Fez, you know the basis behind these banners, if you don't agree with them, that's your choice, and you're perfectly entitled to it, but that basis won't change. The banners are a pure and simple display of support for the team. The other arguments are being represented elsewhere. The decision from posters on here was to keep them well apart. The way it's panned out so far has led to the possibility of further opportunities. I know you don't believe me, but the club have been really helpful. You've latched onto something that's possibly not even an issue. Rather than labour several minor points, the club and SMC looked at what can actually happen because it's within their control. They've been in touch with me today to mention some other possible options. Repeating the same things to me, will only get you the same answers you don't believe. That's why I suggest you come and meet them and ask them the questions directly. I'm not sure how much more fair and open than that I can be.
You keep saying it but does not make it fact, they are the owners and do not have to demonstrate their contempt for the club name anymore than they already have. Have the ones in the ground (this season) been officially endorsed as ours would be? It is not a question of believing you, it is about the continued strategy of the Allams to rid themselves of the name Hull City AFC - what evidence do you have to show that they will now accept it, as is is a great deal of evidence to show they will not. This is my only point, nothing more; if they will undertake to accept designs with the true name on then fine. As for the logistics of hanging them, it is a horse and cart job, see my previous post.
Same questions, so same answers as previous. You don't believe me, so the offer still stands, come and ask them yourself. On an additional note to that; I haven't asked the club if we could both go and meet them, my feelings from talking to them so far is that I'm very confident they would be happy to. In my view, that gives a good indication of what I feel is their support for what we're doing.
I agree and totally endorsed this in relation to a one-off banner in support of Bruce when he needed it (even though a tad tardy in appearing). It is when moving to a fully fledged project, of multiple banners and designs, that this thing takes on arms and legs that could start to compromise the anti-name-change campaign; AlRawdah seems to share my doubts about the name being accepted, maybe more do, I don't know as I am simply offering my own opinion, which is what we do on here. After years of attrition from the owners I am loathe to support their campaign in any way, shape or form; I consider this no small point.
It's nothing to do with the owners, and nobody at the Club has even hinted that we can't have Hull City on the flags.
They are ridding the club of its name by stealth and have been for some time, when this stops and their actions reversed then will be the time to discuss further banners, not before.
I'm bemused how you conclude that from the people at Hull City club helping Hull City fans put our Hull City banners up in Hull City's Stadium to support Hull City AFC, but that's your choice. Your obvious passion for the topic is to be applauded. HCST are open to suggestions, so I think your views are best for them. The ethos of the banners is for Hull City fans to show their support for the Hull City team no more, no less. There are other outlets for campaigns. Although you may want to consider that they all seem to support the ethos of the banners too.
That really is a classic post; really, it is. Why has this banner project - neither of the current two have Hull City on them, so are not contentious to the owners - suddenly made the club management anymore trustworthy than they were previously? We have found so often that their words can be good or mealy-mouthed, depending on their subject. They do not have my trust so I believe more banners are best left for now; we'll leave it there.
The club didn't design or choose the other banners. The banners haven't made the club more or less anything. The issues you've now settled on are ones for HCST. People on this board (not me and certainly not the club) decided what the banners were about. The offer to meet them and then decide still stands.
Christ on a bike Fez. Why are you being so arsey about the views of the users of this forum who made the decisions about what type of flags to go for? **** all to do with the club. This forums users. Describing the displaying of the banner as tardy just makes you look a bigger **** than the arguing, essentially, about **** all, just because you like arguing with Dutch. About nowt. Give it a ****ing rest will you. If you want a banner with Hull City AFC on it, with an Allams Out byline, just ask Mauled, he can knock you one up and you can take it to all the games you want. The users on this forum decided as a majority, on banners that show support for and focus on very specific things associated with our club and city. If you want a protest banner, try lobbying HCST, although I suspect you'll get even less tolerance from them. So, I appeal again, give it a ****ing rest.
That's two posters that have now mentioned HCST for no good reason here. Number of HCST/CTWD protest banners on the planet - 0. Unconditional support from HCST/CTWD for Dutch's initiative - >0. Some people are bordering on obsession.
Stop being so ****ing precious. Zero digs at HCST were given in my post. I was quite clearly pointing out to Fez that he'd be unlikely to get the protest banner he seems desperate for from even HCST. We need a new saying on here, rather than stop been ****, it should be stop been Fez.
Oh thanks! Stop been Fez OLM. I never said that at all. Soooo, that's a lie. I thought you didn't like lies? I said "**** all" twice (Fez's specialty that) and "Give it a ****ing rest", twice. The one paragraph I mentioned HCST in as an example of moderation and tolerance, I didn't swear at all.
