A flag simply stating 'We Are Hull City' should not antagonise the owner. After all, we are! It just shows how much he's lost the plot.
This, massively. I can't believe people are so blind not to see that this is clearly just to stop the taking in of the protest banners. It's like living in North Korea... I would bloody love to see 1000 5.5 x 3.5 Hull City flags now.
A question for those in 'favour' of the name change - do any of you support the name change in its own right, i.e. think it is a good idea? or as I suspect is your reason for supporting it because: a) Allam saved the club/put lots of money in so he is entitled to do what he likes. b) Afraid if we upset Allam he mey leave and take his money with him. c) You do not like the people/groups who are against the name change. d) You think the club will make lots of money because of the name change. PS in clicking the "reply with quote" I notice the naughty word appears in full without the *** I plead innocence if it publishes like that.
Sunn, I fully hear what you're saying, however, just as the banner carriers could have been deemed to be innocently supporting their club against Palace, the club could be deemed to be innocently asking the supporters to light up the KC with black & amber against a potentially very difficult opponent. It's either:- A) An innocent request B) A clever attempt to fight fire with fire I guess it will depend on the individuals agenda as to which option he/she prefers
What is the problem? There was no problem when our banners were refused into Etihad Stadium, we were warned in advance that they would not be allowed in, those trying to take them in were refused entry so just put them into their cars and entered the ground. The shortage of banners in our end of the ground did not dampen the atmosphere, we still out sung the locals.
After reading some of the crap on these forums over the last couple of weeks, I've gone from the fence back to 100% supporting the change. Partly because I think it sounds snappy and will help us generate more income from the lucrative overseas markets that Dr Allam is aiming for, and partly because hopefully we'll shed some of the scum that "supports" the team. Win-win really. (NB: This is NOT aimed at the CTWD committee members, but rather specific arseholes we seem to attract on Not606) To turn your question round, as I've done you the courtesy of responding, what about you: Do you simply reject the name change in its own right, i.e. think it is a terrible idea? Or as I suspect for a fair few online, is your reason for going against it because: a) You don't think Dr Allam's motives were ever honorable and he was just using us to make himself more money b) Hopeful if we upset Dr Allam he may leave and take his dirty money with him. c) You do not like the people/groups who aren't against the name change. Actually, you don't like anyone. d) You don't think the club will make any money at all with a name change. P.S. Don't worry about the naughty words, they show in "edit" mode but when you submit the response, they get filtered as normal.
In responce to Happy Tiger. a) I suspect that may be the reason but have not seen anything to support that theory. b) I want Mr Allam and his money to stay with Hull City - I suspect we are sunk without it. c) I respect other peoples opinions and everyone is entitled to have their own opinion and be able to air them. I believe in the freedom of speech. d) It may make some but I can't see it making a significant amount. Only lasting success will do that. My main reason is purely because it is interfeering with the history and tradition of the club. If the club was a building it would be listed. I also think the name actually sounds better as it is.
Is there much to learn from history? Drop the "City" bit and go for a shorter, punchier style. Did it work last time? please log in to view this image
When I was a kid - pavement was made of flags - big, heavy, York-stone slabs; tab-ends were collected out of the gutter, by tramps, and the resulting baccy (for re-rolling) was 'flag-edge flake'. Those old 'flags' get me fantasizing.......could quite **** up the powers-that-be, eh?
Hull City A.F.C. Flag/Banner Clarification: Following on from requests made by supporters regarding the upcoming home fixture with Liverpool on Sunday, the Club and the SMC would like to clarify their position on flags and banners being brought inside the stadium. Any supporters wishing to wave flags smaller than 6ft x 4ft will be able to do so during the build-up to kick-off and as the players enter the pitch just before 2pm. We would simply ask anyone with a flag to think of their fellow supporters around them as the match begins and not obstruct anybody’s view. Any supporters with flags or banners bigger than 6ft x 4ft will need to contact SMC via [email protected] to pre-book a position in the East Stand for the flag or banner to be placed. Please note that as there is limited space available for use, this booking system will work on a first-come, first-served basis. We would also like to remind supporters that for safety and commercial reasons stadium signage cannot be covered with flags or banners, and if it is then SMC will remove them. Any flags deemed offensive will also be removed.
So CTWD and the CI muppet could take their flags in after all. Think that'll stop the whinging? No course it won't lol. Oh OLM, your wallpaper thread...is empty. No message, no images, no nowt. You aware of that?
Offensive to whom? Obviously, even though there has been nothing emanating from the KC regarding the CTWD group, the powers that be are utilising everything within their power to minimise the effect of any potential demonstrations during the match/in front of the cameras.
Why go looking to jump to assumptions? It COULD just mean nothing....offensive. You know, like "**** OFF ALLAM" or just swear words about scousers or anything else normal people find actually offensive etc. It's fairly simple advice, and sadly in this day and age, probably needed. If CTWD or the CI muppet apply, they can have their banners attached to the East Stand. How is that bad? have they both asked for permission and been turned down? Honestly, I'm baffled by your response to this.
The site's been playing up this morning, I've tried re-posting the details, but it won't let me post anything on that thread, I'll try again.
