Ehab and the parachute payments...

I'm not interested in who said what. Move on. Do something positive.
TOM is asking for volunteers. The Trust is asking for volunteers. Get up off your arse and do something positive. But nah you'll just sit back and pick

 

So you can't bear to admit my statement was correct and DMD and others who said it wasn't were incorrect.
Fair enough.

 

Erm...my post and the one it responded is still there. Your issue seems to about something that wasn't said.

Talk about sad ****s moving goal posts.

 

I think the negetaratti are slowly being revealed.

 

You said my statement about how the ASI was spent in comparison to other clubs was wrong. Your failure to be able to back up that empty rhetoric has made you move goalposts and tie yourself in knots at the same time. Quite a contortionist.
And all you had to do, but couldn't, to show I was wrong was name just one other club which spent all the ASI money on fans of other clubs but none on their own. Talk about ****s full of empty rhetoric who can't admit they were wrong.

 

Yew wood.

 

As if Tickles has finely crafted a witty online persona!

 

Are they really Dutch? Who are they?

 

I really don't have the time or inclination to find the source of this argument but I note one person continually asking for evidence of other clubs using ASI for away visitors to their ground. I thought I'd do a very quick google and found this which suggests that Southampton (granted it was in the previous season) improved their away concourse.

http://www.wearepremierleague.com/2014/04/how-clubs-spend-200k-away-fans-fund.html

 

As you can't seem to ma age to vet back to the original post. Here's what I posted.


"It wasn't someone else's money, and as the prem quoted it as a success, the incompetent bit's wrong too."

Spot the difference?

 

A couple of others spent on the away concourse too. I think some are arguing that we are the only ones that spent all on away fans, although away fans do tend to bring atmosphere to the kc.

 

It wasn't their money, it was part of what was given to them by the PL with the request they spent £200,000 on the ASI. If it was their money they could presumably spent it on a new Bentley with your approval. My point was we were the only club whose chairman chose to use it for fans of other clubs and not their own.
The incompetence bit refers, not to Scudamore's opinions which are of no great import, but to the fact that they could have engendered a bit of good feeling and used the money like every other club did. That they chose not to and Ehab had the nerve to claim they were the only ones doing it the right way was sheer nonsense. None who thinks it wasn't done out of pettiness and because of other issues displays a sense of naivety I wouldn't have attributed to yourself.

 

Sorry, but you are wrong, it was not a part of the money given to them by the PL. It was an agreement made by all of the clubs in the PL to allocate £200,000.00 to the PL ASI fund. At no stage did the PL give the clubs the money and it did not have to come from the TV rights payments. The clubs simply said that they would all spend a minimum of £200k on ASI projects. Some spent more, but none spent less. The clubs also did not have to disclose to the PL how much they had spent or on what it was spent on. It was their (the clubs) money, they could have opted out. It would not have changed what the PL gave them.

Over two seasons Hull City did spend some of the money on its own fans, but in the second season all of the money went into the North Stand away section. It could have all been different, but that is how it was and there is nothing that can be changed now.

 

So the £200,000 will have come out of a separate account? You know full well that the clubs used money from the PL. Most make a loss even with the PL money. And where do you think the PL money comes from? It wouldn't be from the billions they get from the TV rights would it?
So, if not opting out, the club could have spent it on their own fans. But chose not to. A cynical person could think they used it to fund work the SMC should have done. The merely sceptical will think it was pettiness because they haven't got their own way and they were annoyed some fans dared to disagree with them.

 

Perhaps the two posters who have whinged of negativity yet taken another thread to a tedious end. No answers, just circular, boring arguing trying to impose their viewpoint on others. As if that wasn't bad enough, and it was, TOM came in to tell us all to get our hands in our pockets again - why is it the fans responsibility? You really couldn't make this **** up, no wonder many fear fans taking control of the club, but never mind.

 

Erm, as you seem to think you have a right to be critical of others, what have you done?

 

That's a different question really, but maybe, maybe not. The club reckon it moved them up some away fans rankings, which I turn would have added to the KC atmosphere. Plus the Prem and FSF were far from critical.

Anyway, it's history, we've moved to the new positive era.