D-Day for Hull City name change: What will the verdict be?
Ahead of tomorrow's FA Council vote that will decide if it will be Hull City or Hull Tigers who play in next season's Championship, Philip Buckingham assesses the lie of the land.
A saga two years in the making has arrived at another crucial juncture this weekend. Remind us, how have Hull City wound up here?
Assem Allam, City's owner since 2010, first launched a controversial bid to become known as Hull Tigers in August 2013, believing a re-branding was in the best commercial interests of the club. The Football Association could not be convinced, however, rejecting the proposal at a meeting of the Council in April 2014.
The end of the matter? Not a chance. City responded by challenging the verdict through an independent arbitration tribunal and that finally concluded with the FA's decision being set aside in March of this year.
The club were then told they had until April 1 to submit an application if a name change was to be considered again for 2015-16. City duly did that, leading us to another decisive FA Council vote tomorrow.
So what has happened since City notified the FA of their decision to press ahead?
The process has been much the same as it was the first time around. The latest request, in keeping with all applications to change a club's playing name, has been considered by the FA Membership Committee.
It is the Membership Committee's task to then offer advice to the FA Council ahead of a full members' vote. A three-man sub-committee was established to assess the application's merits and again it consisted of Philip Smith, vice chairman of the Kent FA, Jez Moxey, divisional representative from Wolverhampton Wanderers, and Roy Northall, a representative of the Worcestershire FA.
Although the consultation process was not as far-reaching as the first time around, not involving stakeholders such as the local FA, Councils and MPs, the verdict was again the same. It is understood the Membership Committee has recommended that the Council reject this latest application for Hull City to become Hull Tigers.
How influential is that verdict once the Council come to voting then?
Generally speaking, the recommendation of a FA committee carries a lot of weight. They are perceived to be the experts of a certain field, the ones who have spent hours poring over the rights and wrongs of individual cases.
The average member of the Council tends to bow to that in-depth knowledge and, as such, support the recommendations made. As such, one bookmaker is offering odds of 10/1 on Hull Tigers getting the green light tomorrow.
But plenty of the Council members voted against the Membership Committee's recommendation last time around didn't they?
They did. Twenty seven to be exact. Those numbers were not enough for Hull Tigers to get approval as 47 members voted against the change in April 2014, but showed it may only need a small swing for things to change tomorrow.
The numbers voting could hold the key. Only 74 of a Council consisting of approximately 120 members voted 15 months ago.
Although it would appear unlikely that the opinions of members have changed in that time, the higher turnout that tends to come with the summer gathering could yet make the outcome uncertain.
There have been conflicting reports over the Premier League's stance on this matter. What should we make of that?
Essentially, nothing has changed from the first time around. The Sun newspaper claimed on Monday that the Premier League were supportive of a Hull Tigers' vision. Then, the same paper backtracked only a day later to say the top-flight's governing body would be remaining neutral.
The Premier League reacted by releasing a statement that read: "It is for the appropriate FA processes to weigh all the factors up in relation to any application for a club name change. Where any such permission is considered by the FA Council the case for change should be very strong, particularly in the senior leagues of professional football."
The Premier League have adopted a similar stance to the Football League. Neither are publicly supporting this bid but nor will they oppose it. The decision ultimately belongs to the FA.
When and where are things set to be decided?
Unlike last time around, when the process took place at Wembley Stadium, tomorrow's vote will be cast at St George's Park, the FA's National Football Centre near Burton in Staffordshire.
This weekend is the FA's Summer Conference and typically does not have items of such importance on the Council's agenda during a close-season. Time constraints, however, have left the FA with no choice with an application submitted so late last season.
Things are due to get under way at 11am tomorrow morning but it is unclear when a verdict will be officially announced and made public.
What's the mood of the club's board on the eve of this verdict? Are they confident of a victory?
Tomorrow probably comes with more hope than expectation for the Allam family but the noises coming out of the KC have been described as "bullish".
Vice-chairman Ehab Allam last commented on the matter in mid-June. Speaking at the time he said: "The difference between what you hope for and what is going to happen can be different so we'll see (what happens).
"We are still pursuing it because we think it is right. You have to fight for want you believe in, even if you think you are going to get knocked back or you think the chances are slim.
"Even if we think the chances are slim, we think we have a valid case. If you believe in it you have to do that."
And what is the mood of supporters ahead of this judgement day?
This became a divisive issue a long time ago and it continues to evoke passionate opinions. Opposition to Hull Tigers remains as fierce as it always was and you can be sure there will be fans who have everything crossed that the FA reject the name change application again.
Take the Hull City Official Supporters Club as a case study and there are still more fans against Hull Tigers than in favour of it. Of the 704 members to vote in April and May, 459 said "no to Hull Tigers", almost two thirds of the OSC's electorate. That was included in the OSC submission to the Membership Committee.
So can we consider tomorrow's vote to be the end-game?
That's the million dollar question but do not get your hopes up. On both side of the divide are figures who are steadfast in their beliefs so whoever is on the wrong end of the verdict is unlikely to take it with an accepting smile.
Assem Allam placed the club up for sale when failing with a first application 15 months ago and he seems to have little enthusiasm to continue his reign under the guise of Hull City.
An appetite to the fight the matter further is seemingly there from both sides.
Tomorrow promises to be a hugely significant day for the club, regardless of the FA Council's decision.
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/D-Da...6872570-detail/story.html#HYCLz0Sm8CeWqdjz.99
You must log in or register to see images
Ahead of tomorrow's FA Council vote that will decide if it will be Hull City or Hull Tigers who play in next season's Championship, Philip Buckingham assesses the lie of the land.
A saga two years in the making has arrived at another crucial juncture this weekend. Remind us, how have Hull City wound up here?
Assem Allam, City's owner since 2010, first launched a controversial bid to become known as Hull Tigers in August 2013, believing a re-branding was in the best commercial interests of the club. The Football Association could not be convinced, however, rejecting the proposal at a meeting of the Council in April 2014.
The end of the matter? Not a chance. City responded by challenging the verdict through an independent arbitration tribunal and that finally concluded with the FA's decision being set aside in March of this year.
The club were then told they had until April 1 to submit an application if a name change was to be considered again for 2015-16. City duly did that, leading us to another decisive FA Council vote tomorrow.
So what has happened since City notified the FA of their decision to press ahead?
The process has been much the same as it was the first time around. The latest request, in keeping with all applications to change a club's playing name, has been considered by the FA Membership Committee.
It is the Membership Committee's task to then offer advice to the FA Council ahead of a full members' vote. A three-man sub-committee was established to assess the application's merits and again it consisted of Philip Smith, vice chairman of the Kent FA, Jez Moxey, divisional representative from Wolverhampton Wanderers, and Roy Northall, a representative of the Worcestershire FA.
Although the consultation process was not as far-reaching as the first time around, not involving stakeholders such as the local FA, Councils and MPs, the verdict was again the same. It is understood the Membership Committee has recommended that the Council reject this latest application for Hull City to become Hull Tigers.
How influential is that verdict once the Council come to voting then?
Generally speaking, the recommendation of a FA committee carries a lot of weight. They are perceived to be the experts of a certain field, the ones who have spent hours poring over the rights and wrongs of individual cases.
The average member of the Council tends to bow to that in-depth knowledge and, as such, support the recommendations made. As such, one bookmaker is offering odds of 10/1 on Hull Tigers getting the green light tomorrow.
But plenty of the Council members voted against the Membership Committee's recommendation last time around didn't they?
They did. Twenty seven to be exact. Those numbers were not enough for Hull Tigers to get approval as 47 members voted against the change in April 2014, but showed it may only need a small swing for things to change tomorrow.
The numbers voting could hold the key. Only 74 of a Council consisting of approximately 120 members voted 15 months ago.
Although it would appear unlikely that the opinions of members have changed in that time, the higher turnout that tends to come with the summer gathering could yet make the outcome uncertain.
There have been conflicting reports over the Premier League's stance on this matter. What should we make of that?
Essentially, nothing has changed from the first time around. The Sun newspaper claimed on Monday that the Premier League were supportive of a Hull Tigers' vision. Then, the same paper backtracked only a day later to say the top-flight's governing body would be remaining neutral.
The Premier League reacted by releasing a statement that read: "It is for the appropriate FA processes to weigh all the factors up in relation to any application for a club name change. Where any such permission is considered by the FA Council the case for change should be very strong, particularly in the senior leagues of professional football."
The Premier League have adopted a similar stance to the Football League. Neither are publicly supporting this bid but nor will they oppose it. The decision ultimately belongs to the FA.
When and where are things set to be decided?
Unlike last time around, when the process took place at Wembley Stadium, tomorrow's vote will be cast at St George's Park, the FA's National Football Centre near Burton in Staffordshire.
This weekend is the FA's Summer Conference and typically does not have items of such importance on the Council's agenda during a close-season. Time constraints, however, have left the FA with no choice with an application submitted so late last season.
Things are due to get under way at 11am tomorrow morning but it is unclear when a verdict will be officially announced and made public.
What's the mood of the club's board on the eve of this verdict? Are they confident of a victory?
Tomorrow probably comes with more hope than expectation for the Allam family but the noises coming out of the KC have been described as "bullish".
Vice-chairman Ehab Allam last commented on the matter in mid-June. Speaking at the time he said: "The difference between what you hope for and what is going to happen can be different so we'll see (what happens).
"We are still pursuing it because we think it is right. You have to fight for want you believe in, even if you think you are going to get knocked back or you think the chances are slim.
"Even if we think the chances are slim, we think we have a valid case. If you believe in it you have to do that."
And what is the mood of supporters ahead of this judgement day?
This became a divisive issue a long time ago and it continues to evoke passionate opinions. Opposition to Hull Tigers remains as fierce as it always was and you can be sure there will be fans who have everything crossed that the FA reject the name change application again.
Take the Hull City Official Supporters Club as a case study and there are still more fans against Hull Tigers than in favour of it. Of the 704 members to vote in April and May, 459 said "no to Hull Tigers", almost two thirds of the OSC's electorate. That was included in the OSC submission to the Membership Committee.
So can we consider tomorrow's vote to be the end-game?
That's the million dollar question but do not get your hopes up. On both side of the divide are figures who are steadfast in their beliefs so whoever is on the wrong end of the verdict is unlikely to take it with an accepting smile.
Assem Allam placed the club up for sale when failing with a first application 15 months ago and he seems to have little enthusiasm to continue his reign under the guise of Hull City.
An appetite to the fight the matter further is seemingly there from both sides.
Tomorrow promises to be a hugely significant day for the club, regardless of the FA Council's decision.
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/D-Da...6872570-detail/story.html#HYCLz0Sm8CeWqdjz.99
