I just read what you post in reply to others. Though I now realise its best to go back and see how you have changed it. Is it a Mod thing that you can change what you put without it showing as edited?
The issue goes far deeper than that, and that version oversimplifies the argument, however, the question was a claim OLM made that I wanted to clarify. I've still to see any evidence that the trust feel as he claims, and given your earlier reply, it seems we can only ask the trust questions through official channels, but committee members can make statements on trust views on here. I've had a whole variety of answers when this has been raised. One was I was the only one with that view, another was that the supporters group didn't know of the issue, because I'd discussed it on a forum with them while they were poster, and not as a committee member as an email, which makes the claims they didn 't exist curious. This was made worse as some committee members actively supported the evictions in forum arguments. Seems a tad unrepresentative to me. But if you say that's how it is, I guess that's where we are. I said very early on, the move's done and would 't be undone any time soon. It's more the defensive, even hostile nature of replies if anyone queries the trust that I see hasn 't changed much. Actually considering the points, and the possibility some are driven away by it, as well as the fact some of those driven away probably know more than the committee, could just help the trust appear more inclusive and representative.
Now some have moved to North Stand you realise how few stand at City compared to other clubs. We seem to have far more resolutely remain seated at away games than other clubs as well. It won't be long as more and more leave and are replaced by PL loving spectators as opposed to City fans that the whole stadium is sat quietly contemplating the game and politely applauding moments of excitement, such as a goal.
There's standing at the back of East down to the exit to the concourse. Unfortunately, the two guys behind me have always sat. I think it'd be rude of me to force them to change how they have watched for a decade to accommodate me. To be fair, they never made a fuss, and are decent people. We've reached a compromise, and I sit for the quieter bits and stand for others.
Am I remembering correctly that CTWD (when in office) issued a statement (supporting the fans) about the situation at Cardiff?
We respect the right of Hull City fans to protest against the actions of the owner, he can stop those protests at any time, by simply stopping those actions. Personally, I don't think the protests make a blind bit of difference to our performances anyway.
Then we'll lose and Assem Allam will wonder if his petty spat with the council was worth getting relegated over. I personally don't give a ****, I support Hull City not the Premier League, I'd rather not get relegated but at least it's likely to bring an end to this nonsense if we do.
CTWD also issued a statement at the time of the seat move supporting its own fans that were unhappy about being told to move with no consultation?
Since the Allam out movement stepped up its protest there have been 3 games 2 of which we won, the only game we lost was the one when some so called Hull City supporters started booing during the game.
Our statement in support of Cardiff fans was in December 2013, the campaign ended in April 2014, the away end was moved in June/July 2014 when we were enjoying a well deserved hiatus. What's your point?
So...if you weren't all on a hiatus then you would have made a similar official statement supporting your own unhappy fans like you did the Cardiff ones? So just a timing issue?
I'm not risking anything, I've got absolutely nothing to do with people chanting Allam Out. The booing is far more damaging than any chanting anyway.
