Additional flags/banners

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I think, as Happy says, the help we got before from various parties was great, if groups want to contribute as previously, I don't see anyone having a problem. The concern was that the spirit of the flag got lost in other agendas. The flags are gestures of support for the team, no more and no less.
Click to expand...
It's good you don't see a problem Dutch. But that's in contrast with the negative comments made (not by you, admittedly) about supporters' groups' contributions to the Steve Bruce flag. The loss of the spirit of the flags was down to those negative comments, not the actions of the groups themselves. Hence its best to be sure about quite how inclusive this process really is this time, when it comes to supporters' groups.

You've tried to answer that question, thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
AlRawdah said:
It's good you don't see a problem Dutch. But that's in contrast with the negative comments made (not by you, admittedly) about supporters' groups' contributions to the Steve Bruce flag. The loss of the spirit of the flags was down to those negative comments, not the actions of the groups themselves. Hence its best to be sure about quite how inclusive this process really is this time, when it comes to supporters' groups.

You've tried to answer that question, thank you.
Click to expand...
Oh **** off. We didn't want the spirit and purpose of the banners being hijacked, and with Dutchs awesome organising and Mauleds artistry skills that was achieved.
 
I think there's a few issues that could seem to conflict. Sometimes that can appear negative, but I think if they were considered as constructive criticism, rather than negativity, they could be turned into positives.

All in all the banners are evolving into a display of unified support for the team. The only real debate as far as the banner goes is which order we put our heros on display, and how.

I think it's something we can all agree on and doesn't need the burden of politics. I'm certainly not meaning to underplay the problems at the Club, but I believe there are other avenues for those issues.
 
AlRawdah said:
It's hard to conclude that anything has changed. Certain people are insistent on seeing "hijacking" where it simply doesn't exist. That's a shame.
Click to expand...

I'm not totally sure I see your point.
Some expressed similar views previously, and that led to a vote, but I think what came out at the end was recognition of the contribution played by groups and individuals alike in showing support for the team, or am I missing it?

Edit*

This could sound dismissive, but it's not meant that way. If your issue is with individuals, would it be best to approach their concerns separately, and try to determine why they feel that way, and either correct them or address it.

If you feel the issue is with the way the banner thing panned out, please let me know and I'll see what can be done to make sure everyone feels included.
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I'm not totally sure I see your point.
Some expressed similar views previously, and that led to a vote, but I think what came out at the end was recognition of the contribution played by groups and individuals alike in showing support for the team, or am I missing it?

Edit*

This could sound dismissive, but it's not meant that way. If your issue is with individuals, would it be best to approach their concerns separately, and try to determine why they feel that way, and either correct them or address it.

If you feel the issue is with the way the banner thing panned out, please let me know and I'll see what can be done to make sure everyone feels included.
Click to expand...

You mean don't stop donating just because Happy's a ****?
 
  • Like
Reactions: yerman and Kempton
Happy Tiger said:
Oh **** off. We didn't want the spirit and purpose of the banners being hijacked, and with Dutchs awesome organising and Mauleds artistry skills that was achieved.
Click to expand...

No one tried to hijack it you silly frigger. But you and Chazz did try to prevent Dutch from accepting the offer of organisational help and discounts offered unconditionally by a supporters group because you both don't personally like them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Polly13, Fez, Herbert Atkin and 2 others
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I'm not totally sure I see your point.
Some expressed similar views previously, and that led to a vote, but I think what came out at the end was recognition of the contribution played by groups and individuals alike in showing support for the team, or am I missing it?

Edit*

This could sound dismissive, but it's not meant that way. If your issue is with individuals, would it be best to approach their concerns separately, and try to determine why they feel that way, and either correct them or address it.

If you feel the issue is with the way the banner thing panned out, please let me know and I'll see what can be done to make sure everyone feels included.
Click to expand...
There are no "politics" here, no groups wanted to make these flags anything other than supportive of the club and manager in an inclusive way. The supporters' trust contributed time, knowledge and money to the two existing flags, yet there seemed to me to be a reluctance to recognise that. That seemed to me to be a bit unnecessary and suggested those inputs weren't entirely welcomed. Hence the question about whether contributions this time around are to be welcomed by you.

That's just how I see it. I'm sure you have a reasoned alternative view. But it's best you understand where some of the people who assisted you are on this matter.
 
AlRawdah said:
There are no "politics" here, no groups wanted to make these flags anything other than supportive of the club and manager in an inclusive way. The supporters' trust contributed time, knowledge and money to the two existing flags, yet there seemed to me to be a reluctance to recognise that. That seemed to me to be a bit unnecessary and suggested those inputs weren't entirely welcomed. Hence the question about whether contributions this time around are to be welcomed by you.

That's just how I see it. I'm sure you have a reasoned alternative view. But it's best you understand where some of the people who assisted you are on this matter.
Click to expand...


Are you saying I didn't make the support clear enough? I did try and mention it frequently.

As you say, there's no politics and I can accept that. I'm sure that all the welcomed support was done for no other reason than to support the spirit of the banner.
 
There was no mention of the Trust's (or was it CTWD? I can't recall the precise timing) contribution for a long time, indeed some voices claimed quite explicitly for a while that the Trust had NOT contributed and that went uncorrected. For those of us who did contribute time and effort, that was disappointing.

I confess I don't read every thread so if I missed one that made the Trust's role clear then I apologise. But in the threads dedicated to the flag, this reluctance was the impression I got.
 
AlRawdah said:
There was no mention of the Trust's (or was it CTWD? I can't recall the precise timing) contribution for a long time, indeed some voices claimed quite explicitly for a while that the Trust had NOT contributed and that went uncorrected. For those of us who did contribute time and effort, that was disappointing.

I confess I don't read every thread so if I missed one that made the Trust's role clear then I apologise. But in the threads dedicated to the flag, this reluctance was the impression I got.
Click to expand...

I think you could be right. Without looking back, I know I made a point of mentioning exiled's invaluable connections getting us a cracking deal with Barmy Flags, but I could have done that as an individual.

My apologies for anyone I missed. Ultimately I was keen to show everyone that contributed, even with suggestions and votes was a part of the banners. I was concious that some support was more key than others, but the goal was to demonstrate it was 'the fans' that did it rather than emphasising one group over another. I like to think that's the motive behind people's support.

Now people are more comfortable with the simple concept behind it, I'm sure people will see support as just that.

It's a big learning curve, hopefully we can make less errors as it goes on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlRawdah
AlRawdah said:
There was no mention of the Trust's (or was it CTWD? I can't recall the precise timing) contribution for a long time, indeed some voices claimed quite explicitly for a while that the Trust had NOT contributed and that went uncorrected. For those of us who did contribute time and effort, that was disappointing.

I confess I don't read every thread so if I missed one that made the Trust's role clear then I apologise. But in the threads dedicated to the flag, this reluctance was the impression I got.
Click to expand...
So what was the trusts contribution? Open up I did ask and never got a reply.
 
Yes you did. And you commented on it. The Trust put Dutch in touch with flag suppliers and contributed money. I also sorted the payments, although that was under the auspices of HCSS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back