"We have made our feelings known to Hull. At some point, when there’s that many people think it (Tigers) is a bad idea, you really have to start to listen." - Richard Scudamore. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...damores-crusade-to-lift-England-football.html
The article also highlights that we could benefit from having an elite academy - and not just for inclusion in the Under-21 League. Something worthwhile to invest in, rather than wasting pots of money on a useless and unnecessary re-naming/re-branding exercise?
Premier League chief Richard Scudamore says no to Hull Tigers and tells Hull City owner Assem Allam to change his mind PREMIER League chief Richard Scudamore says he has spoken to Hull City owner Assem Allam about his bid to rename the club Hull Tigers and told him to have a rethink. Allam has now registered his plans with the FA, who are now consulting with local stakeholders about it, and an April deadline has been set for when a decision on the application will be made. East Riding County FA and the City Til We Die campaign group have already presented their no stance to the FA, and Scudamore insists the tide of opinion is one which should be listened to by City’s owner. "We have made our feelings known to Hull. At some point, when there's that many people think it (Tigers) is a bad idea, you really have to start to listen,” he said in today’s Daily Telegraph. "They are listening but it is an unshakeable belief and when people have an unshakeable belief there isn't a lot you can do to shake that. But it's an FA decision, not ours. “We are not going to be handing back club ownership to the local communities. It is not going to happen." http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Prem...tory-20631328-detail/story.html#ixzz2tJQuKhwS
“Sometimes it is hard to understand why somebody would want to do something; clearly in Vincent’s case it is recognised that red is a very, very significant colour in Asian culture. But he hasn’t been universally criticised by all his own fan-base. If the fan-base was asked we’ll play in red or blue, Premier League or non Premier League, they would probably play in yellow in the Premier League. We have made our feelings known to Hull. At some point, when there’s that many people think it (Tigers) is a bad idea, you really have to start to listen. They are listening but it is an unshakeable belief and when people have an unshakeable belief there isn’t a lot you can do to shake that. But it’s an FA decision, not ours. We are not going to be handing back club ownership to the local communities. It is not going to happen.” This is a significant statement. It indicates to me that whilst the PL are not happy that owners want to make changes, it is up to the owners and not the local community. This is a neutral statement, real fence sitting.
We have made our feelings known to Hull. At some point, when there’s that many people think it (Tigers) is a bad idea, you really have to start to listen. That's not fence sitting.
It just says the Premier League is not going to force existing owners to hand over their clubs to the local communities. It also says that they think the club should listen to the fans and, reading between the lines, they are relieved they don't have to make the final decision.
The fact is, he thinks it's a ridiculous idea that is being driven by nothing more than a spat with the council.
Do you have anymore room on that fence for some more? I don't understand this change of tack; is it the objective of CTWD that you are against, or the people? To be honest, I think you need to go back to the beginning and start again, because there is nothing logical in the way you are interpreting this interview; Peter Scudamore has made a significant and very pointed statement that he thinks the name-change idea of Assem Allam unwise, he thinks the industry interaction of Assem Allem poor and damaging, he also, for the record, considers him (Assem Allam) to be so wrapped up in his own conceited self-confidence that he is probably incapable of any reconsideration. To me, Peter Scudamore is using the full reputational power of his position to express to the Football Association that they MUST resist this idiot's application. If you don't see that, then I have no idea what you are looking at. For Peter Scudamore you can read City Till I Die - it really is that simple.
Fez, I'm commenting on posts made on here. It is nothing to do with CTWD. The fact is .....! erm what fact!! Peter Scudamore may pay lip service to fans but that's all it is. The PL do not want supporter involvement foisted on its owners. Read the full statement, look at the words used. The part about club colours, he intimates that the heritage of a clubs shirt colours comes after the staus of being in the PL. The PL supports its club owners even if it doesn't understand why they want to do the things they do. Rolling out Peter Scudamore as a voice against Assem Allam is bollocks, he simply says that the club is listening but will not change it's mind and there is nothing the PL can do about it, it's not the PLs problem. Have you read the transcripts of the consultantion with government, the media coverage of the spats with Supporters Direct? You say that you don't trust Assem Allam, yet you trust Peter Scudamore, yes sure the PL will do everything it can, it will not allow safe standing for its clubs, it does not want government to legislate over supporters on the boards of clubs. It wants to globalise English football, extending its reach beyond the top tier. It's not me who has done a u turn Fez, its you, you have become blinkered by your anger over Assem Allam and have lost your ability to read into statements made.
Well they are a very good example of the marketing strategy. Wasn't that long ago they where saying that the Government should stop investing in Cities like Hull and basically keep all the wonga down south
So a quick summary of the last few pages: Scudamore said something we can use and make it fit our purpose, but we'll ignore what he's actually saying. The Economist? What the **** do they know about business? Honestly, Scudamore is a self serving, fence sitting self promotionist. He is seriously NOT interested in ou club, the name, the fans or any of the emo stuff you lot care about. He's paid brief lip service to you, and you go down faster than a 5 quid tart. His real interest is pushing the Premier League everywhere he can, however he can. When the name change goes through, he'll be wondering how little Hull can increase its revenue streams, then other clubs will be all over it too. Not just name changes, other stuff, but you watch, it will happen. It's just funny seeing forum warriors like PLT dismissing that Economist article so I'm going to leave it at that. You ****wits wonder why I'm a passionate supporter of Dr Allam? He's right, he's doing what's best for the Club and knows what he's doing, that's why.
http://www.bbc.co.uk Give football fans a stake in their clubs, say MPs and peers. please log in to view this image Laws are needed to make it easier for football fans to buy a stake in their club, says a group of MPs and peers. The group argues that wealthy financiers have plunged some clubs into crisis. The Football Association, the Premier League and Football League are accused of failing to promote supporter ownership. The football authorities say they do not favour one type of ownership over another. "Our priority, whatever their ownership structure, is that clubs are financially sustainable and that they make a positive contribution to the competitions they play in, the wider community and domestic football," a statement from the Premier League and Football League said. The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Mutuals has released a report on ownership, which says: "At all levels, clubs are prone to sudden changes of fortune and financial crises brought about not by their fortunes on the pitch but by the capricious behaviour of many owners of clubs." The group has stinging criticism for the football authorities for maintaining a position of not favouring any one form of club ownership structure and so not promoting supporter ownership. "We encountered a complacent attitude to supporter ownership from the Football Association, Premier League and Football League, which each insist on maintaining their 'neutrality' on issues of ownership," said Jonathan Evans MP, chair of the group. "This cannot be allowed to continue. Supporters are the lifeblood of the game and yet we see their interests take second place to even the most transient of club owners," he added. The FA declined to comment on the report. There have been a number of high-profile rows where supporters say club owners are making decisions that are not acting in the best interests of the club. Leeds United fans are angry over the decision by the club's owners to sell a controlling stake to the Italian tycoon Massimo Cellino, who has faced questions over his financial dealings. And Coventry City fans now have to travel 35 miles to Northampton to watch their team play home matches after a rent dispute between the owners of the Ricoh Arena and the club's owners left City without a home ground of their own. The all-party group says it is "dismayed" that no action has been taken to ensure the long-term financial security of Supporters Direct, a body set up to advise and assist fans on how to run supporters' trusts. The group points to a recommendation from MPs on the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee a year ago for long-term funding of Supporters Direct to be sorted out. But it says the Premier League did not see this as its responsibility. Kevin Rye, a spokesman from Supporters Direct, said the group was disappointed at the slow pace of reform. "Are we going to give up arguing that simple rules should be adopted to ensure that football clubs are owned by people who are going to run them properly, not bankrupt them, change them beyond recognition or move them? Of course we're not. Good governance The case for reform is made by just what's happened in the last year at Cardiff City, Hull City, Coventry City, Leeds United, Hereford United. It's now about what it looks like and when it happens," Mr Rye said. The Premier and Football Leagues maintain that "progress has been made across all the areas identified by the committee's report including financial regulations and greater supporter engagement". The all-party group is also calling for football "assets" with a value to the community - such as club colours, club name and home ground ownership - to be protected by law. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport told the BBC it had made it clear to football authorities that good governance was vital for the game to prosper. "They have responded and made changes, with independent directors introduced on to the FA board and the Premier League and Football League strengthening their financial regulations. We are speaking to... the football authorities about setting up an expert group on fan engagement that could look at ways in which we could encourage supporter ownership at clubs where that is a viable, workable option," it said in a statement.
The Football Association, the Premier League and Football League are accused of failing to promote supporter ownership. "We encountered a complacent attitude to supporter ownership from the Football Association, Premier League and Football League, which each insist on maintaining their 'neutrality' on issues of ownership," said Jonathan Evans MP, chair of the group. Thanks DMD, this illustrates my point perfectly. The FA, PL and FL are being dragged reluctantly into giving supporters more say in the running of clubs. I want supporters to be directly involved with the running of clubs, I want stadiums to be community assets, I believe in the heritage of the club. But I also know that without the fullest co operation of owners and the authorities it is an uphill battle. The problem is deep rooted and unfortunately the vast sums of money involved make the task nearly impossible for existing PL clubs. When you see existing supporter trusts like Newcastle where out of a huge and passionate supporter base, only 2000 have joined. Portsmouths 1850 members still rely on the wealth of three or four major investors in the trust. CTWD only have around 1800 members, it begs the question, how many supporters want to be involved? Fez asked if I was against CTWD or the people who run it. Well I don't know the personalities of those involved. I have been expressing the same ideals of supporter trusts for years, so I do support the objectives of CTWD. Will CTWD deliver a supporter on the board, I think that even though it is widening the gap between the CTWD and the No To Hull Tigers campaign, the club will not deal with the organisers of the protest. The constant knocking of the OSC on here disturbs me, I do think that some posters on here want to see the OSC fold in order for CTWD to step into the space left by its demise. I stand by my view that Scudamore is sitting on the fence, privately he can say what he wants, but even the government says that the PL doesn't care enough about the issues.
