I don't disagree, but HCST needs to demonstrate that it's more than a single issue group. So far, the replies from them, or rather people commenting on their behalf, have been defensive of a position , that democratically they can't hold. I'd have been more comfortable had there been debate, as opposed to what comes over as arrogant and dismissive replies that assume things incorrectly or try to realign the point. It's part of why I can understand why the club don't bother with them. It's yet another opportunity going begging.
Are you forgetting how folk reached these positions? Where we all are is a result of the actions of Assem Allam, no one else.
so let me get this straight, If "Hull City" went bankrupt and ended up in league 2 you would prefer to follow us in league 2 than playing top quality football. The heritage of this football club was to get Hull in the Premier League, if you care so much about the heritage of the club you you would respect that!....
If we are Hull Tigers why don't all the haters go start watching Hull United, they will change their name to Hull City I'm sure!....then you can watch the football you all want to watch with the name you want!
I merely said that your assertion there wouldn't now be a Hull City was wrong. I am now in my 52nd season if supporting City. A whole 4 of those have been in the top flight. Far less than I have spent supporting them in Div 2 (Division 4 in old money) or the other divisions. I am a City fan who supports Hull City whatever division they are in and would be quite happy to do so again. The thing is, how many who are willing to see us renamed as Hull Tigers would be? Their chief interest seems to be that the club is in the PL. They are PL junkies rather than City fans. I suspect you are one of those.
That's not what he said ............. **** ........ he said, there'd be a Hull City, just not where it is now, he said **** all about preference ......... get it ? You personally bring **** all to this debate other than ''he saved us, therefore he can do what he wants'', that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, we all know where you're coming from, now **** off, you're like someone who's tread in dogshit and spreading it all over the kitchen floor on this thread.
Surely the Supporters Trust & CTWD do/did represent their members You cannot expect any group to represent those who are not members....that would be like expecting a UNISON rep to go to an employment tribunal & represent a non union member At least the Trust will be representing the views of more than one man
As far as the contract point is concerned there is no hint of an answer there. As far as you creating an alternate supporters group, there has been ample time for you to rally your troops. Seems to me that most of the argument is based on the current owners , when, perhaps, it should be based on a longer and more sustainable support principle - do you see the Allams around in 2 - 3 - 5 years? This was the opening paragraph from Obi' s earlier post in which he explains what he would do if he were the owners. The problem is that the owners have never, ever done this, have they?
Fez, you seem to be trying to do your usual trick of building a strawman of issues not made, and then claiming the replies are circular. The name change application can be viewed as a request to vary the contract. I'm not suggesting a new group, partly for the reasons Obadiah says, as usual, far better than I can. It'd be better to make what we've got become more in tune than to add to the conflicts.
