Name change discussion
- Thread starter RicardoHCAFC
- Start date
-
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
-
Here's the OSC's submission to the FA.
http://www.hullcityosc.com/fans/written-portion-of-fa-submission/
http://www.hullcityosc.com/fans/written-portion-of-fa-submission/
Well done to the OSC on releasing their written submission, a bit fudged and not offering much of an opinion, but still better out than in.
PLT there is only one organisation with the names of the season pass holders the club. How could any group outside of the club ballot season pass holders?
20,000 opinions being sought outside a football ground prior to a sell out match? Sorry but I can not see any club allowing that to happen, no matter what the issue. Anyway, I can't make all of the matches, so,why don't I get a vote? I'm a pass holder. I think the club was right to say no to a ballot on that occasion, but wrong not to ballot season pass holders. It may have been wrong to threaten the OSC as reported but actually if any organisation tried to do the same wouldn't the club have a say.
The 'City Till We Die' group (CTWD) yesterday wrote to Allam effectively calling for a referendum amongst season ticket holders. After agreement with Allam over the wording on vote slips, a direct yes or no answer has been proposed.
"We believe that fans want a football club that grows into a Premier League force, raising the revenues needed to do that while maintaining a keen eye on the club's history and standing in the football world," read a statement from CTWD, who have previously handed over a petition signed by 5,000 fans opposing change.
"We are therefore writing to Dr Allam with a simple proposition. Work with us to launch a simple and inclusive supporter consultation regarding the name change proposal.
"CTWD has the passion and time to put the consultation paper together, and we will give equal prominence to our justification for keeping Hull City AFC and Dr Allam's reasoning for change.
"We will also agree with Dr Allam the wording of a single, simple yes/no question. All we ask of the club is that they use their database of 20,000 season ticket holders to distribute the consultation paper, so that the full breadth of City's support can be heard.
"We don't anticipate Dr Allam will refuse our offer. He has stated that he believes 98 per cent of Hull City fans support his proposed name change; we think that is incorrect. So let's ask them. If he wants to ignore the views expressed, that's his prerogative. But let's hear the full voice of the fans."
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...tory-20098583-detail/story.html#ixzz2sYXcpKsX
Finally an honest and succinct submission that doesn't claim to speak for the many, represents its own members just fine, and presents the facts in an honest and accurate manner, without any need for any emotional bullshit.
My opinion of the OSC just soared up.
So, they didn't withhold their submission either. My opinion of CTWD, as low as it was already, just went down either further.
You might want to pay attention to how the OSC conducts itself in regards to mudslinging.
Irony at it's finest. You only ever post for attention. Supported, as usual, by your buddy Dutch. You pair really are the Chuckle Brothers aren't you? You sure as hell make me chuckle.
The point PLT is making is that the OSC in their submission didn't say the club said no but that they didn't have the people to do it. Two completely different things as you know.
Having spent three quarters or so of its submission on context,brief history and the proposed name change what view or comment did they make on the results of the poll where a clear majority is against it? None.
"Although the results gathered from the HCOSC poll illustrate the answer to the question posed, the name change is clearly a highly emotive subject amongst OSC members, and amongst Hull City supporters in general, with strong views being held on both sides of the argument. During this period of debate, many varied opinions from members have been shared with the Directors".
How wishy washy is this? Surely the least they could have said is "Although the results gathered from the HCOSC poll illustrate strong opposition to the name change it is clearly a highly emotive subject amongst OSC members, and amongst Hull City supporters in general, with strong views being held on both sides of the argument. During this period of debate, many varied opinions from members have been shared with the Directors".
Despite the result of the poll it's clear the OSC are trying to be all things to all men.
Asolutely right DMD. Did you notice in reporting the first poll the majority against came first but in the results for the second the minority yes vote came first?
Obi, I only know what I have been told and what has been posted on here, but in my humble opinion three survey points for one hour, would not have been a viable means of conducting a full poll of season holders. Threats by the club do appear out of order, but I don't know the context of the conversation.
60-40 is not a massive majority. They still have 40% of their members to consider. Or you would lot just disregard them as not important and not worthy of your time?
Seems it's too hard for you to understand, CTWD is a single issue (lol) campaign group, everyone signed up to it are focussed on one single (lol) thing. The OSC is not and nor should it pretend to be. It's really that simple.
Any sign of an apology btw for accusing the OSC of not publishing their submission?
Seems it's too hard for you to understand, CTWD is a single issue (lol) campaign group, everyone signed up to it are focussed on one single (lol) thing. The OSC is not and nor should it pretend to be. It's really that simple.
Any sign of an apology btw for accusing the OSC of not publishing their submission?