We don't need another Mr Poopoo incident.Yarblockos wrote:They may have made the decision to restrict the vote to members in order to prevent any malicious voting. It's happened with other clubs in the past. I mean, if I was a Hartlepool fan I know which one I would vote for!Darlogramps wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:58 pmSorry but that’s a bad argument. As a fanbase we don’t expect a collective vote about the walk-on music. Nor is the walk-on music really a part of the club’s identity.Spyman wrote:Yes, but Darlington FC doesn't ask it's fans to vote on absolutely everything. Why should fans being asked to donate money get to vote on the kit, but not the walk-on music?Darlogramps wrote:Difference is Darlington FC is fan-owned, and doesn’t limit its calls for funding to a limited group of supporters.Spyman wrote:
As for the vote and who gets to vote, I can see why it's done that way and it's fine with me (I would say that, as I get a vote), but plenty of clubs don't allow their fans a vote on the kit at all, so even if it's a limited pool of voters it's still more of a fan-perk than many get.
But it is established precedent that fans collectively can vote on the home kit. We’ve done that for years.
And a club’s home kit is about as big an expression of identity as you can get.
Now, mysteriously just as the club board is looking to move away from hoops, the people who can vote on it are restricted.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk