Just to confirm. The trust hasn't had a meeting with Allam have they? In the last weeks?This thread has gone absolutely nuts.
Just to confirm. The trust hasn't had a meeting with Allam have they? In the last weeks?This thread has gone absolutely nuts.
I understand you are an advocate of the fans being united and getting on. Your tirade against Balkan felt a bit awkward in that context.I don't feel awkward at all. The OSC has moved on, just in the exact same way that HCST has. Why some posters on here fail to accept that is beyond awkward, it is actually quite sad really.
If you read my op, I explained the reason for my post.I understand you are an advocate of the fans being united and getting on. Your tirade against Balkan felt a bit awkward in that context.
It’s a cheap dig at me and at the OSC coming from posters who no matter how many times it gets said, do not want to acknowledge changes have taken place.
Just to confirm. The trust hasn't had a meeting with Allam have they? In the last weeks?
Your problem is, that the OSC won't openly criticise anything the club does, they'll go along with the Hall of Fame bollocks, they'll go along with this new consultation bollocks and while that's the case, I'm afraid you're always going to get grief for a large section of supporters.
The problem is OLM that the OSC only has the mandate to support the club. You know that I know that and all supporters know that. You know how wrong the east stand move was but you advocated the move. My post has nothing to do with the OSC as I pointed out, we would not be just asking here would we. It was and is a personal post.Your problem is, that the OSC won't openly criticise anything the club does, they'll go along with the Hall of Fame bollocks, they'll go along with this new consultation bollocks and while that's the case, I'm afraid you're always going to get grief for a large section of supporters.
The problem is OLM that the OSC only has the mandate to support the club. You know that I know that and all supporters know that. You know how wrong the east stand move was but you advocated the move. My post has nothing to do with the OSC as I pointed out, we would not be just asking here would we. It was and is a personal post.

The problem is OLM that the OSC only has the mandate to support the club. You know that I know that and all supporters know that. You know how wrong the east stand move was but you advocated the move. My post has nothing to do with the OSC as I pointed out, we would not be just asking here would we. It was and is a personal post.
Well it was not intended as a personal dig.He says while making a personal dig.![]()
The problem is OLM that the OSC only has the mandate to support the club. You know that I know that and all supporters know that. You know how wrong the east stand move was but you advocated the move. My post has nothing to do with the OSC as I pointed out, we would not be just asking here would we. It was and is a personal post.
I didn’t, and don’t want to, comment on the OP. Other than to say the club’s announcement on concessions is, in my view, finely tuned to wind up and divide City’s support base further. That perhaps gives a guide as to whether I think supporters groups should get involved.If you read my op, I explained the reason for my post.
I will tell you exactly what frustrates me. Instead of putting forward some ideas and solutions, some posters want to promote division.
If the OSC was involved and wanted some response from supporters, we would have used social media and our web site. It’s a cheap dig at me and at the OSC coming from posters who no matter how many times it gets said, do not want to acknowledge changes have taken place.
There is a real problem looming on the horizon. Reinstating concessions. Anyone who thinks that it will be easy, will find that it could lead to more division amongst the support.
Headlines:
Supporters groups advocate price rises and more seat moves.
So come on AlRawdah, put forward a reasonable way of reintroducing concessions that does not mean that adults between 16 and 65 pay significantly more and there are no forced seat moves. Because I cannot think of anything, hence the op.
That reads like someone from the club who hasn't a ****ing clue asking for help.
I maybe wrong and have had the wrong perception, but right from day one back in the late fifties early sixties, I was always under the impression that when joining the OSC you were in a loose way joining the club. Therefore always expected the OSC to be towing the party line so to speak.
That is still by perception, and why I have never joined over the years, as I never wanted to feel that I might be part of something that certain thing I was against. It may well be possible that member are against many things the club did, and to be by default seen to be part of an organisation that had to go with things they maybe against never appealed to me.
The East Stand move ? I thought you said we should move on and you are talking about the East Stand move ?
Personally, I think that changes need to be made, but how will supporters view another seat move?
Two things have been said to me by mates, in recent days, hence the questions.
What do we think new owners would do with the membership scheme and how would supporters react to paying more, so that others get concessions?
The easy answer will be just do it, but I cannot see an easy answer myself. I am not saying we should stick with what we have, but I really have not seen anyone put forward alternatives.
Maybe, just maybe, the collective knowledge and experience on here, could put together alternatives that are viable and even if they do not appeal to the current owners, they may appeal to new ones.
I maybe wrong and have had the wrong perception, but right from day one back in the late fifties early sixties, I was always under the impression that when joining the OSC you were in a loose way joining the club. Therefore always expected the OSC to be towing the party line so to speak.
That is still by perception, and why I have never joined over the years, as I never wanted to feel that I might be part of something that certain thing I was against. It may well be possible that member are against many things the club did, and to be by default seen to be part of an organisation that had to go with things they maybe against never appealed to me.
Hi John, I hope TOM doesn't mind my jumping in here, but I fairly recently joined the OSC and I am working with the OSC team and Tigers Trust to help develop their media operation. If they were a patsy for the management of the club I would have gone nowhere near this, but they are not. What they are trying to do is create some opportunities for the fans - especially the younger fans e.g to meet up, to meet players, ex players etc, in order to help build and maintain activities for the fan base/community regardless of the ownership of the club. They cannot do this without some dialogue with the club - whoever is in charge - this is pragmatism not hegemony. That dialogue is professional and undertaken with the aim of creating those opportunities. Nothing is ever perfect but they are a small team working hard to create something good over these next few months, and I will avoid embarrassing TOM and the others, but what they are trying to do, and they way they steer a neutral path is actually quite tricky but commendable. Also, through my work I am also dealing with Lincoln City and it has been an big eye opener. They are so easy to deal with and a warm welcoming and inclusive club, so there is no need for an OSC as such. In this sense, and in my view, the Hull City OSC is doing good things despite all the problems.
Hi John, I hope TOM doesn't mind my jumping in here, but I fairly recently joined the OSC and I am working with the OSC team and Tigers Trust to help develop their media operation. If they were a patsy for the management of the club I would have gone nowhere near this, but they are not. What they are trying to do is create some opportunities for the fans - especially the younger fans e.g to meet up, to meet players, ex players etc, in order to help build and maintain activities for the fan base/community regardless of the ownership of the club. They cannot do this without some dialogue with the club - whoever is in charge - this is pragmatism not hegemony. That dialogue is professional and undertaken with the aim of creating those opportunities. Nothing is ever perfect but they are a small team working hard to create something good over these next few months, and I will avoid embarrassing TOM and the others, but what they are trying to do, and they way they steer a neutral path is actually quite tricky but commendable. Also, through my work I am also dealing with Lincoln City and it has been an big eye opener. They are so easy to deal with and a warm welcoming and inclusive club, so there is no need for an OSC as such. In this sense, and in my view, the Hull City OSC is doing good things despite all the problems.
I appreciate your insight into what is going on, maybe there is a wind of change there, or maybe just in the past OSC have not advertised themselves well to the broader fan base.
Would be interesting to know if the OSC membership was larger during the Adam Person reign compared to today, as the feel good facture about the club during Adam's time was infinitely better than the last few years?
I appreciate your insight into what is going on, maybe there is a wind of change there, or maybe just in the past OSC have not advertised themselves well to the broader fan base.
Would be interesting to know if the OSC membership was larger during the Adam Person reign compared to today, as the feel good facture about the club during Adam's time was infinitely better than the last few years?