Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The 2013-2014 Football Thread
- Thread starter Jaffa Cake
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Unfortunately, in the UK you can't sue someone for being an arrogant, deluded tit.
Instead, we just give them a football club to run.
Here's your original post:
Apologies in advance, chaps - this is likely to be a long post.
A week or two ago, a set of representitives from Hull City supporters groups met with Assem Allam to discuss the renaming of the club. I was waiting until the official minutes were published before making mention of it here, but instead I'll sum up some key points based on what's been said on social media, forums and the like by those who were present.
* Allam is talking about changing the name to Hull Tigers from Hull City Tigers - he mistakenly believes this is the name of the club. It isn't, he's only changed the name of the holding company. We are still Hull City AFC to everyone outside of his office.
* Noises coming from the club suggest that the change is designed to bring in extra revenue from overseas - however, Allam admitted that no research has been done whatsoever to establish if it really would be of financial benefit.
* It would seem that his desire to rebrand is based on his dispute with Hull City Council, stemming from their unwillingness to sell the KC Stadium to him - he apparently started getting rather angry when discussing this. He feels that calling the club "Hull City' makes it sound as if it has links to Hull City Council. It doesn't.
* Allam spoke of his admiration of clubs maximise the commercial potential of their stadiums one of his key examples was, bizarrely, Coventry City. He seemed quite unaware that Coventry are currently forced to play their home games 34 miles away in Northampton, after a well publicised dispute with the owners of the Ricoh.
* In the end, he promised that proper research would be carried out and that any changes would only go ahead after consultation with, and backing from, the club's fans. Is was anticipated this process would take around three years to complete.
However, today the club issued a statement. (http://www.hullcityafc.net/news/article/201314-club-statement-name-1169297.aspx)
The club name is currently Hull City Tigers, after it was shortened in the spring of this year. However, as a result of the greater exposure generated from playing in the Barclays Premier League, a further shortening of the club name is under review with a decision likely to be made early next year. Dr. Allams preference for the club name remains Hull Tigers, as he has previously stated, but he has also explained that the club will first ensure that a shortened name will provide the anticipated global marketing impact.
So there's your proper research and supporter consultation, then.The City Till We Die group has issued a statement of their own... (http://notohulltigers.tumblr.com/post/66699844040/club-statement-a-ctwd-response)
We remain puzzled that Dr Allam cannot distinguish between the name of his holding company and the football name of the club he owns. Until he registers a new name with the Football Association, the club remains Hull City AFC. His belief that we are already called Hull City Tigers, a name ripe for shortening, is therefore spectacularly ill judged and erroneous.
Our group has already had extensive contact with key figures at the FA, and we anticipate they will take a dim view both of this announcement and of Dr Allams rubbishing of our clubs proud history at the meeting we had with him last week.
Let us be clear - Dr Allam CANNOT change the football name of the club without approval of the FA, who in turn require consultation with fans of the kind promised by Dr Allam when we met. By claiming we are now called Hull City Tigers, he has announced a new name and gone back on that promise - it took him 10 short days.
We have seen the academic paper that Dr Allam has based his name shortening strategy on. He has apparently only read the first page, we have read all 59. The paper is entirely irrelevant in that it has nothing to do with sports businesses and nothing to do with business success. It is a paper about stock market gaming - apparently stock brokers are more likely to trade shares in companies with shorter names.
To conclude - we remain eternally grateful to Dr Allam as the saviour of Hull City AFC and the man whose money propelled City to the Premier League. But we believe a man that breaks FA rules, breaks his own promises within days and rides roughshod over our clubs proud history should not go unchecked. We remain determined to do everything we can to retain Hull City AFC as our club name. Our campaign continues - indeed with todays announcement it is clear that it has only just started.
The gloves may shortly be coming off, and it appears that the FA might be keeping a close and disapproving eye on proceedings...
tl;dr - our owner's bonkers.
[I tried to post this after I saw your original long post but the forums went down so I saved it, ready to go for when the lights came back on…]
Dreadful news, Jaffa.
I just dredged up this April 29th article about Allam and was interested to note that Allam Marine appears to be built largely on word-of-mouth rather than heavy marketing. from the article:
So this man, who started out as purely a finance guy, has grown his business empire almost without the aid of any marketing. Yet, somehow he is sure that Hull City AFC needs to market itself internationally, that he is the man to lead this effort and that shortening the name is going to accomplish this? The lack of experience here is hair-raising. Also in the article, he claims that
Alright then - so where is the world-class marketing team i.e., the people who know how to do marketing? He seems to be breaking his own rules here.
Allam appears to be an intelligent fellow, and his affection for and dedication to his adopted home seems genuine. But this latest affair threatens to undo all his previous good work. Why is he so committed to it? Is he too arrogant to back down? What does he expect to achieve? What does he think his chances of staying up are? How would relegation effect his plans of world domination? He is setting himself up for a big fall.
If the whole thing is precipitated by a dispute with the city council, that puts him on even shakier ground.
Lots of questions, Mr. Cake. Allam is a real puzzle - almost equal parts benefactor and madman. Unfortunately, as I said before, the bad will ultimately outweigh the good unless he does a 180 on this name change nonsense.
Dreadful news, Jaffa.
I just dredged up this April 29th article about Allam and was interested to note that Allam Marine appears to be built largely on word-of-mouth rather than heavy marketing. from the article:
So this man, who started out as purely a finance guy, has grown his business empire almost without the aid of any marketing. Yet, somehow he is sure that Hull City AFC needs to market itself internationally, that he is the man to lead this effort and that shortening the name is going to accomplish this? The lack of experience here is hair-raising. Also in the article, he claims that
Alright then - so where is the world-class marketing team i.e., the people who know how to do marketing? He seems to be breaking his own rules here.
Allam appears to be an intelligent fellow, and his affection for and dedication to his adopted home seems genuine. But this latest affair threatens to undo all his previous good work. Why is he so committed to it? Is he too arrogant to back down? What does he expect to achieve? What does he think his chances of staying up are? How would relegation effect his plans of world domination? He is setting himself up for a big fall.
If the whole thing is precipitated by a dispute with the city council, that puts him on even shakier ground.
Lots of questions, Mr. Cake. Allam is a real puzzle - almost equal parts benefactor and madman. Unfortunately, as I said before, the bad will ultimately outweigh the good unless he does a 180 on this name change nonsense.
Last edited:
Get the council to change their name to Hull Tigers Council? He seems obsessed, may end up like Anton Walbrook's character in 'Gaslight'; instead of 'rubies' it'll be 'Tigers'.
Doubt he will get FA approval.
Cheers,
OW
Doubt he will get FA approval.
Cheers,
OW
Lots of questions indeed, your Lordship, and precious few answers. There is of course the fact that he's a wealthy man, and such men are all too often used to getting their own way and not being questioned. That came out during a spectacular rant on BBC national radio last night, in which he repeatedly shouted at the interviewer that no one questions him on how he runs his companies.
He's also had an interview published with the local rag today. A few quotes...
"I am not changing [the name], I am shortening it. The name was not Hull City AFC, we need to get the facts right. With Companies House and the FA, the name was Hull City Association Football Club (Tigers) Ltd. So why do you say change? We dropped the redundant words of Association Football Club and have shortened it to Hull City Tigers."
As mentioned, the business acting as the holding company of the club is 'Hull City Tigers Ltd', the club's playing name is still Hull City AFC and this can't be changed without FA approval and evidence of fan consultation. Most of the interviews raised this point, each time it was dismissed in the same manner. The question was asked again later for clarification;
"No, I don’t know where you get this from. The name with Companies House and the FA is Hull City Tigers... Show me the rule that says shortening the name requires fan consultation. I have shortened the name and it is registered with the FA. We have done it. Where was consultation then?"
In fact, the FA confirmed yesterday that no change to our playing name has been made nor any application to change it submitted.
When asked how he would gauge whether shortening the name would benefit the club;
"That’s my decision. I don’t allow questioning of this. If I am allowing that I might as well let people come and run my company. No. No question is entertained about how I run my business or my club."
It was pointed out that in a poll run by the paper, 78% of the 3,000 who voted were against change;
"How do you call that a majority of Hull Tigers fans? It is a joke to mention 3,000. If your sample was 3,000, it’s a fantastic point in my favour because if there’s 100,000 who didn’t participate, it means one thing. It means it doesn’t matter... Where are the fans who disagree? It is your imagination."
The only thing clear so far is that he's not for turning.
However, I don't like to think that we may be relying on them as our only hope - after all, MK Dons got past the FA...
He's also had an interview published with the local rag today. A few quotes...
"I am not changing [the name], I am shortening it. The name was not Hull City AFC, we need to get the facts right. With Companies House and the FA, the name was Hull City Association Football Club (Tigers) Ltd. So why do you say change? We dropped the redundant words of Association Football Club and have shortened it to Hull City Tigers."
As mentioned, the business acting as the holding company of the club is 'Hull City Tigers Ltd', the club's playing name is still Hull City AFC and this can't be changed without FA approval and evidence of fan consultation. Most of the interviews raised this point, each time it was dismissed in the same manner. The question was asked again later for clarification;
"No, I don’t know where you get this from. The name with Companies House and the FA is Hull City Tigers... Show me the rule that says shortening the name requires fan consultation. I have shortened the name and it is registered with the FA. We have done it. Where was consultation then?"
In fact, the FA confirmed yesterday that no change to our playing name has been made nor any application to change it submitted.
When asked how he would gauge whether shortening the name would benefit the club;
"That’s my decision. I don’t allow questioning of this. If I am allowing that I might as well let people come and run my company. No. No question is entertained about how I run my business or my club."
It was pointed out that in a poll run by the paper, 78% of the 3,000 who voted were against change;
"How do you call that a majority of Hull Tigers fans? It is a joke to mention 3,000. If your sample was 3,000, it’s a fantastic point in my favour because if there’s 100,000 who didn’t participate, it means one thing. It means it doesn’t matter... Where are the fans who disagree? It is your imagination."
The only thing clear so far is that he's not for turning.
Word is that the FA and Premier League are closely monitoring the situation and they're not at all happy at the idea nor how Allam is going about it.
However, I don't like to think that we may be relying on them as our only hope - after all, MK Dons got past the FA...
Last edited:
The FA and Premier League don't care about the name of the team at all. But they are sensitive to negative PR and perceived damage to their "brand". If they resist the name change it will be because of the bad press rather than sensitivity towards fans or any high-minded principles.
Allam really looks to be going off the rails though. He's on a collision course with reality.
Allam really looks to be going off the rails though. He's on a collision course with reality.
Ultimately, I suspect it's the integrity of their competitions they're more interested in rather than little old us directly - they don't want daft names appearing on league tables or fixture lists, and their noses are likely out of joint from his public disregard of their regulations. It would also set a very dangerous precedent, as there are other owners who would undoubtedly want to follow suit.
I think I much prefer our reality to his.
During one of his telly interviews, he attempted to prove his argument by stating that our opponents last Saturday aren't called 'Southampton AFC', they're named the 'Southampton Saints'. I suspect that's news to all involved at Southampton FC...
I think I much prefer our reality to his.
Last edited:
It just gets curiouser and curiouser…
I agree with you on the FA/Premier League being more concerned with themselves. In the end it might be enough to muzzle Allam a bit though. But given the position he's in this story looks set to run and run. He's turning into another Mike Ashley or Vincent Tan.
Meanwhile, in World Cup Qualifier news, Mexico began their undeserved WC playoff tie with New Zealand by smashing the Kiwis 5-1 at the Azteca. Surely the All Whites have no chance in the return leg, even though they'll be at home…I till feel sorry about the US knocking out Panama. We essentially let Mexico in by the back door.
Also, Uruguay managed to put 5 goals past Jordan - and none were scored by Suarez. Cavani got a couple though.
I agree with you on the FA/Premier League being more concerned with themselves. In the end it might be enough to muzzle Allam a bit though. But given the position he's in this story looks set to run and run. He's turning into another Mike Ashley or Vincent Tan.
Meanwhile, in World Cup Qualifier news, Mexico began their undeserved WC playoff tie with New Zealand by smashing the Kiwis 5-1 at the Azteca. Surely the All Whites have no chance in the return leg, even though they'll be at home…I till feel sorry about the US knocking out Panama. We essentially let Mexico in by the back door.
Also, Uruguay managed to put 5 goals past Jordan - and none were scored by Suarez. Cavani got a couple though.
Last edited:
Jaffa Cake said:
I think I'll be watching Sweden v Portugal at the expense of the Iceland and USA matches. But Iceland v Croatia kicks off 45 minutes before Sweden Portugal so I'll probably get to watch the first half.
Makes sense. I just put him into my fantasy team.
It's fine - he didn't pick up an injury, which is more important.
I wonder if there is a legal way for me to watch Sweden - Portugal? I can't believe I pay mucho each month and still have to watch bad quality streams..same with some PL games actually - can't believe Everton and Aston Villa ain't interesting...Lukaku, Beneteke, eh!?! 29,3% ownership!
What's wrong with Mexico btw?
What's wrong with Mexico btw?
They played so poorly during CONCACEF qualifying, they don't deserve to go to the World Cup. They only even got into the playoff round because the US scored a last minute goal against Panama. They're like France 2010 all over again, without the egregious hand ball in the box.
Of course, if Panama has only taken care of business in a game that was meaningless to the US, this wouldn't have happened.
I would like you to remember back in history there have been other teams that made a mess of qualifying.
One of the most important things which people forget about the Dutch World Cup run of 1974 was that it very nearly didn't happen! Under the guidance of Czech-born coach Frantisek Fadrhonc, Holland made heavy weather of qualifying from a group which included their local rivals Belgium as the only serious opposition, Norway being a very much weaker side in the 1970s than they are now. The contest was ultimately decided on goal difference. Holland rattled in considerably more goals against Norway at home and against Iceland home and away, although they struggled to a 2-1 win over Norway in Oslo, central defender Barry Hulshoff scoring the winning goal with just two minutes left. * There were no "second chance" play-offs in those innocent days, only 16 teams made it to the competition, and, in the European qualifiers at least, you finished top of your group or you watched the World Cup on television. * The decisive game was a dour 0-0 draw with Belgium in Amsterdam. I've never seen the video, but I've heard from several sources that the visitors had a perfectly good goal disallowed. The second such inconclusive result between the teams, it meant Belgium finished their fixtures without conceding a single goal, but it was all Holland needed, even if it didn't exactly set the football world on fire. Maybe they were trying to lull everyone else into a false sense of security...
That team were the ground breakers of total football.
Van Ierssel, Cruyff, Jongbloed, Schrijvers, Haan, Rijsbergen, Neeskens, Israël, Keizer, Treytel, Krol, Suurbier, Van Hanegem. Jansen, Rep, Willy van de Kerkhof, René van de Kerkhof, Geels, Rensenbrink, Strik, Vos, De Jong.
I'm not saying that Mexico are going to do the same, but qualifying is not always a good guide to future results.
But was there something fishy with Mexico? Because if not I think the comparison with France isn't fair. That was just plain wrong and the only good thing about it was that it gave France the chance to play the most horrific WC ever played by any team in history.
I wonder if there is a legal way for me to watch Sweden - Portugal? I can't believe I pay mucho each month and still have to watch bad quality streams..same with some PL games actually - can't believe Everton and Aston Villa ain't interesting...Lukaku, Beneteke, eh!?! 29,3% ownership!
I doubt there is a 100% legal way to see those games unless you go to a pub. I hate the way modern TV works - everything is on TV somewhere, but the fat-cat suits don't let much of us see it…I hate the concept of blackouts. Disgusting.
You could put it that way and I'd have to agree - Panama just weren't good enough and didn't deserve to go. However, you could also say the same about Mexico. The difference came down to luck, pure and simple. And if you look at it that way Panama did deserve it more - they played closer to their potential than Mexico did and have never made a World Cup before.
We'll never go back, but I wish we could. The bloat of modern tournaments diminishes the sport.
Mexico's problems go beyond the pitch. They have essentially been leaderless for months; the players have had no confidence in the last three managers and a few players who would be starters, like Carlos Vela, can't even be bothered to pull on the shirt. Whether justified or not, that has hurt their collective confidence. They'll crow about their win over New Zealand at the Azteca, but they are still a long, long way from looking competitive.
So no, they didn't cheat to get in like France did. But they looked awful and only CONCACAF's very generous qualifying structure got them through. CONCACAF qualifying games can be surprisingly difficult, but since the top four go through you can afford to make more mistakes.
Last edited:
So, kits for the World Cup are starting to be released and there are a few strange ones, particularly with regards to the color of the shorts. For example, Spain will have red shorts: http://www.footballshirtculture.com/14/15-kits/spain-2014-adidas-world-cup-home-football-kit.html and Germany will have white shorts: http://www.footballshirtculture.com...das-world-cup-home-football-shirt-leaked.html as will Argentina: http://www.footballshirtculture.com...orld-cup-2014-adidas-home-football-shirt.html
There seems to be some new FIFA guideline for the World Cup that says that each team must bring 2 kits (shirt, shorts, socks) one that is predominantly light and one that is predominantly dark. People are reading that it's no longer possible for your home kit to be a light shirt with dark shorts anymore. (Of course, you could always wear the "away" dark shorts with the "home" light shirt.
There seems to be some new FIFA guideline for the World Cup that says that each team must bring 2 kits (shirt, shorts, socks) one that is predominantly light and one that is predominantly dark. People are reading that it's no longer possible for your home kit to be a light shirt with dark shorts anymore. (Of course, you could always wear the "away" dark shorts with the "home" light shirt.
Those FIFA guidelines aren't really new, they've been in their rulebooks in one form or another for quite a while now - it's just that now FIFA are tending to increasingly favour teams wearing shorts and socks which are the exact same colour as the shirt, ostensibly because it makes dealing with clashes easier. For the manufacturers' part, they're generally not keen on elements being swapped between kits for aesthetic reasons, hence we're seeing them toe the line on this more.
It's notable that the kit maker releasing the most 'mono' kits (so far at least) is Adidas, FIFA's Official Stuff Partner.
And whilst we're talking about Adidas, yesterday's Hull City PR gaffe was a strongly worded official statement strongly badmouthing the thrice-striped polyester pedlar - talk of being 'once again been let down' and that the club 'continue to receive an extremely poor service' from them. Strangely, the statement was removed within a couple of hours, no doubt shortly after a message arrived through from Adidas' legal department. Heh.
It's notable that the kit maker releasing the most 'mono' kits (so far at least) is Adidas, FIFA's Official Stuff Partner.
And whilst we're talking about Adidas, yesterday's Hull City PR gaffe was a strongly worded official statement strongly badmouthing the thrice-striped polyester pedlar - talk of being 'once again been let down' and that the club 'continue to receive an extremely poor service' from them. Strangely, the statement was removed within a couple of hours, no doubt shortly after a message arrived through from Adidas' legal department. Heh.
I'm not a big fan of many of the mono kits, Jaffa…They seem a bit bland.
No immigration jokes, or you'll be having Baldrick's dung for dinner. (his dung dinner, not his dung for dinner, though the latter could also be arranged….)
is that a backhanded immigration joke?
No immigration jokes, or you'll be having Baldrick's dung for dinner. (his dung dinner, not his dung for dinner, though the latter could also be arranged….)
I suspect the prince tried to run him through and accidentally knighted him in the process.
Well done to Iceland holding Croatia to 0-0 with 10 men.
EDIT: Watching the Scotland - USA friendly and I'm worried that Altidore's move to Sunderland has dulled his play. He looks off today. This match is not a classic either, by the way.
Well done to Iceland holding Croatia to 0-0 with 10 men.
EDIT: Watching the Scotland - USA friendly and I'm worried that Altidore's move to Sunderland has dulled his play. He looks off today. This match is not a classic either, by the way.
Last edited:
- Status