Club Badge (merged)

Never seen so much complaining and moaning about how bad something that no one has seen is.
 
CitizenTID said:
Sorry but you have to have measures in place to stop rags and people who have just signed up with an online form and who know nothing about the club or our city from having a say in such a key aspect of the club.
Click to expand...

They can email Cityzens with a heavily blurred version can Cityzens get the jist of it. the Rags don't care and to say all Cityzens aren't equal is bollox.
 
IanBishopsHaircut said:
37BAEB8A-F512-487F-B85F-D8BA3B6DDE64_zpsvau8of3e.png
Click to expand...

This is probably the most worrying thing of all.

Modern, Original, points towards them not developing our traditional design like Gav's. A design based on the Coat of Arms of our city. A design that has been associated with the club for nearly 100 years.

As for the "Manchester City" bit, the fans will be the judge of that. Because by the sounds of it, the club have done a questionnaire, found out what "symbols" are popular, and have used them to create something completely original. Well I'm sorry, that's not reflective of fan's views. That's not "Manchester City" at all.

If a rose is inside a crest in a round badge with the ship above like on our 72-97 badge, that means something to me, that's Manchester City. If a "single red rose" is just throw in the middle of a round badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

If the 3 rivers are in a shield with a ship on top like Gav's design and our 1920s badge, that means something. That is on the CoA, it represents Manchester, it was on our badge from 1920-72 and 1997- present day. That is Manchester City. If 3 lines are just thrown in the middle of a badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

The ship when at the top of a crest with the 3 river shield below, or the rose in the shield below, that means something. It's like that on the Manchester CoA, it's been like that on all of our badges from 1920 until present day. That's Manchester City. If we just have a Blue Peter style ship thrown in the middle of a badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

I'm becoming more and more concerned the club have completely fucked this up and let the idiot who designed the Melbourne badge have free reign to shit all over our identity based on the results of a bloody questionnaire about popular symbols.
 
So it appears that the red rose has won the day One element imho that shouldn't be on the new badge is the symbol of Lancashire we are Manchester not sodding Lancashire or Blackburn Rovers Plus it's RED
 
Shaelumstash said:
This is probably the most worrying thing of all.

Modern, Original, points towards them not developing our traditional design like Gav's. A design based on the Coat of Arms of our city. A design that has been associated with the club for nearly 100 years.

As for the "Manchester City" bit, the fans will be the judge of that. Because by the sounds of it, the club have done a questionnaire, found out what "symbols" are popular, and have used them to create something completely original. Well I'm sorry, that's not reflective of fan's views. That's not "Manchester City" at all.

If a rose is inside a crest in a round badge with the ship above like on our 72-97 badge, that means something to me, that's Manchester City. If a "single red rose" is just throw in the middle of a round badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

If the 3 rivers are in a shield with a ship on top like Gav's design and our 1920s badge, that means something. That is on the CoA, it represents Manchester, it was on our badge from 1920-72 and 1997- present day. That is Manchester City. If 3 lines are just thrown in the middle of a badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

The ship when at the top of a crest with the 3 river shield below, or the rose in the shield below, that means something. It's like that on the Manchester CoA, it's been like that on all of our badges from 1920 until present day. That's Manchester City. If we just have a Blue Peter style ship thrown in the middle of a badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

I'm becoming more and more concerned the club have completely fucked this up and let the idiot who designed the Melbourne badge have free reign to shit all over our identity based on the results of a bloody questionnaire about popular symbols.
Click to expand...

How much pain have cost us, the evils that have never happened
 
Shaelumstash said:
This is probably the most worrying thing of all.

Modern, Original, points towards them not developing our traditional design like Gav's. A design based on the Coat of Arms of our city. A design that has been associated with the club for nearly 100 years.

As for the "Manchester City" bit, the fans will be the judge of that. Because by the sounds of it, the club have done a questionnaire, found out what "symbols" are popular, and have used them to create something completely original. Well I'm sorry, that's not reflective of fan's views. That's not "Manchester City" at all.

If a rose is inside a crest in a round badge with the ship above like on our 72-97 badge, that means something to me, that's Manchester City. If a "single red rose" is just throw in the middle of a round badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

If the 3 rivers are in a shield with a ship on top like Gav's design and our 1920s badge, that means something. That is on the CoA, it represents Manchester, it was on our badge from 1920-72 and 1997- present day. That is Manchester City. If 3 lines are just thrown in the middle of a badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

The ship when at the top of a crest with the 3 river shield below, or the rose in the shield below, that means something. It's like that on the Manchester CoA, it's been like that on all of our badges from 1920 until present day. That's Manchester City. If we just have a Blue Peter style ship thrown in the middle of a badge with a load of other stuff, it means absolutely nothing.

I'm becoming more and more concerned the club have completely fucked this up and let the idiot who designed the Melbourne badge have free reign to shit all over our identity based on the results of a bloody questionnaire about popular symbols.
Click to expand...

To be fair I'm open to a complete redesign..something really good that nobody expects..my only worry is like you said..that it looks like Melbourne
 
I've been told by someone at the club that they are asking everyone to get into the ground early pre-kick off against Sunderland. I'd imagine they are going to do some form a badge related display.
 
Manchester33 said:
I've been told by someone at the club that they are asking everyone to get into the ground early pre-kick off against Sunderland. I'd imagine they are going to do some form a badge related display.
Click to expand...
Probably have it displayed in the centre circle at some point like the big Premier League/Champions League flag.
 
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.