It's not that simple though. 1. there is nowhere in the stadium to put up a banner as big as the Bruce one. 2. i don't believe the club would allow a banner that says HULL CITY 3. James may not be able to keep to the things he says to supporters.
All possibly true, possibly not. What is true, is we can have whatever we wanted on the banners. The banners exist as proof of that, with a few more to come. You can have that too.
In case I missed it (and so I don't have to scroll through the last ten pages) is there a banner in production with Hull City written on it?
No there isn't, and according to Dutch that's because no one wanted one. But if they did there would be no problem putting it up in the stadium .
Why would there be? Noone suggested it in the polls of names of players, and therefore noone voted for it. You know, if its not too late Dutch, I'd be tempted to go with the following layout Hull City <awesome mauled artwork> Legend(s) Might shut the whiners up, at least for an hour or two.
Short answer, no. The design of the banners was decided on by posters on here. If people want one or more with Hull City on, it can be done, but as the existing donations are for the design posters chose, it'd have to be funded separately. To get the best value, the design would also need to be amended as too much text detracts from the image. If people want a banner contains the name Hull City, there's zero problem doing it. For me personally, I believe it's separate to the spirit of the banners, especially if the main motivation is to prove a point. That's just my opinion, I also believe the more shows of support for the team the better.
That was considered, but people felt the players name needed to be on it, and the 'legend' part was its purpose. The Hull City bit was felt self evident.
Suggestions were put forward and majority decision won. As no one suggested Hull City then that is the only reason is hasn't been done. I suspect some wouldn't just want a simple Hull City banner but would require a '**** off Allam you twat' banner to be agreeable to the idea.
On a separate vote proposed by board users, the outcome was a very clear choice to keep any perception of a political or protest message out of the flags. It's those board decisions that people choose to donate to or not. Anything beyond that, is outside what people have decided these banners are about. I think it's important that any actions respect those choices.
The fact is the club wouldn't allow a simple "HULL CITY" banner to be displayed in a similar way to the Steve Bruce one As long as we all recognise that and not pretend that they would if only we had voted on it
It's not a FACT at all. It's your opinion. As long as we all recognise that and not pretend it's anything more. If you want a banner with Hull City AFC on, there's nothing other than the ground rules stopping you. I have no intention of changing the banners that fans have voted on and donated to just because some don't respect those choices. If someone wants a banner with their own choice of design on, I'm happy to help, and even if that's not needed, there'd be no obstruction from me. The more banners the better.
Is there something wrong with me asking you that question; have you not discussed it on here previously? No, it is so I can understand why you made the comments you did and who they might refer to. (I'm guessing your comments were aimed at me and others?). Would you like to point out where I have negated other folk's views based on what they think about that one area. That is a big statement Charlie1, can you support it, as I find it offensive? It would seem it depends on what is on the flag, it will be either supportive or in protest, apparently. It's not about personal agendas, it's about opinions, just as you are expressing yours now, have done in the past and I am sure you will do again in the future. The sad state of affairs is the continuing debacle of the name-change controversy. I would remind you that I have not tried to derail anything, I supported the original banner for all of the reasons given on here, I had no input, as I promised, into the second banner thread and it took it's course and somehow reached a consensus; the PayPal thread is there and I have not seen anyone hindered from making their payments - have you? How is my discussing the issue on a forum an attempted derailment? I agree that 'positivity, dialogue and building bridges is needed', I think we (the supporters) tried to show how we wished to achieve and encourage that with the first and second banners - our reward was a continuation of the name-change application and an interview with Ehab Allam that was insuting and the total opposite of 'positivity, dialogue and building bridges' - or did you believe otherwise? Do you not think everything is very one-sided? Do you not have some concern about throwing more of the supporters money at this project when we still do not have answers on where the missing Away Supporters Initiative Fund is? I am all for cooperation and support, but it really does, at some point or another, need to be a two-way street.
Fez, if more banners are proposed, you'll get plenty more chance to raise your issues, as you did before people chose these. Right now, the banners are being produced in a way that people on here decided. That needs to be respected. No matter what you say, that cannot change. It's a decision made by posters, it's not for me to change it. What will not change, is the ethos of not being dragged into using the banners to make a point against the Allams as you're trying to do. There are other outlets for that.
