Club Badge (merged)

I totally agree with this! A lot of people seems to be leaning towards and all white and sky blue badge, I understand that when you see it mocked up on a window or with a white background. But if you put it on a sky blue shirt, it will just get lost, it won't stand out at all. Before making a decision we should think about what the badge will look like on a sky blue shirt. Personally I think the maroon crest, or even traditional red will look far better from a design point of view. For those saying we don't want red in the badge, we had red in the badge right up until the eagle landed in 1997! It's part of our history, and the identity of Manchester to have a red shield with gold stripes.

if we have maroon in the badge, then I expect the club to return us to sky blue and maroon turnovers on the socks on a regular basis, and give us maroon and gold away kits, and stop the bloody navy onslaught we have to put up with. If that was the case, then I'd take maroon, as long as it was clearly maroon and in no way possible, even to colour-blind people, red in any way shape or form.
 
CrYpSjw.jpg


I'd like to have the crosses included but we're not going have 'religious' symbols on the badge.

Some say the rose has nowt to do with Manchester but it is part of our history. Rather have roses than fucking bees! lol

it's not sky blue enough, looks like some hybrid Hammers/Burnley badge if I'm honest, and the club have ditched maroon wherever possible in recent years for navy. Will be a step-change for them to embrace it all of a sudden.
 
I get why people are saying red/yellow on the inner shield for the CoA but you know how thick/shit the designers at Nike are, we'll end up having red/maroon/yellow on the home kit. I know we used to have maroon on the socks but I don't think that justifies any maroon in the badge at all.

Maroon doesn't make sense on the shield either because of the CoA being red - it'd just be weird, and we don't want red on the shield again, we've evolved since those early days into an identity of sky blue and white - we need to keep that in the badge as I don't think the CoA colour scheme works well for us.

The inclusion of the lancashire rose just makes the badge feel more us because we had that on the old badge so long and it makes the badge pop more/more striking - that is the only red I don't see an issue with as it's not the background colour scheme.
 
Last edited:
it's not sky blue enough, looks like some hybrid Hammers/Burnley badge if I'm honest, and the club have ditched maroon wherever possible in recent years for navy. Will be a step-change for them to embrace it all of a sudden.

Sky blue, white & maroon are our clours fuck this navy blue away kit shit I can add red n black stripes as acceptable but naby blue bar being socks gets right on my tits
 
Sky blue, white & maroon are our clours fuck this navy blue away kit shit I can add red n black stripes as acceptable but naby blue bar being socks gets right on my tits

Well I agree entirely, it's just not clearly what the club wants. They ignored us over kits 2 years ago, and made us dress as Coventry last season.
 
if we have maroon in the badge, then I expect the club to return us to sky blue and maroon turnovers on the socks on a regular basis, and give us maroon and gold away kits, and stop the bloody navy onslaught we have to put up with. If that was the case, then I'd take maroon, as long as it was clearly maroon and in no way possible, even to colour-blind people, red in any way shape or form.

I assume you were lucky enough to see the team in the 60s mate? Fans from that era seem to love maroon on City kits. Personally I can give or take maroon, it doesn't bother me but I'm not bothered either way.

"Navy blue being forced on us" just isn't true mate. Navy has been part of City's kit since the 1800s. It has been part of our kit for 80 years. Maroon was part of our kit for about 15 years during the 60s and 70s.

Far from navy being forced on us, it's an essential part of our identity. No other club in the world plays in sky blue shirts, white shorts and navy blue socks. It is completely unique to City and has been since the 1800s. Bring back the navy blue socks!!!
 
I assume you were lucky enough to see the team in the 60s mate? Fans from that era seem to love maroon on City kits. Personally I can give or take maroon, it doesn't bother me but I'm not bothered either way.

"Navy blue being forced on us" just isn't true mate. Navy has been part of City's kit since the 1800s. It has been part of our kit for 80 years. Maroon was part of our kit for about 15 years during the 60s and 70s.

Far from navy being forced on us, it's an essential part of our identity. No other club in the world plays in sky blue shirts, white shorts and navy blue socks. It is completely unique to City and has been since the 1800s. Bring back the navy blue socks!!!

I mean in terms of sky blue and navy as our home kit, when it isn't our home kit, and the constant black or navy aways under Nike which are just boring and irritating, I want some stylish variety, not just dull and dark or glow in the dark, want proper kits. Maroon was important and is a nice unique colour, the club don't seem to like it though. Navy is fine but it's being used way too much, it was a sock colour for the most part, should stay that way apart from the occasional away.
 
Manchester City Council crest in to the future
History of Manchester's crest
To approach the problem of how Manchester's Crest should look in the twenty first century, we felt it was necessary to examine what made up the elements of the crest, where they had come from and what they actually meant. To just simplify and modernise is not enough; anything new has to have meaning and value.

Over a period of two months we examined the councils archives in Manchester Central Library. We also examined the original documentation of the granting of the city's shield in the College of Arms in London. We also felt it was essential to make an overview of what other cities employ both in the United Kingdom, but across Europe and the world.

Manchester can trace its heraldic routes back to the 13th century, when Roger de Grelley was first issued with a crest. In 1301 when Manchester was granted its first charter which gave its townspeople certain rights and privileges, the feudal lords the de Grelley family simply applied their own shield. This shield is described as 'Gules three bendlets enhanced or.', which simply translates as on a red shield three diagonal stripes in gold. Heraldry allows interpreation and so many variations of this can be found. A popular myth is that the three Bendlets or stripes represent the three rivers, but no historical evidence supports this view.

The significant change in Manchester's Crest happened when Manchester was granted Borough status in 1838. Four years later in 1842 the city was granted a coat of arms in two stages. The first was the adding of the ship above the shield to represent Manchester's trade links to the world. Again this does not represent a ship on the ship canal; the canal did not exist until the latter 19th century, and it rarely featured sailing ships of the kind represented in the original crest. Above the crest was placed a helmet (Helm) with ribbons (Mantle). On top of this was placed a globe and on this were placed bees, which represent industry. Below is the motto of the Borough 'Concilio et Labore'. This translates as 'wisdom and effort'. Very shortly afterwards the supporting mythical creatures were added. On the right (Heraldically) is the silver or white Heraldic antelope with a collar and chain wrapped around the body. The chain is gold and is used to represent industry. On the left is a gold lion with its face towards the viewer. On its head is a red castle; the castle may be a reference to the Roman fort at Castlefield from which the city originated. The roses upon both the lion and the antelope are references to the county of Lancashire. The Antelope and Lion are derived from the coat of arms of Henry IV (of the House of Lancaster).

For over 120 years this description as laid out in the Borough's formations, were the basis of many different interpreations which can be seen around the city. In 1958 the first official crest was issued by the City, this included the often missed Helm and Mantling. It added in the Mantling a Golden Eagle on a Crown. The Eagle was included to represent the importance of the Aero Industry and the crowns represent the enlarging community of Manchester.

Since 1958 this manifestation has been the basis of all developments. Certain elements have been removed; the Golden Eagles have been removed, the chains on the Antelopes. Fundamentally though it represents what was described in the original 1842 charter. The problems are that in many uses now the amount of information shown is simply too great. Whilst on ceremonial examples, such as the mayors chain or architecturally it is possible and even desirable to show the entire crest, in many every day uses it neither reproduces well, nor expresses the cities forward looking approach.

As we examined all the elements of the crest we drew the conclusion that the most basic and elementary part of the design was the crest itself. This alone represents the original Manchester, but also is naturally streamlined and distinctive. Whilst heraldic elements such as the Unicorn remain important descriptive parts of the crest, they are not unique to the city. The crest and its arrangements of stripes is much more unique and distinctively Mancunian.

Such simplicity means that it can be effectively used in multiple medias at a range of sizes without losing its distinctive qualities. Whilst the complicated and elaborate crest from the 1840s will always be distinctively heritage, the crest on its own is timeless and modern.
 

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.