blonde poker forum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29440451

Obviously this article is biased towards Assam.

But really? Is it worth all the energy and bile Hull supporters are putting into this campaign to keep Hull City's name unchanged?

It's not like he's doing a Wimbledon and moving the club away.

It's not like what Ridsdale did to Leeds or Storey did to Portsmouth.

Fans of these 3 clubs and plenty of others have legitimate reason to protest about the way their club has been mismanaged.

But what is in a name?

Arsenal were once Woolwich Arsenal.

Everyone still calls Leyton Orient their old name plain old "Orient".

And does anyone actually call AFC Bournemouth their proper name?

The official name is irrelevant. The club is called what the people call it. And everyone will keep on calling Hull City by that name.

And in 10 years time when a new owner is looking to curry favour with the fans he'll change their name back to Hull City and in 100 years time, this will be an amusing footnote in Hull City's history.

Seems to me Assam has done quite a lot for Hull and the city. The fans are just being ridiculous.

Agreed

The fact he has spent millions not just on the club but the City should give him the benefit of any doubt

In the top five owners in the country

Had more sympathy with the Cardiff fans when the team colours were changed, which i think is of signifcance to most fans

As in most of these cases, in modern football without a significant bankroller then teams are also-rans

where would Hull be without him? maybe a division lower, maybe two?

would that be a price worth paying for no change of name?

the fans need to look at the bigger picture

What if queens park rovers became queens park tigers? Not being funny just genuinely interested how you'd feel.

Auto-correct strikes again......

If it was a choice between no team to support and changing our name, I would be "Come on you Tigers!"

Well, I wouldn't because the supporters would keep the QPR name alive.

We almost merged with Fulham in the 1980s. Now that would have been something worth getting het up about.

I always found it amazing how much Newcastle fans kicked off about ST james being called the Sports direct arena?  I mean does that really matter in the bigger picture?  Every USA sports teams arena is sponsored and the names change all the team and no one could care less.  I just find UK football fans incredibly anal about stuff like this which doesn't matter at all compared to other sports/fans around the world.

As a stoke fan the Brit is only called that because the club sponsor was the local building society when it was built.  Once their contract runs out i assume the stadium will be called the bet365arena and i can't imagine any stoke fans caring less what it is named.

Again, Cardiff were on the verge of going bust without Vincent Tan.

They will change back to blue the moment Tan leaves. It's just temporary.

Wimbledon will never get their club back. Leeds and Portsmouth are a shadow of the clubs they were 10 years ago. Maybe never to come back.

All have had their clubs irrevocably ruined.

Hull and Cardiff's changes are just for a couple of seasons.

Earlier than that, mid seventies as I recall, Jim White nearly merged QPR with Brentford.

You got really unlucky there, think what might have been for QPR.

It isn't the same, Hull City have been known as the Tigers for years.   It isn't like the red shirts for Cardiff either.  And Valley Parade is Valley Parade whatever it is called.  Sure people would still call them Hull City regardless of the name change.  All seems a bit silly to me.

They bloody wish there had been a merger in the "mid 70s"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975%E2%80%9376_Football_League#First_Division

1 point away from being champions of England in the middle of the 70s.

Bugger only knows where Brentford were languishing in the "mid 70s"

We had a lot in injuries that season.

After much research I found them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975%E2%80%9376_Football_League#Fourth_Division

18th in Division 3.

A mere 84 places below Queens Park Rangers.

Are you sure you aren't confusing "merger" with "takeover"?

No no, merger, takeover, just words. You wanted our superior ground. Fact.

Anyway, I had to meet research with research, & I discover that "mid 70's" was in fact 1967.

Quite amusing now to think  there used to be "West London Derby" games betwen Chelsea, Fulham, QPR & Brentford.

The golden triangle of football, or golden square if we generously include QPR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_London_derby

There was a huge outcry at the time, with a "Save Brentford" campaign. I even purchased a square of the hallowed Griffin Park Turf for £1.


However, the bad feeling between the clubs runs deeper than locality. In 1967, QPR attempted a takeover of Brentford, which would have resulted in QPR moving into Griffin Park and Brentford F.C. ceasing to exist. The story infamously broke in the London press but Brentford supporters rallied to save their club. Since then, relations between the clubs have been frosty. The rivalry resumed in 2001 and continued for several seasons until Rangers were promoted. During this time, the rivalry was intensified by Brentford player Martin Rowlands leaving to join QPR. He then went on to kiss his badge on several occasions in front of the Brentford support when the two sides met in 2003 at Loftus Road.

Why would Newcastle fans be ok with changing the name of the clubs ground when the club received nothing from the name change since Ashley pays the whole sum of 0 for advertising Sports Direct.

The same way as Stoke fans would be ok with the brit being renamed the bet365arena for the whole sum of 0 because the owners have that right by the fact they own the club.  You, as a Newcastle fan, have no more right to stop the owner changing the name of the ground as you do telling me what to name my house.  Why do football fans think they have any control over a building that they own 0% of?  More importantly, why does it matter what the ground is called?

Why would they not?

Lord Ashley owns the club, he has every right to do what he wants, imo.

Not really sure why I made the original post other than to show others they otherside of Arbboy's FACTS.

Not being funny with you tikay but I'm over discussing Newcastle on here, won't be getting involved in pointless discussions about them on here again.

If we have a chairman who owns a club with no ambition to make it anything but break even so he can push his own agendas via very expensive advertising space including re-naming one of the most famous stadiums in the country without paying a penny then surely we can feel a little aggrieved?

We are constantly told we can't compete financially with other clubs, if we started by getting a better revenue stream in terms of advertising then that would be a start.

If we are told that we will 100% not care about winning cups, 100% accept being a mid table team then at least let us keep the identity of the club? Why should we even keep going back if there is no ambition in the club?

I remember when Norwich had a kit that consisted of yellow shorts not green. Cue leaflets outside the ground every game, the local newspaper having a campaign, culminating in a vote at home game where you were given a piece of paper to hold up one side yellow, one side green. We now always have green shorts.

Ashley said that stadium rights would be in interests of club then stuck his tramps brand on it for nothing. He had already ripped to heart out of the club then changed the pride and joy of the club. If he builds an 80K seater stadium he can call it what he wants, but putting his tacky branding on the pride of the toon was typical of a billionaire who wears jeans with dress shoes and a toon top. You dont buy a merc and put a lada badge on it lads.

I suppose you could say the same for hull but it seems to me the bloke is the only reason they are where they are and has spent more then they deserve. Its not like he wants to change hull to tigers. I wouldnt give a monkeys if ashley was spending money and backing us in the market and wanted to call us Newcastle fatradgietrampsbrand

Ashley owns 100% of Newcastle United.  He owns 58% of Sports Direct.  To say he benefits from Sports Direct not paying for the naming rights of St James Park can't really be true can it?  Before tax he appears to be £4m better off from each £10m Sports Direct pays to Newcastle.  

So you genuinely have nothing to be aggrieved about here. 

The big jumps race at Sandown at the end of the season has been sponsored by about 10 different companies since Whitbread.

But everyone I know still calls it the Whitbread.

If Newcastle fans call the ground St James's Park, that's its name, no matter what Mr Ashley wants.

It's all a fuss about nothing. I hope Leftus Road gets renamed the Durex Arena. If it means QPR get £5 mill per year and the fans gets a free sample of the sponsors product.

After all there is usually a lot of cocks supporting QPR. So I'm told.

Lets face it- football fans are not happy unless they have something to moan about.

This is such a tap in......