So therefore my point is ballot every person with a customer number. Weight it to take into account the fact one person might have regularly bought for many. Nothing wrong with trying to ensure there is no loophole for the llams to come back with this time.
I may be pissed. It may be approaching the bewitching hour here in Melbourne, but that is spot on, no bullshit man!
It might be a good time to post this, I don't know, but what the heck. I believe that Leyton Orient Fans Trust sets out the difference between a supporters trust and a supporters club in a clear fashion and although the sentiments about HCST and HCOSC may not be shared, it is something to aim for. This is of course my own personal view only. As both groups have been contacted by the FA, it may explain a few things. The full version can be read here. http://www.leytonorientfanstrust.com/about.asp What about the Supporters Club then? Are you trying to replace it? Absolutely not. Many LOFT members are also members of the Supporters Club, and everyone recognises what an excellent job the Supporters Club does. LOFT's aims and objectives are different from anything the Supporters Club does, however, and we firmly believe that there is a role for the two organisations at Leyton Orient, each working in different spheres. We can't do what the Supporters Club does, and there's no need for us to try when they do it so well, but similarly we can do things that they simply can't do at the moment. Please explain. Well, we explicitly invite people to join LOFT to get involved in the issues that concern the fans and to act as a voice for their interests. That often means talking to the club, lobbying the club's officials, campaigning amongst the fans, actively promoting the club in the community, representing the supporters' views to local politicians and media and working with other national and local football groups on supporter issues generally. The Supporters Club doesn't do most of those things and, quite rightly, doesn't try, because that's not what it is there for, and that's not why people join it. It doesn't have a mandate from the people who've joined it - many of whom are quite legitimately only interested in the social aspects of the Supporters Club - nor does it have the properly constituted legal structure of a Trust that allows it to do it properly. The Trust is a completely independent organisation, and doesn't depend on the club for premises or facilities, and it means that we can speak our mind, and if need be publicly disagree with the Club, without jeopardising our very existence. But isn't it confusing having two organisations? Wouldn't it be better to work within the Supporters Club? Only if you believe that 'hostile' takeovers are the right way to operate and if you're prepared to ignore the fact that there's no mandate from the members for the Supporters Club to take on the sorts of issues that the Trust is concerned with. We've got too much respect for them and their work to do that, and we don't think it necessary when the two organisations have such distinct roles and objectives. We've a friendly and co-operative relationship with the Supporters Club, and keep each other informed of what we're up to and sometimes attend each other's meetings. It might be that some time in the future the two organisations come closer together - and indeed we are working together with the fanzines at the club's Fans' Forum - but as organisations there is no pressing need to reform.
It's a strong parallel. And based on that evidence from Leyton Orient, you would conclude that if LO were to change their name again in the future, their supporters club wouldn't be a consultee because they wouldn't have the mandate.
There appear to be two schools of thought on this thread. Obviously there is the "no name change" school and then there is a school which, whilst not necessarily being pro name change, is saying that a wider ranging ballot could be a decent solution. The "no name changerrs" seem convinced that the Allems would not co-operate in such a proposal. The "wider ballot" group seem to be saying let us at least exhaust that possibility. To me, the latter idea would involve a wider spectrum of fans - the so called silent majority. It's pointless simply saying that the Allems won't agree. There are those on here who seem to know the channels to the FA powers that be. This would be a good time to use that access and not merely to stick to the old entrenched positions.
That maybe would apply to HCSS as well. Should a supporters club be asked to take part in any consultation? I believe that it should be consulted, but consideration must be given to the fact that it is a supporters club, with a different role to a trust, or in fact a protest group.
The Allams can organise any kind of ballot they want , season ticket holders , everybody with a customer number , whatever , the fact is they think the views of the fans are irrelevant
Makes good sense. But you and I both know one or two individuals from the OSC who wouldn't agree at all.
The arbitration panel said that one of the criteria for a name change was majority support from fans. The club has to show that support to have any chance of getting the name change, in my view. Like the OSC and HCST they can ballot the season ticket holders or they can rely on the previous ballot. The Allams could hold a ballot if they want, nothing stopping them. I don't think they can complain about the OSC and HCST ballots if they don't hold one. As someone says it just shows what the members of the organisation balloted think. The failure of the club to hold an independent, simple yes or no ballot will say more about their case then anything the OSC and HCST do.
The only reason for the name change is that Allam wanted to steal our stadium off us. Plain and simple. He can **** off with his name change, and it is good that the council wouldn't give him our stadium. Emember we are all paying for the stadium, on an ongoing basis, by virtue of the fact that Hull only has KC internet. It is expensive and ****. He wanted to steal that value away, to the ast iding, into his private pocket. **** him and his name change it is worthless.
The only truly valid ballot of City ticket holders should be administered & verified by the Electoral Reform Society While people can procrastinate about who should be consulted, in order to get a fairly representative sample a ballot of passholders should be enough....the question on the ballot should simply be.....should the playing name of Hull City AFC be changed to Hull Tigers YES/NO
l I agree about HCSS, being independant. I am not trying to draw any different picture, but the point is more about the differing roles of supporters groups and consultantion.
No ballot on the name change will be ever be independent again because of what has gone before. The floating voters will have the 'threat to leave' etc in the back of their mind even for a simple yes/no vote.
I know that not everyone will share my view, but it does not stop me from believing that it is a possiblity. You never know.
We could have a compromise - Hull City Tigers. I wouldn't mind a compromise. Should we have a compromise?
I see their's is a Fans Trust not a Supporters trust. Understandable as LOFT looks better than having an organisation called LOST.
