Rammyblues said:Trouble is we can't, owned by council copyright etc etc. But if Manchester team does well we get special dispensation to use it, that is why galling to see that red shite wear it even though they contribute fuck all to Manchester. They should not be allowed to wear it at all IMO but wear Trafford coat of Arms. :-)
Manchester
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/m/manchest.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/m/manchest.htm</a>
Trafford
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/t/trafford.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/t/trafford.htm</a>
Does the Rammy part of your name refer to Ramsbottom, Bury?
Rammyblues said:that is why galling to see that red shite wear it even though they contribute fuck all to Manchester. They should not be allowed to wear it at all IMO but wear Trafford coat of Arms.
Rammyblues said:Does the Rammy part of your name refer to Ramsbottom, Bury?
Yep
We could if we wanted to,the Council would have to challenge us by forming an Heraldic Council with special officers positions created, but without saying to much at least one & possibly 2 precidents of the COA being used exists.............plus the purple nose twat nearly always wears a blazer with the COA on it.Rammyblues said:Trouble is we can't, owned by council copyright etc etc. But if Manchester team does well we get special dispensation to use it, that is why galling to see that red shite wear it even though they contribute fuck all to Manchester. They should not be allowed to wear it at all IMO but wear Trafford coat of Arms. :-)
Manchester
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/m/manchest.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/m/manchest.htm</a>
Trafford
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/t/trafford.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/t/trafford.htm</a>
I agree with that,it's good to see the Manc Council has once and for all fucked them off from parading around Manchester aswell.They should not be allowed to wear it at all IMO but wear Trafford coat of Arms. :-)
danburge82 said:Rammyblues said:
I live in Trafford but I am not a Traffordian, it doesn't exist, I'm a Mancunian. United wearing that is no problem for me. This whole connurbation is all Manchester to me.
Really ? i knew the purple nosed fuck wore one on his jacket but the players have them aswell do they.pml79 said:when them scumbags were on sky against spurs they had it on their jackets walkin into changin room
Nearly...bluemanc said:We could if we wanted to,the Council would have to challenge us by forming an Heraldic Council with special officers positions created, but without saying to much at least one & possibly 2 precidents of the COA being used exists.............plus the purple nose twat nearly always wears a blazer with the COA on it.
Her Majesty's High Court of Chivalry of England and Wales is a civil court in England. It has had jurisdiction in cases of the misuse of heraldic arms since the fourteenth century.
The sole judge is now the hereditary Earl Marshal of England, the Duke of Norfolk, though he normally delegates his responsibility to a professional lawyer as his Surrogate. Before 1521, the Lord High Constable of England also presided, but that office was abolished as a permanent institution (it is "revived" only for a Coronation).
The court was last convened in 1954 for Manchester Corporation v Manchester Palace of Varieties Ltd [1955] P 133; [1955] 1 All ER 387. The theatre displayed the City of Manchester's (that is, the Manchester Corporation's) arms both inside and on its seal and this usage implied that it was linked with the City's Council. The City had requested that the theatre cease the usage and had met with refusal. The court ruled in favour of the City (the Corporation). This was the first time that the Court of Chivalry had sat for approximately two centuries, since 1732. The opening part of the judgement involved an analysis leading to the determination that the Court of Chivalry still existed.
danburge82 wrote:
Rammyblues wrote:
Yep
I live in Trafford but I am not a Traffordian, it doesn't exist, I'm a Mancunian. United wearing that is no problem for me. This whole connurbation is all Manchester to me.
IXNorb said:bluemanc said:We could if we wanted to,the Council would have to challenge us by forming an Heraldic Council with special officers positions created, but without saying to much at least one & possibly 2 precidents of the COA being used exists.............plus the purple nose twat nearly always wears a blazer with the COA on it.
quote]
Nearly...
That must be why other partys have been allowed to still use the COA/s.a revival of the Court in 1954, when the Earl Marshal appointed the then Lord Chief Justice to sit as his surrogate. The Lord Chief Justice Lord Goddard confirmed that the Court retained both its existence and its powers, and ruled in favour of the suit before him.
However, in his judgment (Manchester Corporation v Manchester Palace of Varieties [1955] P 133) Lord Goddard suggested that
“...if this court is to sit again it should be convened only where there is some really substantial reason for the exercise of its jurisdiction.”
I wonder if this is why the Council wanted a new COA.Hence, although the Law of Arms undoubtedly remains part of the law of England, and although the Court of Chivalry in theory exists as a forum in which it may be enforced, there is difficulty in enforcing the law in practice (a point made in Re Croxon, Croxon v Ferrers [1904] Ch 252, Kekewich J). The absence of a practical remedy for the illegal usurpation of arms in the law of England does not mean that there are no rights infringed, merely that it not within the jurisdiction of the common law Courts to act and the Court which is so empowered does not now sit.
It's not the people it's about, it's the club.Project said:As someone born and bred in Trafford, I consider myself a Manc, and the borough I live in an area of the city of Manchester. Technical boundaries be damned.
If you have a problem with that, fuck you.
nashark said:danburge82 said:I live in Trafford but I am not a Traffordian, it doesn't exist, I'm a Mancunian. United wearing that is no problem for me. This whole connurbation is all Manchester to me.
Well, that's touching but Trafford is Trafford and Manchester is Manchester. United have no right to wear our coat of arms.
Rammyblues said:danburge82 wrote:
Rammyblues wrote:
Yep
I live in Trafford but I am not a Traffordian, it doesn't exist, I'm a Mancunian. United wearing that is no problem for me. This whole connurbation is all Manchester to me.
Not out to upset any fellow blue, but Trafford has its own coat of arms, I wish Rammy had one if they did I would be proud to wear it. Seems odd that people want to be somewhere else than where their roots are. If Traffordians believe they are Mancunian I don't have a problem with that, I have never ever considered Rammy as part of Greater Manchester it was forced upon us, I still look back when Rammy was Rammy Urban District Council and was part of Lancashire. If I have offended anyone from Trafford please accept my apologies.