"So, I was right, then judging by the responses in this." I am disappointed by your placement of commas in that sentence.
It's been posted before. Premier League rules rather than FA ones if I recall correctly. But why does it matter anyway? Is it too much to ask for an owner to give a **** about what we think without being forced too?
Both were dismissed without consideration, as they didn't meet the basic requirements, one was an application to use the name of a club which had gone bust(which isn't allowed) and the other was to use a name too close to an existing club(which also isn't allowed). From memory, I think it was Darlington in the first instance and something like Brighton and Hove United for the second.
I'm being picky, but the rules are flawed. What the actual rules are saying is that there is no rule that governs a name change. Council will use its absolute discretion in deciding whether to approve a change in a Club’s playing name And the PL rules do not really say anything provide for consultation with them on a regular basis through forums, questionnaires and focus groups and by the publication of current policies on major issues in an easily digested format;
The point is that the rules do not set out a process to follow. Even the PL rules can be read as "have regular consultation with fans and publish details of major issues in easy to read formats".
It's never actually been used before, so there can't be any claim of inconsistency and I can't see what could be seen as unfair. Allam's claim that it was unfair because the fans were consulted is ridiculous.
All true, I was simply pointing out that the discretion cannot be absolute. It has to be conditional and justifiable to be valid.
Watch out for an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, his aim will be to wear out the FA with countless attacks from a variety of angles. And all the time he is appealing he will continue the process of death by osmosis.
I'd agree that the rules aren't good enough, there should be far more detailed rules to prevent daft owners wasting the FA's time with any more hair brained schemes. The rules also need to be extended to cover badges, kits and social media, we've offered to work with the FA, in conjunction with other trusts, to help draft these improvements.
The Premier League Rules (R.20) says: "A Club’s policy with regard to its stakeholders should provide for consultation with them on a regular basis through forums, questionnaires and focus groups and by the publication of current policies on major issues in an easily digested format." Assem Allam didn't do any of this before he made the application. He said "nobody tells me what to do". All the FA did was what he should have done and didn't. Allowed the fans the opportunity to put their views in line with the rules of the Premier League. The arbitration process isn't bothered whether the rules are right or wrong, unless they are against English law. Arbitration will look at whether the FA followed its own rules, the rules which gave them complete discretion in making the decision. If it did follow its own rules they will see if the procedure complied with natural justice. Either way I don't think Assem Allam has a leg to stand on. The application in Brighton's case would be in breach of copyright law as Brighton and Hove United was too close to Brighton and Hove Albion. Darlington's name would be owned by the liquidator and couldn't be used without their consent. So both applications fell because they were in breach of English law. As such there was no need to follow the same procedure as applied to us. If he does win the FA will consider the decision of the Arbitration panel and decide in April whether Hull City will be called Hull Tigers next season. My reading of their rules (and the precedent of MK Dons) says there will be no new application. The FA has to re-consider the original application in light of the panel's findings. Next season Hull Tigers could be playing Leeds United. By April I'm not even sure he can withdraw the application. He's not going to sell the club this season unless he takes a huge loss. His only hope of getting his money back is by staying in the Premier League and taking it out £5 million or so a year over the next 5 or 6 years.
Obi, re read the PL and move the emphasis. Hull City comply. As,for the arbritation, the FA made the club hold a ballot and then did not accept the result. I know that if I was in Assem Allams position, I would want compensation and without wishing debate open on the rights and wrongs of the name change, the FA screwed up and that is my point.
