No To Hull Tigers

[ruisliptiger]

It's heartening to see the show of solidarity for us over the last couple of days from practically every Club Supporters Trust in the country. Including Leicester City. The petition has rocketed over the last week due to the recent exposure and now stands at 10,984.

[ruisliptiger]

A very good article here from The Times about the Capitulation of the English game.

 

Oliver Kay in the Times wrote:Cynics unravel our game’s rich tapestry

Choose football. Choose a club. Choose a vanity purchase. Choose a leveraged buyout. Choose dragging a club into hundreds of millions of pounds of debt, running up huge interest payments every year, just to prop up your own investment.

Choose being dismissive, contemptuous and silent. Choose being open, desperate to please but hopelessly naive. Choose living the dream and then leaving behind a nightmare. Choose pumping in hundreds of millions of pounds and running the club as a dictatorship. Choose paying an £11 million dividend to one of your own companies. Choose sacking your manager, hiring a friend of a friend, thinking you know best and then showing you know nothing.

Choose alienating your fanbase by inflating ticket prices. Choose turning a proud old club into an advertising vehicle for a country, a downmarket sports shop or takeaway chicken. Choose selling the stadium’s name, changing the club’s name, changing the kit colours. Choose relocating to Milton Keynes or Northampton. Choose charging for newspaper interviews. Choose official integrated telecommunications partners in Benin, Bahrain and Bangladesh. Choose selling your soul to the highest bidder. Choose English football.

You get the picture. It is not just about Assem Allam’s attempts to turn Hull City into Hull Tigers or Vincent Tan’s unedifying rebranding of Cardiff City or Mike Ashley’s constant cheapening of Newcastle United or the Glazer family’s leeching of Manchester United or the atrocities inflicted on Birmingham City, Blackburn Rovers, Coventry City, Portsmouth, York City and various other clubs in recent times.

No, the real issue here is the common theme that runs through all this: the unravelling of football’s rich tapestry by businessmen who correctly sense that the English game brings all manner of opportunities for self-aggrandisement and unregulated abuse of proud old institutions while the authorities shake their heads solemnly before shrugging and saying there is nothing they can do about it, guv.

Increasingly, it feels as if that particular horse has already bolted, that there is no use trying to shut the stable door now when Portsmouth have dropped three divisions or when Manchester United have spent more than £500  million in eight years to prop up the Glazer family’s ownership or when attendances at Blackburn have plummeted in three years under the calamitous ownership of Venky’s or when Coventry are playing to pitiful crowds in Northampton while the purpose-built Ricoh Arena sits empty because of a dispute between a hedge fund and Coventry City Council.

The authorities have proved spectacularly useless when it has come to stopping the various forms of corporate vandalism that have followed the diversification of club ownership in English football. A similar verdict was reached in 2011 by a Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) committee into football governance, which stated that “the FA, Premier League and Football League have spent too long behind the curve on ownership mattersâ€, allowing “some startlingly poor business practices to occur, and have tolerated an unacceptably low level of transparencyâ€.

The most troubling thing of all is how weak English football’s authorities are when these issues arise. The classic case came in 2002, when an FA-appointed commission greased the wheels of the bandwagon that took Wimbledon to Milton Keynes, which, it said, “provides a suitable and deserving opportunity where none exists in South Londonâ€. The FA received assurances that Wimbledon’s identity would be retained in Milton Keynes — as if that were even possible — but, to nobody’s surprise, the re-franchising was complete when the club was renamed MK Dons in 2004.

Compared to all this, Tan’s rebranding of Cardiff, wearing red shirts rather than blue, and Allam’s proposed relaunch of Hull as Hull Tigers might seem relatively trivial. A personal view, though, is that both cases show an appalling disregard to their club’s heritage and for the feelings of supporters and that, for your average football supporter and indeed reporter, these are small but significant conflicts in a wider battle to preserve the soul of English football.
By far the least significant of the football crimes listed above are Newcastle’s plans, more embryonic than reported, to persuade newspapers to pay for the right to be “media partnersâ€, presumably on the condition that it is accompanied by the type of soft-soap reporting that so many clubs seem to imagine is the media’s duty.

Again, this is symptomatic of a wider issue. It is not about media relations, even if Newcastle are a sad case in that department, having banned their three local newspapers for sympathising with those protesting against the Mike Ashley regime. No, what grates most here is that this daft initiative has come from a club that did not request a penny from Ashley’s company when, for 11 embarrassing months, St James’ Park, the club’s home since 1892, was rebranded as Sports Direct Arena before Wonga.com restored a little of the class for which they are so well known.

Manchester United’s pursuit of logistics partners, noodle partners and official snack partners — “with a history of success and not compromising on quality, Mister Potato shares our commitment to excellence†and no, I’m not joking — makes financial sense. One cannot help recalling, though, that so much of the money that club makes goes into sustaining the Glazer regime or that the club’s otherwise impeccable tributes on the 50th anniversary of the Munich tragedy were besmirched, horribly, by an AIG logo on the huge mural outside Old Trafford.

It is typical, every bit of it, of a culture that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing. Allam seemed one of those owners that appreciated the wider value of a club, having invested so much in Hull and then propelling them forward, but his disdain for the supporters’ view over his Hull Tigers proposal is appalling. “We’re City till we die,†they chant. “They can die as they want,†he said, having earlier stated that “No one on earth is allowed to question how I do my business.â€

Allam claims that he rejects “Hull City†because “City is also associated with Leicester, Bristol, Manchester and many other clubs. City is a lousy identity.â€

Only a cynic would suggest that Allam’s real issue with “Hull City†stems from his longstanding grievances with Hull City Council, who own the KC Stadium and have rejected the club’s attempts to buy the freehold. This is what we are dealing with here: the type of owners who feel a club’s heritage is reasonable collateral in a dispute with a local council. A change in name, in Hull’s case, might be reversible, but SISU, the hedge fund that owns Coventry, seem not to care about the damage being done by their senseless decision to relocate to Northampton out of spite towards Coventry City Council, who own the Ricoh Arena.

Nobody at Coventry/SISU seems to worry about the long-term issues arising from the fact that a Sky Bet League One club, facing a battle to attract young supporters, has, out of bloody-mindedness, ended up playing its home matches in 
front of crowds of less than 2,000 and a 40-minute drive away in Northampton.

The Football League tried but failed to intervene over Coventry. The FA, in the year that marked their 150th anniversary, have shown themselves to be powerless when such issues have arisen. The self-styled governing body of English football has long washed its hands of such matters.

The weakness of the authorities is one of the great regrets of English football in the 21st century. Frustration tends to be focused on the antiquated structure of the FA, with its bloated Council, made up almost entirely of grey-haired men. They are too conservative, we frequently hear. Well, for once, the FA Council has an opportunity to justify its existence. The next step, after Hull submitted its request to change its name , is for the FA Council to decide whether to to ratify the change as per FA rule A3 (l).

We often hear the English football is too conservative. In recent years it has been nothing like conservative enough where it has come to containing the whims of owners who, bit by bit, are picking apart the rich tapestry of what they have bought into. The “Hull Tigers†debate might seem relatively trivial compared to some of what has been allowed to go unchecked in recent years, but, if the authorities have any intention of fighting the good fight at last, that club will be City till they die.

[Craig]

The protests are really quite vociferous.

[Kitchandro]

The protests are really quite vociferous.

 

I'm surprised anyone watched the match tbh.

[coley1884]

Leicester Foxes, Cardiff Dragons, Watford Hornets sound more like ice hocky teams than anything hahah

[AndWhat?]

The protests are really quite vociferous.

Anything happen of note?

Or just few chants of 'city till we die' every 10 minutes?

[Aus Fox]

It's heartening to see the show of solidarity for us over the last couple of days from practically every Club Supporters Trust in the country. Including Leicester City. The petition has rocketed over the last week due to the recent exposure and now stands at 10,984.

The petition only has 11,000 odd signatures? With support from all around the country, how many actual Hull supporters have signed it? Do Hull supporters care about the name change?

Because it's time to act if they do!

Another 24,000 there today lining the pockets of the owners and less than half of these have signed the petition.

[Strokes]

The petition only has 11,000 odd signatures? With support from all around the country, how many actual Hull supporters have signed it? Do Hull supporters care about the name change?

Because it's time to act if they do!

Another 24,000 there today lining the pockets of the owners and less than half of these have signed the petition.

They aren't bothered, it will give them something to complain about but that's it.

[lavrentis]

Leicester Foxes, Cardiff Dragons, Watford Hornets sound more like ice hocky teams than anything hahah

 

Better imo

[Craig]

Anything happen of note?

Or just few chants of 'city till we die' every 10 minutes?

Barely even that.

 

Allam must be pissing himself.

[Guest Bilo]

Quite depressing to think about what the fixture list would have looked like this weekend.

 

Leicester Foxes v Burnley Clarets

Barnsley Reds v Yeovil Glovers

Bournemouth Cherries v Birmingham Blues

Charlton Addicks v Derby Rams

Huddersfield Terriers v Reading Royals

 

I wouldn't fancy that, strangely.

[Mike the Metal Ed]

Quite depressing to think about what the fixture list would have looked like this weekend.

 

Leicester Foxes v Burnley Clarets

Barnsley Reds v Yeovil Glovers

Bournemouth Cherries v Birmingham Blues

Charlton Addicks v Derby Rams

Huddersfield Terriers v Reading Royals

 

I wouldn't fancy that, strangely.

 

You're assuming that all of these would have any kind of nod to their history.

[Corky]

 

The FA â€@FA6m

Football Association to consult fans over proposed Hull City name change http://the-fa.com/CvhAbT 

 Retweeted by FSF Faircop

 

will it really make any difference though? I'm sceptical.

 

 

There isn't a lot the FA can do to stop it. On what grounds would they object? If it's about tradition then the FA have messed about with the FA Cup Final for TV, they take plenty of sponsorships through branding so they can't complain about that either.

 

The only option now is to either accept it or stop going. Or maybe it will be the total flop it looks like.

[AndWhat?]

They'll probably let this happen then change the rules afterwards so it can't happen again to be seen as caring for the fans.

[Number 6]

Depriving of money is the best bet. Still go, just stand outside the stadium giving it some. If he's getting money still then he won't give a shit. We've all been blinded by the 'glamour' of the Prem. If we go up expect higher prices, name changes, players with no club affection and less games to watch. Great. Football is broken, but the truth is that it has been for a while.

[GingerrrFox]

I honestly wouldn't be arsed if our owners wanted to change the name to Leicester Fosse so as to be individual and unique. I'm only bothered about Leicester not City/Fosse/Foxes. I'd only care if they moved the club like Wimbledon to Milton Keynes.

[AndWhat?]

They did think about renaming us and they gave us all a vote, that's the right way to go about it.

[Guest Bilo]

They did think about renaming us and they gave us all a vote, that's the right way to go about it.

 

It was, too.

 

Leicester Fosse is just about the only name change I'd accept, and the circumstances behind it at the time could have made sense with a new post-administration company being formed. The fans rejected it, pretty overwhelmingly too, and it's never been mentioned again. It's absolutely the right way to go about it; if the fans don't want it, it doesn't happen.

[ruisliptiger]

The petition only has 11,000 odd signatures? With support from all around the country, how many actual Hull supporters have signed it? Do Hull supporters care about the name change?

Because it's time to act if they do!

Another 24,000 there today lining the pockets of the owners and less than half of these have signed the petition.

 

You have to understand that the average Football fan doesn't spend his time frequenting the internet.

 

A more realistic comparison would be to compare the size of the No petition to those in favour of the change. Based on what I'm hearing it seems to be 50% No To Hull Tigers 35% No that bothered 15% Allam put his money in he can do what he wants. The 35% tend to be the more casual supporters who hardly go to games. The 15% tend to have little understanding of History and Tradition and just want to maintain our Premiership Status by any means possible.

[ruisliptiger]

They did think about renaming us and they gave us all a vote, that's the right way to go about it.

 

Nail. On. Head.

[ruisliptiger]

For those who doubt that if protest fails, many would walk away. Here is a very interesting article from www.ambernectar.org discussing the results of a recent survey undertaken by our Local Newspaper the Hull Daily Mail. If the FA don't come through for us on this one; then the financial impact of supporters taking the actions suggested in this poll should mean that any change would be short lived.

 

No walking away yet though. There is still a debate to win.
 

ARTICLE: assessing the HDM’s name-change poll

 

What to make of the Hull Daily Mail’s poll, then?

A few things – and the first thing is to note that it’s a self-selecting poll. Ie, the respondents chose themselves, rather than being selected at random from the population as a whole. That means it cannot technically be considered as representative of City fans as a whole. The only way of doing that is to either poll a random selection of City fans, or to poll all of them. It’s worth remembering that Assam Allem promised wide consultation, and then went back on this inside a fortnight.

Incidentally, it’s been suggested that a poll of 3,450 is somehow not a large enough sample of (say) 50,000 City fans. That is untrue; professional opinion pollsters rarely exceed a sample of 2,000 people when conducting political surveys, and that’s considered ample for a tens of millions of people. Statistical significance is not a thrilling topic, but its rules are unlikely to be rendered obsolete by ignorant comments on the Hull Daily Mail’s website.

The numbers, then. 3,450 voted, and this is the most important finding:

Hull City AFC/Hull City: 69%
Hull Tigers/Hull City Tigers: 18%
Whatever: 13%

So almost seven in ten favour “Hull Cityâ€. Fewer than one in five favour changing the name. Even with our opening caveat, it is virtually certain that anyone asserting those who favour Hull City AFC to be a minority is wrong. The suggestion that only 200 people care is patently false given that twelve times that figure voted for HC/HCAFC (and many times more have joined City Till We Die or signed its petition, which is now north of 12,000 signatures).

There’s more, and its devastating for Assem Allam’s discredited wheeze. Around a quarter said they won’t attend “Hull Tigers†games or renew season tickets. Again our caveat applies, but if anywhere close to that figure walked away, the owner would be voluntarily removing a significant proportion of his customer base. Suppose 4,000 season ticket holders drifted away, either in righteous fury or quiet sorrow? At an average of £300 each, that’s over a million pounds. How many shirt sales would be needed from this fantasy Eastern market to make up for that? Rather a lot.

On we go, with over half (61%) saying they wouldn’t buy “Hull Tigers†merchandise. Again, what sort of business acumen is to halve your existing commercial sales with no guarantee of the shortfall being made up elsewhere? Pity the unfortunate people tasked with raising funds for City through merchandising whose job is going to be made vastly more difficult at the behest of their boss. We look forward to hearing how that makes business sense.

Given the open nature of the poll, there’s no reason not to suppose these results are fairly close to the truth, something that is certainly supported by comments we’ve heard when leafletting, or by the mood in the stadium and at away games. This will not raise extra money, for even marketing experts scorn the idea. It will however cost money. It will bring about a haemorrhaging of support.

“Hull Tigers†may cost the club thousands of supporters and an untold sum of money. And still he presses on. You really couldn’t make it up.

[Walker]

 

For those who doubt that if protest fails, many would walk away. Here is a very interesting article from www.ambernectar.org discussing the results of a recent survey undertaken by our Local Newspaper the Hull Daily Mail. If the FA don't come through for us on this one; then the financial impact of supporters taking the actions suggested in this poll should mean that any change would be short lived.

 

No walking away yet though. There is still a debate to win.

 

ARTICLE: assessing the HDM’s name-change poll

 

What to make of the Hull Daily Mail’s poll, then?

A few things – and the first thing is to note that it’s a self-selecting poll. Ie, the respondents chose themselves, rather than being selected at random from the population as a whole. That means it cannot technically be considered as representative of City fans as a whole. The only way of doing that is to either poll a random selection of City fans, or to poll all of them. It’s worth remembering that Assam Allem promised wide consultation, and then went back on this inside a fortnight.

Incidentally, it’s been suggested that a poll of 3,450 is somehow not a large enough sample of (say) 50,000 City fans. That is untrue; professional opinion pollsters rarely exceed a sample of 2,000 people when conducting political surveys, and that’s considered ample for a tens of millions of people. Statistical significance is not a thrilling topic, but its rules are unlikely to be rendered obsolete by ignorant comments on the Hull Daily Mail’s website.

The numbers, then. 3,450 voted, and this is the most important finding:

Hull City AFC/Hull City: 69%

Hull Tigers/Hull City Tigers: 18%

Whatever: 13%

So almost seven in ten favour “Hull Cityâ€. Fewer than one in five favour changing the name. Even with our opening caveat, it is virtually certain that anyone asserting those who favour Hull City AFC to be a minority is wrong. The suggestion that only 200 people care is patently false given that twelve times that figure voted for HC/HCAFC (and many times more have joined City Till We Die or signed its petition, which is now north of 12,000 signatures).

There’s more, and its devastating for Assem Allam’s discredited wheeze. Around a quarter said they won’t attend “Hull Tigers†games or renew season tickets. Again our caveat applies, but if anywhere close to that figure walked away, the owner would be voluntarily removing a significant proportion of his customer base. Suppose 4,000 season ticket holders drifted away, either in righteous fury or quiet sorrow? At an average of £300 each, that’s over a million pounds. How many shirt sales would be needed from this fantasy Eastern market to make up for that? Rather a lot.

On we go, with over half (61%) saying they wouldn’t buy “Hull Tigers†merchandise. Again, what sort of business acumen is to halve your existing commercial sales with no guarantee of the shortfall being made up elsewhere? Pity the unfortunate people tasked with raising funds for City through merchandising whose job is going to be made vastly more difficult at the behest of their boss. We look forward to hearing how that makes business sense.

Given the open nature of the poll, there’s no reason not to suppose these results are fairly close to the truth, something that is certainly supported by comments we’ve heard when leafletting, or by the mood in the stadium and at away games. This will not raise extra money, for even marketing experts scorn the idea. It will however cost money. It will bring about a haemorrhaging of support.

“Hull Tigers†may cost the club thousands of supporters and an untold sum of money. And still he presses on. You really couldn’t make it up.

 

 

Yeah, i'd be interested to see if any of your fans actually go through with any of that. A lot of it would depend on if you're in the Premiership anyway, because you certainly wouldn't be getting 25k if you were relegated.

 

As mentioned, only 12,000 people have signed that petition (myself included, by the way), surely it's been given enough exposure to at least get 25k signatures ( your average gate) to make Allam stand up and take note. If there were a significant amount of signatures maybe he would take note of opinion polls and surveys regarding 'boycotting games' or 'not buying Hull Tigers' merchandise. 

 

It just seems to me that a few hardy souls are bothered, but the rest are pretty ambivalent, does it not?