Bit late for all that isn't it.
Sorry, i've been transfixed on the football.
Bit late for all that isn't it.
Sorry, i've been transfixed on the football.
David Burns ‏@bbcburnsy 2m
I have an interview with Hull City's Ehab Allam on tomorrows show. He puts some figures to the potential value of the name change. #hcafc
Might be worth listening out for.
I like Burnsy but I'm expecting nothing more than the usual journalist soundbite we keep getting on the subject where he doesn't grill Ehab asking for evidence and pointing out the obvious flaws as he should do but instead just makes sure he gets what he needs to make a 'sensational' story and provoke lots of phone-ins which, surprise surprise, happen to be 50-50 for and against.
David Burns ‏@bbcburnsy 2m
I have an interview with Hull City's Ehab Allam on tomorrows show. He puts some figures to the potential value of the name change. #hcafc
Might be worth listening out for.
Only if you think the name change has a value that cannot be achieved with the existing name and nickname. All this will be is the next instalment of smoke and mirrors, a perpetuation of the BIG LIE. The only reason it will be worth listening to would be to see if there is a journo out there with a full set of brains and balls.
Allam has a track record littered with acts of 'retribution'. This whole name change fiasco for a start. He'd have no hesitation in trying to punish the disobedient ones if he can get away with it.
If the ballot is to determine whether they should **** off or not, then they should have worded it as such. As it is, they've blatantly tried to play on people's misplaced fear of them leaving and turn that into votes of confidence in the name change which he'd have had no chance of getting if worded straight, just so that they can initiate some kind of legal challenge and carry this nonsense on even longer.
If you really believed it was just about whether they stay or not, then you'd be able to explain why it is they've squeezed a second question into it without allowing them to be answerred separately.
Not for long.
Some good posts from you tonight, PLT. You are right to question if folk really believe if they are asking whether to **** off or not? Do they really believe they are in a position to **** off, or if they are, do they seriously think they would seek views or permissions.
I would be more specific in what I believe their rationale and drivers are; ego and power are all consuming, as is wealth. There is a change coming to Hull, in macroeconomic terms, that will be a huge regional opportunity for entrenepeurs who have assets to exploit it. Where is a huge percentage of the Allam family's fortune currently tied up? This was supposed to be their entrance card to the right circles, but is it now?
The Allam's are playing for time and the chance to reposition themselves on the regional monopoly board, Hull City AFC or Hull Tigers is a sideshow that they can lose, but not be seen to have lost. If the stakes and returns are high enough, then no one will be making trips to Specsavers anytime soon.
Nice stuff, Mel - and you a pro-name change fan.
Cardiff fans having a shout:
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...s/cardiff-city-supporters-trust-urge-6897905?
On the turncoats thread I posted this.
"I'm now partial pro name change, anti FA and undecided about the Allams."
Partial pro name change, I do not mind the loss of AFC and I have never considered Hull City Tigers to be a real problem.
No such thing as partial name-change. Anything other than Hull City AFC is a name-change, to support a change from that is to be Pro-name-change. The FA have FA to do with why this name change attempt came about; to bring them into the argument is as much a red-herring as a supporters trust - interesting topics, but separate to the name-change debate. What do you think about the moral standards of the Allam's? What do you think when people call them bonkers?
On the turncoats thread I posted this.
"I'm now partial pro name change, anti FA and undecided about the Allams."
Partial pro name change, I do not mind the loss of AFC and I have never considered Hull City Tigers to be a real problem.
<snooze> we still arguing about this?
The FA will vote no.
all the prepubescent CTWD members and the knuckle draggers have won, can we move on now?
AA is a business man, he can spot a money making venture cos he no longer wants to throw his own cash into a money pit. Who can blame him really?
Congratulations, Slapper - your unchanging vacuous approach to the issue is being firmly maintained. You continue to peddle the Allams' line that it's definitely about making money, whilst ignoring the old man's falling-out with HCC over the Stadium.
If we are to move on, as you 'wittily' suggest - then why is the so-called 'ballot' being called by the Allams? And would you concede that the 'ballot' is being handled with the same finesse (and PR success) as many of the Allams' other moves?