Allam WILL walk away

CTWD at least want to speak to the owner at try to sort things out , pretty naive to think you could try to change the name of the club without protest but he's made it much worse

 

Yes but does he want to speak to them? It appears not. Some would say that it's pretty naive to slate the multi-millionaire owner of your football club on a publicly accessible message board, especially one with Egyptian roots, and then to envisage that it would have any positive effect on the 'no to name change' cause.

So what's the end game? Does anyone know?

 

I've kept away from this argument as I am not deeply involved with the club or the team, as I have stated before I am an armchair supporter these days so don't have the kudos to comment on team/club matters although I understand that is exactly what I am doing now. But my twopennethworth is this, and if its been mentioned before I appologise, does anyone think SB will get pissed off by all this distraction and walk away, if not to another club then just walk away?

 

I think that CTWD as a group representing a large body of supporters, including me, have acted with admirable restraint and a great deal of dignity during this ongoing saga.Some of the pro-name change lobby seem unable to differentiate between the reasonable stance of CTWD and posts fired off on this and other message boards by individual members in the heat of the moment.

To accuse those of us who are against the name change of wanting to see the club back in league one or fail in any way is plain silly. The suggestion that prices should be raised to "keep out the riff raff" is crass and insulting, many supporters who have followed City for decades struggle to find the money to attend home games and many are like me just can't afford to go to away games now, does that make us "riff raff" ?.

 

well said - i am in despair. And for what its worth can I throw in my twopennorth that a for relative of mine who sits in the disabled seats in the east stand and was caught up in the whole flag vs stewards thing it was all a very frightening and unpleasant experience indeed. Not to mention the fact that whilst the flag was being moved in front of them by the protesters THEY WERE TRYING TO WATCH THE GAME!

 

You should report the stewards.

 

From where they sat (my relative i mean) the stewards were trying to ensure that the people in the disabled seats (who are at pitch level basically) were not prevented from seeing the match.

 

I understand why you would say that, however if peoples view of the game are being obstructed by a large banner, no matter how worthy the cause, those people have the right to complain about the banner carriers, it also gives easy ammunition to the club as to why they would ban them being brought into the stadium for future games.

 

Your point is?

 

And where do you stand on the name change?

 

So its the club's fault for siting disabled seating there? rather than the people who chose to parade in front of them?
Just want to be clear and able to feed back to my relative who doesn't post on this forum, but did ask me to make the above point.


As it happens I'm against the name change but I don't agree with protests inside the ground and as I said increasingly despairing of the way what should have been a great return to the PL is being compromised by all this, which is why I was applauding look_back_in_ambers comments

 

Aaah, the pro name changers are trying a new approach! Make out they're against the name change but consistently make out every protest etc is bad for the club, hoping to turn those still on the fence against the protest!

 

Oh for christs sake. Ive just said where I stand and you have no knowledge of what the views of my relative are.

Theres a big world outside the KC you know - plenty of space to protest

 

In that case there are a lot more pro name changers then you thought.

 

Only on this board, not in the real world!