of hostility between fans which won't go away overnight. We're left with a badge which doesn't represent the club but the horrible name change situation. The relationship between club and fans is at an all time low. None of that should be ignored because of results. Those who are willing to ignore that for the sake of success on the pitch are either sellouts, or simply don't get what a football club can mean to its fans.
We reached enough critical mass to achieve our objection which was to persuade the FA to say no to the application. The campaign wasn't anti-Allam, it didn't want rid of him so it wasn't really a protest group.
Hull UK City of Culture 2017 Hull City AFC promoted to the Premier League for the first time in its history 2008 Hull to become the hub for green energy Hull has many things going for it, always has had
Easier said than done I think mate. Moores at Liverpool cared deeply about the club and sold to what he thought was a pair of driven entrepreneurs, but they leveraged debt on the club and took them into administration in everything but name. The point being that charlatans aren't always easy to spot....... In terms of your sustainability as a PL club, the TV revenue hike should see you OK until the next massive hike ends up arriving in a couple of years time. The hard work has been done, the huge investment needed to get you to the promised land of the EPL has paid off. Your last accounts showed that you were roughly at the point of break even. Your next owner shouldn't need to splash the cash.
What, and that's it? You'll be traipsing out the old "We were once the centre of the World Fishing Industry" next. Don't forget to add Roy North and the guy from Fine Young Canibals to your list of "Hull Achievements".
Like I said if you don't have the facts how can you have any kind of informed opinion ? It always amazes me when fans of other clubs think they know it all
Straight Question Happy If the vote was do you prefer HULL CITY OR HULL TIGERS as our name How would you vote. Even the Allams have admitted there was no deal On the table for more investment if the name changed So What's the point of it ????? Even a siimpleton like me can see its ****ing Pointless
Yes our accounts showed us breaking even. We got to the FA Cup final that season and play Arsenal away in January. I wouldn't be betting on a cup run this year, but live in hope. We have bought a number of players that will be on more than the players we already have so wages will have increased. We have to pay £9 million in transfer instalments plus maybe £8 million for the players we got in the summer. Our small profit gets quickly eaten up. As you know football is a cash business. Your players need to be paid their large salaries every month. The tax man then gets his cut and round and round it goes. The TV money will find its way into players' pockets, you slightly later as existing contracts will complete their cycle. However the players you buy will expect more pay as a result. So any losses incurred require an injection of cash, either bank borrowings (Bartlett) or company borrowing (Allam). The way of the footballing world.
The EPL wages cap will slow the transfer of the additional TV revenue into players / agents pockets. Given where you are now, you could run Hull City as a sustainable entity in the PL, without the need for stakeholder cash, that was my point, in exactly the same way as we are run.
Perhaps, but how many young players have you sold since getting £25 million for Wayne Rooney? That part of your set-up is missing from ours which means we have to find that cash from somewhere else.
Have a great Christmas Happy Tiger...Your view is your view and that's how it should be . I just don't see what the point is.
1 - Jack Rodwell. Rooney was sold in 2004 and our previous Managers net spend during his 11 year tenure was just under £11m in total! He didn't make cash from selling youngsters, he made money from buying players cheap, developing them and selling them on for a massive profit e.g. Lescott and Arteta.
So that was all your own doing? I thought it was written in the FA's rules that he couldn't change the name and therefore was always going to be dismissed. "Persuade" is quite the word.
You thought wrong, there's nothing in the FA rules to say you can't change a club name, you just need FA approval to do so.
I recall the FA Council voting on the matter. 63.5 per cent of the FA council voted against the name change. A FA statement read: "The FA council has today rejected Hull City's application to change their playing name to Hull Tigers. "The council's decision - carried by a 63.5 per cent vote of its members - came after a recommendation from The FA's membership committee. "The Council, which is made up of representatives from across football, fully considered the recommendation and the subsequent responses received from Hull City in reaching its decision."
