I think you are wrong; well meant, but wrong. If the ground were full and then systematically emptied then yes, that would have the drama required to draw widespread comment and concern. Our ground being ridiculously empty at KO would just add to the ridiculous Hull tag; sad but true. It needs drama, theatre, something to compete for column inches and airtime on a long awaited opening day, with God only knows what else happening in the world. I have always been a Hull City supporter, but not always an attendee; circumstances threw other things before that. I really feel for those who are 'must attends' as it is their passion and sense of belonging. I just don't share that, I can't, as I have not learnt the routine and have been disenfranchised, from both the club and the professional game it is involved in. It stinks, it is financially and morally corrupt, it is lacking in any genuine sincerity or civility towards the supporters, their customers and so-called 12th man. Not to mention ****, Brucified football. Whether or not I will attend any games, home or away, is totally unimportant to me, as the owners have destroyed the joy I felt in the occasion and the commitment I had to make to travel to it. Again, sad but true; but life goes on.
P.S., obviously. Gawd, it's obvious you're not the brightest bulb in the pack. But really? Really? Are your meds working as they should? Kinnell.
A bit of insomnia has allowed me to catch up and just got to this and had an early morning chuckle. This always should have been and still should be the way in which supporters groups deal with these liars and manipulators. Refuse to have formal talks, decline collaborative groups and activity, express displeasure through the most accessible and simplistic of methods, shun their deceitful advances. The lobbying and drip-feed of drops of information is fair enough but should always have been clearly labelled as such on public forums. I think mistakes were made, but they were well intended. I posted, before reading this, that I am now disenfranchised from Hull City, I take no pleasure or pride in that, but it is the truth and I've always found the truth to be the final word. Hopefully my type of support will not be widespread, but I fear otherwise. Strategy advice given at cheap rates, all times of day or night, drunk or sober; just post or PM @Fez .
As long as you have a media strategy that informs, then it works. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...Jeremy-Menez-s-impressive-double-Serie-A.html
It would need to be one hell of a media campaign to compete with the other issues of life, such as internal politics, international politics, terrorism, olympics, doping, weather, other PL stories. Seriously, it will be a brief piss in the ocean.
You mean something really hard hitting and important to the whole world, such as Taylor Swift and Kim Kardashian having a row on twitter?
Agreed there, was just making the point the "news" doesn't have to be hard hitting to get centre stage. It should certainly be easy enough with the right organisation, to get at least the same type of coverage as Blackpool did, more so given PL status again.
I would love a peaceful on pitch process to delay kick off and mess up Sky's schedule. About 5 mins before kick off when the pitch is empty people should just walk down to the front, step over the barrier, walk to the centre circle and sit down. Obviously the stewards would try to stop people but if hundreds or even thousands did it what could they do? I remember some away supporters doing this at half time at BP (Brighton?) and delaying the second half. It would be great to see all stands united and just meeting up in the middle of the pitch united against the owners. It wont happen but it would be brilliant. Even if the club got wind of it and put a bunch of stewards in front of each stand, all supporters gathered together at the front would look great on the Sky. Whatever protest is decided it needs to be set in stone a couple of weeks before so it can be promoted to death on all social media. Charltons organised march last season was publicised all over and thousands turned up and even the away supports joined in with them.
my ten penneth for what its worth (feel free to imagine I have said "I think" before each statement so we don't get into an argument about how I can prove any of this!) 1. A boycott isn't workable, there are too many who would attend regardless of a call to boycott 2. If there are to be protests then it needs to be clear what it is about because even those vehemently opposed to the current owners have different things that tipped them over the edge, so focus needs to be on one or two main issues (personally that would be the lack of concessions and the rebranding of the club) 3. It seems odd to involve Yank flags etc. I don't think a protest should be about wanting them to sell and while there are people who feel the Yanks would have been good none of (the rest of) us really know that, and of course it might be that someone else from China etc is considering bidding so why put them off by showing allegiance to some people that may never be back anyway 4. Red cards was effective I thought, visually certainly, and I think because it is easy to do that should be the protest used for the Leicester game, basically an extension of last years protest due to the fact that the concessions still aren't in place (if they aren't of course) and the argument about the name of the club rarely being used 5. Having said that I quite like the idea of turning our back on the game between 1904 and 2010, but again worry how well observed it would be, people liked red cards because it was done before the game fire away!
I'd pretty much agree with all that. Personally, I'd stick with the red card protest against Leicester, mainly because it seems to be something that most are happy to be involved in and it's a very clear statement to all, that all parts of the ground and the majority of the fan-base are against what's going on. The American flag thing might have been worthwhile if negotiations were ongoing, but it's fairly pointless now and anyway the cost would be massive compared to the red card protest and I don't see it adds anything. I think Dutch's idea of adding some humour is a good one, I've seen mention of teddies being thrown onto the pitch at the start of a game and the red cards being replaced with giant mock bus-passes, both of which I think are decent ideas.
Just to repeat, I feel what keeps getting underplayed, is that the stand closures, and disruption of communities within the stands, is a bigger cause of people leaving than the name change or pricing. The lack of children's concessions, and disrespect shown to longer serving fans runs it a close second.
I know That's the problem really Most people are up for a protest of sorts, but there are lots of different reasons for people
Not been the same for me since we got unceremoniously evicted from the East , but that was just the beginning...
