FA reject name change

  • 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!
The FA Council has today rejected Hull City’s application to change their playing name to Hull Tigers.

The Council’s decision – carried by a 63.5% vote of its members – came after a recommendation from The FA’s Membership Committee.

The Council, which is made up of representatives from across football, fully considered the recommendation and the subsequent responses received from Hull City in reaching its decision.

http://www.thefa.com/news/governanc...-on-hull-city-application#Sj0XWGcGjrVQrkWV.99
 
There is no appeal.

If the club want to try again, it needs to be for next season, we will remain Hull City AFC for next season, whatever happens.

Time to move on Doc, don't drag this **** out a minute longer, there's a good chap.
 
Only 63%?

Kin ell was far closer than I thought it'd be. I was expecting it to be unanimous.

This definitely is not the end.
 
Glad the FA blocked it. Hopefully he won't re-apply next season (but he probably will).

Happy for you lot. <ok>
 
Congratulations boys and girls. Excellent news just before Wembley, go have a good day out now and stuff the Blunts.
 
I'm very surprised it was that close. Annoying really as Assem will see this as 'just 13.5% to convince' and therefore undoubtedly will apply again next year. I wish the batty old knobhead would just let it go but am sure this is far from over.
 
originallambrettaman said:
There is no appeal.

If the club want to try again, it needs to be for next season, we will remain Hull City AFC for next season, whatever happens.

Time to move on Doc, don't drag this **** out a minute longer, there's a good chap.
Click to expand...

Sadly, I think the fact he only needs to win over another 14% means this is far from the end. Very far for it. It's an encouraging result really for Allam it's got to be said.

Unless he has actually done proper research into it already and that was included in his submission, then he'll be scratching his head at where his ammo can come from. If that's the case I expect it to be over in the summer once it's been through the courts.
 
"The Council’s decision – carried by a 63.5% vote of its members – came after a recommendation from The FA’s Membership Committee."

Does this mean that it was rejected by a 63.5% to 36.5% majority. Or does it mean that just 63.5% of its members voted in total? It reads like the latter but everyone is assuming the former.
 
If 36.5% approved it then that's worrying. How anybody could approve it is beyond belief
 
Brucie's and Curtis's video comments before the announcement.

[video]http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/teams/hull-city/9257309/bruce:-nothing-i-can-do[/video]
 
rovertiger said:
Brucie's and Curtis's video comments before the announcement.

[video]http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/teams/hull-city/9257309/bruce:-nothing-i-can-do[/video]
Click to expand...

The thing is, the staff and players can't really properly take a side as it is a lose-lose situation.
 
I'm ****ing staggered that 36% of the FA voted in favour.

****'s sake. Unbelievable. Seems there are cockends with no sense of history running the game too.
 
The official statement suggests that only 63.5% of the members voted. Very doubtful that 100% of members attended so it could be that 100% of the members who were there all voted no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back