Elle, I don't think the FA ever would have the same amount of emails a year as the group you worked for would get in a day.
Are CTWD considered stakeholders? the FA doesn't need to ask their opinion as it says it on the tin. I did ask if they have been invited to take part in the process but haven't had a reply.
You have had a reply, Obi clearly told you we have not yet been contacted by the FA. I expect we will be and we'll be contacting all the FA representatives directly anyway.
My apologies, either I missed it or misunderstood, it. There's nothing in my questioning other than the fact that the FA declared that they would consult and there is no timetable. To my knowledge supporter groups have to be identified by the club. This isn't a slight on CTWD but it is a concern that the one group that is clearly leading the campaign to stop the name change may be unable to contribute directly because the club does not put it forward as a supporter group. I base this on the call for reforms and the Sports Minsters statement "That umbilical link has to be recognised in the way supporters are represented as stakeholders and in the way the game is governed. We would like to see that change sooner rather than later." The fact is that I have a concern and its a major concern. CTWD have demonstrated that they are representative of the no name change supporters, yet the FA, PL and clubs have ignored the feelings of supporters in the past. Reforms have been called for, but unless the reforms are put in place, groups such as CTWD will never have a voice that is heard in the right corridors. Posters on here appear to take it as read that CTWD will be involved, but there is nothing to base this on. Ill tell you what OLM, if you haven't been invited to give an opinion yet, my guess is you are not going to be invited. If that's the case there is an injustice, isn't there!
Surely the situation changed when Allam put in his request for the name change to counter an earlier application, from a different party, to use the name 'Hull Tigers'. Is the FA now only faced with a simple decision has to who has the best claim to the name 'Hull Tigers'. Surely no consultation is required for this. Anyway, time will tell.......as someone is so fond of stating.
If you have a list of who has been invited please share it with us. My understanding is that the FA are considering how to respond to the application and how the process will operate. I suspect that will take some time. I would be surprised if they have drawn up a list of stakeholders yet and I'd be even more surprised if they have written to Hull City Council, as the freehold owner of the KC. I will make my view clear. I think CTWD will be asked to respond to the application because we represent a significant number of Hull City fans. I may be mistaken but I don't think so. The matter isn't in our hands so its a question of waiting for the FA to announce its next steps.
The application has only been in a week, I'd have been amazed if we'd been contacted by the FA already. They move at the speed of a supertanker and they don't meet again until March.
The FA can do anything it wants with both applications except grant them both the playing name Hull Tigers. I don't think the FA would grant the new club the playing name Hull Tigers without first considering and deciding on Hull City's application first. I recall saying Time will Tell a few times to Tubby Tiger. Enough time has passed on some of the issues he raised for a judgement to be made. I haven't seen many posts taking the pee out of the size and effectiveness of our campaign lately.
Probably boredom is setting in. Why make a fuss anyway, its out of all our hands. Don't forget that poster like me are in a win win situation. Whatever the outcome I'll be at the KC next season, singing 'City Till I Die' which I've been doing for years.
Ah, that'll be why yesterday you were saying the FA met next in April, and today you are saying March. I guess the FA just rang you to tell you of their change in plans.
I haven't seen many posts taking the pee out of the size and effectiveness of our campaign lately.[/QUOTE] We do not need to.You will be ignored I hope.You could all embrace a noble cause-there are plenty out there.
HCC have no input to the process, nothing about the name change affects the KC stadium. The fact is that there is a real chance that the only way that CTWD will have a voice is via the Tigers Co op. If you think that waiting until the FA announces its next step is the right thing to do, why are you lobbying its members. I don't need a list of those invited to the consultation table. It's easy. The only groups invited to the table are the ones recognised by the club as representing the supporters of Hull City. No poll of season ticket holders, no poll of the general public. There maybe a season pass ballot on a matchday as that is a proven means of polling that does not affect the database. Ie on production of an adult season pass a ballot paper is issued and votes are collected in a nearby ballot box, it does not identify the voter, where as even local and national voters can be identified by their polling papers. Petitions do not count as unless they are pre ratified they have no viable content. Membership of CTWD has been diluted by the addition of future shareholding as it could be said that some have joined in order to simply be members of a future fans shareholding. Government ministers are saying that at the moment the FA, PL and club owners do not consider fans as stakeholders and yet you say it's alright we will have our say, doesn't that indicate that CTWD have no chance of being included. Mind you what do I know eh. Just prove me wrong.
From the FA statement: "As part of the evaluation of the request a consultation process will be undertaken with various stakeholders including supporter groups." I would expect HCC to be considered a stakeholder. It's not whether the change will affect them or not, but whether they're a stakeholder in the club. The existence/non-existence of the club within affects HCC so they should be considered a stakeholder. As you say, the change will have little effect on them, so the FA panel is likely to give their position very little influence over their decision. It's one of those where if everybody said yes and HCC said no then the FA would tell them to do one, but if HCC and several other smaller stakeholders (in terms of the decision) were all against the change they would combined have the same sway as a more directly affected stakeholder. Or is that too sensible for it to be the way they'd work it?
Ricardo, Look at Coventry. Hull City Council are not stakeholders, they are not actually even the landlords. The name change debate will include identifiable stakeholders. Who identifies them? Why would the Sports Minister say that supporters are not represented as stakeholders by the FA and the club owners? The fact is that it is owners of clubs who will decide what other owners of clubs can and cannot do. Are they going to say "stop the name change we don't like it" or will as Assem Allam says come out with "football is a business and Hull City is my business to do with just what I want?" Only the club can say who it considers as stakeholders. Two clubs have recently taken on board the wishes of their supporters. Newcastle and Everton. But look at Manchester United, they couldn't give a fig about there supporter groups as there is always another one around the corner. Swansea have a twenty per cent share in the club and that gives them what? Seats on the board where they are in the minority.
