Perhaps it's only appears to be a one-horse race (is it really?) because the donkeys have the skill to sit on the fence and do nothing but whinge.
Bloody nonsense. We have now been told November 2014, then February 2015 and now the end of the season. Did they really believe we would not be in a relegation battle back then? If all HCST want is a simple commitment to a date from the FA then that is perfectly reasonable considering they have moved it twice now. Personally I believe they should be demanding the result now as it will not change anything whatsoever on the pitch and folk who pay to support have the right to know. It's all just a continuation of the dishonest management style of our football club, whatever it is now called by the owners. What is this compromise you speak of; explain?
Why would or why should they answer anyone ? It is what happens on the pitch that matters most. For now at least. The FA i expect will leave it to the club anyway. It is a local issue. As for the HCST,, some of the people who were a part of the Hull co-operative are not happy at all. Not all Past and present members of the Hull co-op agree with what has gone on with the new group.
They should answer the question because it is their duty to do so. Answering the question of when will change nothing on the pitch, just as issuing the result will not. No, it is a FA issue, as it is them that have held the review of their actions - you really couldn't get it more wrong if you tried. Who is unhappy, why don't they speak up, there has been ample opportunity? No one expected everyone to agree or disagree, but again, why did they not speak up then or do so now? Sounds like the 'I'll hold your coat' brigade to me.
The FA being the FA will leave it to the club. As for not speaking up re. the HCST you had better ask them. I suspect that they did not even know of the meeting to change. Just a thought.
Wrong, the FA must make some sort of announcement. If I knew who they were I would ask them, but it is you who knows them so you ask them and report back, just as you made the original comment; or was it just pointless tittle-tattle?
I first started to frequent Boothferry Park pre 1950, the events of 2008 were what I and probably millions of other supporters (mostly now sadly departed this life), had been hoping and praying for since your precious 1904.
This was my reply from the FA last September: The Football Association has agreed with Hull City to clarify the position regarding the club’s name change application. On Wednesday 9 April 2014, The FA Council rejected Hull City’s application to change its playing name to Hull Tigers. The club has chosen to commence an arbitration under Rule K of the Rules and Regulations of The Football Association to challenge the decision of The FA Council. Any arbitration commenced under Rule K of the Rules and Regulations of The Football Association is confidential. However, in the interests of the supporters, The Football Association and the club have agreed to confirm that an arbitration has commenced and once a decision has been reached it will be published. All other aspects of the arbitration shall remain confidential until such time as a decision has been made.
Ridiculous that this whole process has taken so long , if they have finally reached a decision they should tell us what it is as promised
The Tigers co-op voted massively in favour of merging with CTWD and anyone who didn't want to be a member of the new group didn't have to transfer their shareholding. All decisions made by Tigers co-op were made by their members, that includes approving the merger, repaying any money due to shareholders who didn't want their shareholding transferred and the distribution of co-op funds, most of which they decided to give away to local charities. In other words, you're talking ****e.
For those who are interested in what an arbitration panel decision looks like here's one about a player that head butted a match official. Its 14 pages long with 38 paragraphs. I expect something similar to be published in Hull City AFC and the FA, although it may be considerably longer depending on the number of points raised. As you will see it goes through each of the legal and procedural points raised. I would expect all Assem Allam's points to be clearly stated and answered in the decision. If he has lost I can see why he wouldn't want it published now. Here's the link, the document can be found by clicking on "written reasons etc" http://www.thefa.com/news/governance/2014/dec/james-holden-arbitration-181214
Received this from the FA today. Thank you for contacting the Football Association. At present there is not a further update with regards to the below. The last communication regarding this can be found by clicking here. Once there are further details which can be made available they will be so.
They're sending exactly the same message to everyone who contacts them. Considering they've set up a stock message to send everyone, it's grammatically appalling.
So they're linking people back to the page which says they'd let us know once a decision is reached...
This whole argument will be completely irrelevant if we get relegated. And I tell you what, that doesn't look a bad option at the minute!
