Fair enough I don’t particularly disagree, but I can also see why you might meet now too I still don’t think they would have made the offer to meet without the protests though
So you really believe the protests had nothing to do with them saying they’re going to use Hull City? They would have offered that, in the same way, at the same time, if no one was protesting at all?
The club are not currently meeting the EFL rules on supporter consultation, as they’re picking who attends, rather than allowing them to be democratically elected to the committee by the fans... 112 Supporter Engagement 112.1 Clubs shall hold at least two meetings/fans forums per Season to which its supporters (or representatives) are to be invited in order to discuss significant issues relating to the Club. The framework for these meetings shall be documented in the Club’s customer charter, but are subject to the following minimum criteria: 112.1.1 Clubs must be represented by the Club’s majority owner, board director(s) or other senior executive(s); 112.1.2 where meetings are not open to all supporters wishing to attend, the supporter representatives must be elected, selected or invited in line with basic democratic principles; and 112.1.3 individuals cannot be excluded by the Club without good reason (the Club acting reasonably).
It’s the Government Expert Working Group Report, which specifically states Trusts should be invited... https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ile/594883/EWG_PROGRESS_REPORT_FINAL_1.0.docx
We’ll see what’s been achieved by the end of the month, you expect nothing, I expect our name to be reinstated. We’ll soon see.
I think the importance placed upon it is overstated. The reality has far more to do with where they are in their financial recovery strategy, as they'll do whatever is necessry to string folk along. It has far more to do with how they exit the club, the protests were coincidental. They have said many things in the past. Edit: OLM unearthing the ELF and Govt. Requirements does support my view that they kill two birds with one stone. They need to hold the Liaison Meeings, the Trust should be invited (it would seem) and the Trust is their best organised threat; they keep their few friends close and their enemies closer by stringing them along in these necessary meetings.
Everything is wait and see, Just as they would want it. Whether they are following rules or inviting who they should doesn't matter, they won't face any repercussions They don't like the protests and they stopped them. The focus should be on Allam out, a new owner would change all the rest immediately. The HCST can't have this as their aim as they are now too professional but this is what the majority of supporters want. In the meantime were going down due to lack of investment and poor management and they still wait for that last payment. We should be making that wait as painful as possible
We’ll just have to disagree, which is fine I agree they want to strong people along as possible I think that without protests they’d have been happy enough just staying quiet and letting things bob along as they are Yes they should have meetings, but they’ve never bothered about what they should do before (you shouldn't really sell things that don’t belong to you!) so I’m sure they won’t care at all about a clause about meetings. Whether the meetings will actually get a satisfactory outcome is another matter though, which we do agree on. Have a good weekend
112.1.2 Elected,selected or invited inline with basic democratic principles. Show me where it say must hold a ballot. Basic democratic principles are that all are equal and no one may be discriminated against on the basis of their race, religion, ethnic group, or gender. Every word, comma and full stop in a regulation is important as regulations are not open to interpretation. You cannot read a regulation and say this is what is meant by it, you can only say this is what it says.[/QUOTE]
This is a report and was published prior to the EFL guidelines as below. “The recommendation that club leaders (owners/senior executives) from every one of the 92 professional clubs meet with a representative group of supporters (including the Supporters’ Trust) from their club at least twice a season has been agreed by the Premier League and English Football League (EFL), with those meetings taking place from this 2016/17 season. The EFL has codified this as a requirement in their Rulebook and has issued a guidance note to its clubs on how these meetings should work, including suggestions on information that should be provided by clubs to supporters to inform those discussions. The EFL will be asking clubs to confirm how they complied with the new regulations at the season’s end.” Note that the supporters trust element is in brackets and is not included in the EFL guidelines or rules.
Strange typo, must be something Freudian in that somewhere. The key to the merger was CTWD was an active organisation and the Tigers Co-op wasn't. By using the existing company the merged organisations shaved some money, perfectly understandable. There is an ocean between the old Co-op and the new Supporters Trust even though its the same company. A bit like Hull City Tigers Limited under Pearson and Hull City Tigers Limited under the Allams.
The EFL guidelines were published on here previously and whoever has told the trust that the club has not followed them has simply got it wrong. The Govt document is the report that was used as the framework to build the EFL and PL guidelines, not law
I agree with this, but it misses my point entirely. Some time ago, probably in the early build up to the Queens visit and the fallout of the original baĺls, they sat down and considered their options. I don't believe protest is a major consideration to them, just an annoyance. I also believe that, just like many of us, they worked out that protests in front of HM weren't going to happen. They knew they had an obligation for the SLMs and they knew the Trust were expected to be invited. A bit like having random balls of wool and knitting an effective jumper, they cobbled together the meetings and invited the Trust, as required. The remainder of the invites they manipulated, as they knew they had done enough to not be challenged. Since then they played the press and the attendees, using delaying tactics to move forward. VB was clearly being sourced and recruited, they wanted distance (AA wanted EA away from the reins), they concoct this later burst of promise and here we are, yet again. I sincerely hope OLM is right in his call about the name, but I expect a fudge of some sort; my approach and opinion has staved off disappointment thus far... As for the weekend, thanks for the thought, it will be limited, as I tried the snowboard you love and agree it's real fun, but, alas, a gash in my nose (broke again, put it back) and a badly broken rib mean nuProxin, cocodamol, Old Perculiar and a sedentary few days are in order. I explained to my wife that the scar will add to my rakish good looks - open your window, the laughter has yet to stop... Have a good one yourself and thanks for discussing this, I think some things are clearer...
