Hamann Pineapple
Well-Known Member
Ungrateful bastards. Merry Christmas.
nope still dont like it .... even in a comparison style in CFG brand ...
nope still dont like it .... even in a comparison style in CFG brand ...
Ardwick was a dying club and wouldn't have been re elected. MCFC was elected, not re elected.For the last 40 years I was under the impression that the change of name in 1894 was to attract more fans, and to be honest if it was done for marketing reasons of course they are going to claim it is a new club for the whole of Manchester. I'm not convinced at all by this change in formation dates, such as how could city be re-elected into division 2 in 1984 if they didn't already exist? Surely Ardwick would have had to have resigned from the league?
Inconsistent application of shading, several elements that violate basic design principles (like the unbalanced use of white space and the poor positional lines of the shield relative to the proportions of the whole), and the use of "trending" design styles which are usually reserved for more transient applications (rather than longer term branding initiatives).
In the end most things outside of hard science are opinions, but they did reference generally accepted design principles that were ignored (and others have already discussed in this thread).
It's not horrific, it's just not good design and I suppose I expect more from our generally excellent executive/management team.
It does look like a Blue Peter badge tbfIt's not like the BBC sports website to try to belittle City....
http://m.bbc.com/sport/football/teams/manchester-city