who gives a toss

Fewer and fewer.

can't believe this e is on our board. Would have hoped mods would lock it by now

As I said after the 5th time you posted on this thread, don't read it if you're not interested in the guy who is effectively our landlord and who could/is making life very difficult at times.

^^^ this

With only 6,000 or so voting, I guess Mr Allam will be claiming a moral victory, whatever the actual vote.
12,000 have, in effect, voted for option 3 "I am not too concerned and will continue to support the club either way."
I suspect that was part of his master plan when he set loaded questions.

I caught some of this on the radio last night heading to the KC. They said that 4000 were ineligible to vote because they're junior passholders but that still leaves 8000 who have chosen not the vote/option 3 so I can see Allam claiming the moral victory as you say.

Out of curiosity what were the questions exactly?

• Yes to Hull Tigers with the Allam family continuing to lead the club.

• No to Hull Tigers.

• I am not too concerned and will continue to support the club either way.



Didn't realise that juniors were excluded - makes my sums look a bit off the mark.

Thanks. Your figures may have been off the mark but it's still more people choosing not to vote than those choosing to vote.

• Yes to Hull Tigers with the Allam family continuing to lead the club.

• No to Hull Tigers.

• I am not too concerned and will continue to support the club either way.


I think the answer to that conundrum lies in the questions, as the Allams intended.

Not one Hull City supporter I have spoken to wants to change the name from Hull City to Hull Tigers. This appears to be the majority feeling judging from their forums and the general word on the street. However, ther is certainly a very hefty number who do not want the Allams to walk and are terrified they will, leaving - in their minds - the club in ruins. Despite that not being an option - the Allams simply cannot afford to just walk away, they need to sell the club for an acceptable price - it remains a very real fear sown, of course, by the words and threats of the Allams. Their latest implied threat being in the wording of the questions.

I.e., If you vote yes to Tigers we will remain at the club. The inference, obviously, being that a no vote means they will go. That in itself would be sufficient for those already frightened for the future of their club to abstain. Problem is, I read somewhere that the Allams are considering everything [iother[/i than a cross against the 'No to Hull Tigers' box as a positive vote for change - that includes the 'Yes' votes, the 'not too concerned' votes [iand[/i the abstainers. So the result will inevitably be lauded as a 'positive for change'.

110 years of heritage dismissed because of the good Doctor's pride and hatred of the City council. Luckily, the sporting media are almost unanimous in their scorn and ridicule of the 'referendum' and the FA are similarly unlikely to be fooled. The only media dissenters flying in the face of the opinion of their peers? Why, it's Radio Humberside and the HDM, of course, terrified they'll lose their access rights.

wow wormy that's good and my post of the week

dont trust the allams

rlNarrowly backed proposalrl

Wait for the statement from the Club that only 16% wanted to retain Hull City without adding that actually only 17% want the change.

5,874 responses?

What has all the fuss been about these last few months?