Club Badge (merged)

KippaxCitizen said:
I've just been to this evening's Lecture. Thought it was good and informative, a few things I didn't know and also realise. Cheers Gary.

Interesting to note that there is actually no current evidence for why we had the cross on the kits way back when; so I'd like to stay away from that on any new badge as well as staying away from any religious connotations it may have (as a total atheist). Also that there was a crossover period where both Manchester City and Ardwick both existed as football clubs separately; so I'd actually like any new badge to have only MCFC from 1984 onwards links.

Also interesting that the 'original' badge could likely have been a City badge from even earlier than the 1930s and was still seen at Maine Road on the social club up until the late 80s (so could have around 60 years of use related to the club).

I was glad that I wasn't alone when someone else also mentioned the "there's a generation of people who've never lived in Lancashire" as I agree with that I don't think the rose should be part of the future club. What I would be disappointed with is that there's a lot of people saying that they 'grew up with' the red rose badge and that they would be a large part of our current fanbase, but there are many generations past who will never have a say on this badge who were City fans for decades before we ever had a rose in the badge but may have passed away now and won't get their day in the future badge.

Good to hear the lady say "red, just no, we don't want red" and "and those stars...eugh, they've just got to go!" as I wholly agree on both counts.

I will be visiting the consultation space this weekend to have my say I think.
Click to expand...


I can't get to a lecture & im not a Cityzen. I've posted on Cityvoice. What's been the lecture consensus been then? Comments on here seem to think the club are going away from original badges but surely the lectures are part of the discussion process...& helping to ensure everyone and all ideas are brought in before a final decision is made. If a change is made.. (please I hope one is made).
 
KippaxCitizen said:
I've just been to this evening's Lecture. Thought it was good and informative, a few things I didn't know and also realise. Cheers Gary.

Interesting to note that there is actually no current evidence for why we had the cross on the kits way back when; so I'd like to stay away from that on any new badge as well as staying away from any religious connotations it may have (as a total atheist). Also that there was a crossover period where both Manchester City and Ardwick both existed as football clubs separately; so I'd actually like any new badge to have only MCFC from 1984 onwards links.

Also interesting that the 'original' badge could likely have been a City badge from even earlier than the 1930s and was still seen at Maine Road on the social club up until the late 80s (so could have around 60 years of use related to the club).

I was glad that I wasn't alone when someone else also mentioned the "there's a generation of people who've never lived in Lancashire" as I agree with that I don't think the rose should be part of the future club. What I would be disappointed with is that there's a lot of people saying that they 'grew up with' the red rose badge and that they would be a large part of our current fanbase, but there are many generations past who will never have a say on this badge who were City fans for decades before we ever had a rose in the badge but may have passed away now and won't get their day in the future badge.

Good to hear the lady say "red, just no, we don't want red" and "and those stars...eugh, they've just got to go!" as I wholly agree on both counts.

I will be visiting the consultation space this weekend to have my say I think.
Click to expand...

so I'd actually like any new badge to have only MCFC from 1984 onwards links.

You did mean "1894" right?
 
Just to clarify... In the lectures I have said that this is not about picking badge A, B or C it's about thinking what is relevant now and in the future. That may well be a new badge, that may be the current badge, that may be a redesigned earlier badge but whatever it is it's based on the feedback the club are receiving during this consultation process. It's another reason why I would urge all fans to try and attend. There's only one lecture left. Times running out.

I've been amazed at the number of views that have changed during this process and I love the way people are engaging with it. There still seem to be a lot of misconceptions out there though, so please if you've attended the lectures then please tell all what you've gained or how your views have changed. The more discussion the better and, as I've said at each talk, it's up to fans to get their preferred emblems, elements and views across. This is a great opportunity the club have given, so let's use it fully. If there's anything you need to know come to the talks or visit the consultation. The biggest worry I have is the confusion some seem to have over what are the authentic elements and when they were used.
 
My decision has been made what elements I want to see on a new badge. I like the suggestion that once all the thoughts of the fans have been fully collated by the club, they then come back to Citizens members to give them a chance to select the most relevant badge design to be used. That way it allows things to really go full circle and clearly shows that the final decision has been made by the fans. Initially I had my concerns about this process, but now I'm looking forward to seeing it go to the next stages of its development. Unlike other clubs we have been given a chance to aire our thoughts. The club management of this process has been first class, they were never going to please everyone, but they do deserve huge respect for the lengths they have gone to engage with all the fans. Gary's presentation is part of this, so if you can get along to the final lecture do so, it is very worthwhile...
 
Last edited:
Gary James said:
Just to clarify... In the lectures I have said that this is not about picking badge A, B or C it's about thinking what is relevant now and in the future. That may well be a new badge, that may be the current badge, that may be a redesigned earlier badge but whatever it is it's based on the feedback the club are receiving during this consultation process. It's another reason why I would urge all fans to try and attend. There's only one lecture left. Times running out.

I've been amazed at the number of views that have changed during this process and I love the way people are engaging with it. There still seem to be a lot of misconceptions out there though, so please if you've attended the lectures then please tell all what you've gained or how your views have changed. The more discussion the better and, as I've said at each talk, it's up to fans to get their preferred emblems, elements and views across. This is a great opportunity the club have given, so let's use it fully. If there's anything you need to know come to the talks or visit the consultation. The biggest worry I have is the confusion some seem to have over what are the authentic elements and when they were used.
Click to expand...

Gary - have you been asked by the club to feed back the views expressed by attendees at your lectures, or to provide recommendations?
 
YaYa's Left Peg said:
Gary - have you been asked by the club to feed back the views expressed by attendees at your lectures, or to provide recommendations?
Click to expand...
No, but there have been staff there every session listening to fans. However, and I can't stress this highly enough, it is absolutely vital views are submitted through the Cityzens questionnaire as outlined by the club when they launched the process. So if anyone reading this has a view that has not been submitted to the club then please do it asap. The process ends on 14th November. Get your views in through those channels now. The aim of my talks is to ensure fans understand the history of the badges and their elements. I'm not certain about those that haven't attended of course but the overwhelming view coming from the fans that have is that by understanding those elements they can make informed choices and, as a result, a large number of attendees each time have walked away with a different view than when they arrived. I know I've banged on a bit about attending the talks but I genuinely want everyone to engage in the process and not assume they understand what the elements signify. There have been many misconceptions expressed in recent weeks including - that City have only worn 2 bespoke badges; that the original badge was the Red Rose; that the true original badge was only here for a couple of years and never worn on shirts; that the Latin motto has been here in some form for ever; that the process is about selecting an old badge; that the Red rose is not on the Manchester COA; that City wore the Red Rose between 1976-81; that the Ship means the Ship Canal; that the eagle has nothing to do with Manchester; that the Stars do have a meaning; that Rodney Marsh wore the red rose on his debut; that we know what the Gorton cross actually means.... I could go on because there are a lot of misconceptions out there.

As a response to the misconceptions here are a few snippets to note:

City have worn 3 bespoke badges since 1894 (occasional variations such as Maine Rd commemorations as well). They are - the original round badge which evidence suggests existed from 1930s but possibly much earlier (those who attend the talks can explain) and was present in a significant way at the 1934 FA Cup success and throughout the Mercer-Allison glory years (making appearances on gifts/pennants presented to opposition during ECWC run 1969-70; on match progs throughout title winning season and at FA Cup & League Cup finals, plus worn on the pitch at LC final by mascot). This was worn on shirts 1970-72 (it wasn't convention to wear an emblem on League shirts earlier than this). This was replaced in 1972 following the takeover of the club by the red rose version (Rose added to represent Lancashire instead of the 3 emblazoned lines - rivers). The Red rose was worn on shirts 1972-76 when it was dropped for the Manchester COA. It returned for the 1981-82 season and remained on shirts until 1997 when the current eagle badge was created.

Latin motto - created in 1997, not associated with City at all prior to that. Process - not about selecting an old badge. It's about saying what elements matter to you. Red rose - it is on the Manchester coat of arms (see lion & antelope), and is on there to represent Lancashire. Ship - predates Manchester ship canal by several decades, but it does represent Manchester's trading links and it is believed it points to the left to represent our trading links with USA which, at the time, was Manchester's main trading partner (cotton). Eagle - emblem created in 1957 by Manchester City Council to represent the city. Mufc were first to wear the eagle in a cup final, 1958 (mind you they also wore a red rose before City - 1909 final - and have worn the COA often). Stars - no actual meaning other than they were to give the badge a continental feel. Rodney Marsh wore the original round badge (not the red rose round badge, the earlier one) when he made his debut. Gorton cross - we do not have evidence of what it stands for. There are plenty of theories - religious, Masonic etc but it is not clear.
 
No stars
No Eagle
No Latin
No bee

yes to three stripes and Manchester connections like the ship.

We have more right to wear Manchester connected badges than Trafford red sox

Yes to a round badge
Yes to MANCHESTER CITY FOOTBALL CLUB around badge
Yes to a white border


DONE!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.