Jun

I have no doubt some of the fans would never be pleased by any changes forced on their club, some have stated so in this and other threads, and they're well within their rights to. Everyone will draw the line at different points based on their own emotional attachment with the club, and it's exactly that, it's emotional. And what has been stated countless times in this forum and evidenced by a poll in another post, is that a great many fans are happy with a red and white stripe home kit, and sky blue away kit. We could sit here and speculate about what they wanted or didn't want to do, but we can only go by the things that have happened. Fuck it I'm sick of this argument, sorry for bringing it up again. Might get Thai for dinner.

I didn't use the word 'lie', although I think there's even an argument for that word. I used the word 'deceptive', which they were. How is the decision to change our red and white strips home kit to this white with some blue home kit 'well-supported'? It isn't, at all, in any way. That's also true of the large body of text stating that "any decisions" will be "guided" by the club's traditions and the passion for red and white, even though there's those final few words that go on about "opportunities". Call it want you want. It's either 'misleading in the extreme' or deceptive. Either way, it's not a respectable way to go about communicating with supporters that try to be loyal to the club. This is splitting hairs, really. The point still stands that supporters only asked the club for one thing, a red and white home kit. A name change, a badge change, an away kit change and many other changes all were ready to be tolerated, and even though Man City couldn't get what they wanted (a sky blue home kit), they didn't give supporters the only 1 real thing we've been asking for. And then, as I said, on top of that they knowingly used language that was misleading in the extreme (don't belittle them. They would have known exactly what they were doing, and were consciously trying to placate supporters in the lead up to these changes). Going forward, I hope for the sake of this club and its supporters that the club works to build a better relationship, where the supporters can be trusting of the club. Because right now, supporters don't have many reasons to seriously trust this club. What about what the owners want? You know the one's who are actually paying the bills? They get no say at all? Be realistic. The new owners are the ones that wanted everything their way, supporters were unwilling to compromise on one thing, the home kit. How the fuck do you read that as "they get no say at all"?

Re the bolded bit - I hope they do as well, and maybe learn how to spell whilst you're at it... All jokes aside I really don't understand why you're so bitter - it's almost as if unless they did everything your way then you wouldn't be happy. I reckon no matter what they did you would find some gripe about it. Which is fair enough I suppose but not exactly a mature and measured response in regard to the situation. You claim that the strip is a hand me down Man City strip and I can can definitely see why, however it is white and it was a predominant color of your previous home shirt, which by the way is is now your away shirt. To claim there are no links at all is extremely disingenuous. You don't know who they consulted, but just because you weren't consulted it means they mustn't have done anything. You also confuse listening with doing exactly what you want them to. Just because they haven't done exactly what you've desired they mustn't have listened. I reckon they probably have listened, taken it on board, considered what feedback they have received and then presented this as a compromise. At it's core it's a name change, a logo change to something that is a more traditional crest and not the cringey bullshit the A League is known for, which retains the original colors and includes the Melbourne crest, and a move from the home to an away shirt and a new home shirt that is 90% one of the original colors. Ah yeah and David Villa and more to come. I've lurked on this forum for a good few months and I've seen a heap of comments about protecting identity but also a lot of other comments about changing the culture of the club. The same thing happened at City. Look up Typical City to get a vibe about what was the City identity pre-takeover. Winning the league one year and then getting relegated the next despite scoring the most number of goals in the division. Winning Cups for cock ups best sums it up. You could argue that 'typical city' was an intrinsic part of our identity. However success on and off the pitch has engendered a new identity. Success and typical city cannot live hand in hand. I think it's every fans dream to have a successful team - and success on and off the pitch will shape your identity. I will admit that i'm not a Heart fan, however I am excited about what this will mean for football in Australia. Football has always been a poorer cousin to the other codes. This is such a great opportunity for football in Australia full stop. Great new facilities leveraging off the expertise at a global level. Hopefully this will start the process of lifting the standing of the game by the bootstraps. And with league and union in a bit of a disastrous state at the minute, now is the perfect time to strike. This can result in football becoming the second biggest code in the country (don't think it will be able to dent the AFL). Yet much like the story of Australia's football history and like typical city there have been so many instances in the not to distant past of the code shooting itself in the foot. We know the coverage for the A League is still not supportive, someone bringing a flare into a game will be reported as being 'hooliganism gone wild' whereas the countless drunk idiots who beat the shit out of eachother at league and union matches barely get a mention. This is a chance to start correcting that. If people objectively looked at the greater good that City's involvement with Heart would bring to football in Australia, they would be tearing down the roadblocks rather than erecting them. Put the self interest aside for the good of the game in the country and then they might actually start going places. Are you likening CFG changing everything about the club with supporters wanting everything their own way? For the majority, everything was acceptable except changing the home colours to sky blue. That was a change few wanted and many considered a step too far. The fact that CFG went to the FFA with their plans for a sky blue home kit, without speaking to the members or STH about it doesn't help build good sentiment with their leadership. I think it is far from unreasonable to expect people to be upset and your comments on it are baseless. However, I absolutely agree on your other points, this is a huge boon for the sport in this country, and dare I say, the region. Mate - I'm responding to Sash's post about him complaining about the fact that even though 95% of the colors of both the new home and away strips are the clubs original colors he is still railing. The home kit is not sky blue. It is 85% white with a strip of blue. If the home kit was predominately sky blue, then yes I would say that the criticism of you, the fans, would be warranted. But it's not, yet that's still not good enough. As I stated so many fans are confusing consultation and listening with doing exactly what they wanted. CFG not only have the fans interests to take into account but their own business interests as well. How would you feel if you bought a house for $12mil but then the tenants in it told you you can't make any changes to it? What CFG has done, in my opinion. is a pretty decent compromise so that the original tenants can still enjoy the house, and that CFG can achieve their objectives in increasing the value of the house, and attempt to reshape the housing landscape... From what was proposed to what has now been delivered - I couldn't see why there was still this outrage. My apologies, I forgot to include a section stating that I personally feel this compromise is acceptable. I think you are confused. CFG have changed everything they wanted to change, they couldn't change the home kit to sky blue even though they had every intention to. The only compromise they made was with FFA/Sydney FC. They ignored the fans and/or had no intention of communicating with the fans.

Re the bolded bit - I hope they do as well, and maybe learn how to spell whilst you're at it... All jokes aside I really don't understand why you're so bitter - it's almost as if unless they did everything your way then you wouldn't be happy. I reckon no matter what they did you would find some gripe about it. Which is fair enough I suppose but not exactly a mature and measured response in regard to the situation. You claim that the strip is a hand me down Man City strip and I can can definitely see why, however it is white and it was a predominant color of your previous home shirt, which by the way is is now your away shirt. To claim there are no links at all is extremely disingenuous. You don't know who they consulted, but just because you weren't consulted it means they mustn't have done anything. You also confuse listening with doing exactly what you want them to. Just because they haven't done exactly what you've desired they mustn't have listened. I reckon they probably have listened, taken it on board, considered what feedback they have received and then presented this as a compromise. At it's core it's a name change, a logo change to something that is a more traditional crest and not the cringey bullshit the A League is known for, which retains the original colors and includes the Melbourne crest, and a move from the home to an away shirt and a new home shirt that is 90% one of the original colors. Ah yeah and David Villa and more to come. I've lurked on this forum for a good few months and I've seen a heap of comments about protecting identity but also a lot of other comments about changing the culture of the club. The same thing happened at City. Look up Typical City to get a vibe about what was the City identity pre-takeover. Winning the league one year and then getting relegated the next despite scoring the most number of goals in the division. Winning Cups for cock ups best sums it up. You could argue that 'typical city' was an intrinsic part of our identity. However success on and off the pitch has engendered a new identity. Success and typical city cannot live hand in hand. I think it's every fans dream to have a successful team - and success on and off the pitch will shape your identity. I will admit that i'm not a Heart fan, however I am excited about what this will mean for football in Australia. Football has always been a poorer cousin to the other codes. This is such a great opportunity for football in Australia full stop. Great new facilities leveraging off the expertise at a global level. Hopefully this will start the process of lifting the standing of the game by the bootstraps. And with league and union in a bit of a disastrous state at the minute, now is the perfect time to strike. This can result in football becoming the second biggest code in the country (don't think it will be able to dent the AFL). Yet much like the story of Australia's football history and like typical city there have been so many instances in the not to distant past of the code shooting itself in the foot. We know the coverage for the A League is still not supportive, someone bringing a flare into a game will be reported as being 'hooliganism gone wild' whereas the countless drunk idiots who beat the shit out of eachother at league and union matches barely get a mention. This is a chance to start correcting that. If people objectively looked at the greater good that City's involvement with Heart would bring to football in Australia, they would be tearing down the roadblocks rather than erecting them. Put the self interest aside for the good of the game in the country and then they might actually start going places. Are you likening CFG changing everything about the club with supporters wanting everything their own way? For the majority, everything was acceptable except changing the home colours to sky blue. That was a change few wanted and many considered a step too far. The fact that CFG went to the FFA with their plans for a sky blue home kit, without speaking to the members or STH about it doesn't help build good sentiment with their leadership. I think it is far from unreasonable to expect people to be upset and your comments on it are baseless. However, I absolutely agree on your other points, this is a huge boon for the sport in this country, and dare I say, the region.

You get abused because you're a clown

What Drama queen you are. (you are not supposed to support the owners but the team) What a clown you are! He is supporting his team and the colours are an important part of that. If our colours had tried to be changed to red and white us City fans would also have been up in arms about it. But the very fact is, the colours will NOT be changed so why keep moaning about it. Im not sure city fans would moan half as much if city changed colours 5 years into its existenes, after all city have changed colours through history and as we all can see it worked out pretty well in the end. Are you intentionally being antagonistic or do you genuinely still not get it?

Isn't that what the colour debate is all about? Another team deciding what our colours are? true, what i meant was. im not taking part or side in the colour of the shirt debate. its just weird that Sidney can influence hearts colour choice. I just hope Heart absolutly run over Sidney next season to shut them up. You're absolutely taking a side in the colour debate. You're taking the Manchester City side. A great majority of the heart fans are not on the Manchester City side. Why do YOU want Sydney* to be run over next season? They seem to be shaping up to be a very competitive team. I'll be tipping my hat in their direction next time we meet, chur for the chop out, sort of..

So help us if the sheik is actually The Sheik

This statement on it's own is entirely baseless. Colours have a hugely different significance to different cultures, for example in China you get married in a red dress, white is associated with death and funerals. Off the top of my head, in China and Japan the mcdonalds logo is yellow M on a brown background, as opposed to a red on in the west (as far as i know). And the icecream company Streets uses a variety of combinations of blue, white, red, yellow and orange depending on the region.

To summarise: some aren't fussed, many aren't happy but accept it, many actively dislike light blue that is the colour of New south wales, Victoria's traditional rivals, some will disengage from the franchise. Light blue pants would be a better alternative to a light blue jersey. If you look at the poll on this site only a tiny minority want to change our home colours. Almost all are perplexed that CFG have tried so hard to engage the potential NYCFC fans over colours and logos but have virtually ignored us. Surely by now all evidence points to a scenario of a big announcement of high calibre players to mitigate the disappointment of a sky blue home kit, That's probably true and a large part of the upside And changing of the colours being a large part of the downside. FWIW I think the biggest upside of all of this is how the spotlight, resources and the effective increase in competitiveness of this new team affect the league as a whole. It's just a shame that Heart had to be the team that was sacrificed for it all. A shame? Fuck that, I love that we're the centre of it. Naturally people will draw their own conclusions from what has been hinted at so far in this whole buy-out thing. I'm in the "different name, different colours, different team" crowd. I feel it's a shame because Heart was bit of a flog, but they were a flog we all loved, we stuck through all those bad times because we believed in it. It seems the Heart chapter of Australian football is coming to a close, and while there was a bit of heroism at the end, I feel Heart was done a disservice by not being afforded the chance to redeem themselves. Of course I'm basing all this on pure speculation, but the silence is deafening. Now I'm still going to follow the new chapter of this Mini-Man City, I'm thrilled about the potential, and I like brand of football they are promising. Victory can fuck off. But like it's been said before here, my relationship with this franchise has been reset to 0. Edit: Sorry I realise I didn't actually respond to what you said. I am loving that the spotlight is on us for a change and we're not making huge announcements about players of the Mifsud calibre.

To summarise: some aren't fussed, many aren't happy but accept it, many actively dislike light blue that is the colour of New south wales, Victoria's traditional rivals, some will disengage from the franchise. Light blue pants would be a better alternative to a light blue jersey. If you look at the poll on this site only a tiny minority want to change our home colours. Almost all are perplexed that CFG have tried so hard to engage the potential NYCFC fans over colours and logos but have virtually ignored us. Surely by now all evidence points to a scenario of a big announcement of high calibre players to mitigate the disappointment of a sky blue home kit, That's probably true and a large part of the upside And changing of the colours being a large part of the downside. FWIW I think the biggest upside of all of this is how the spotlight, resources and the effective increase in competitiveness of this new team affect the league as a whole. It's just a shame that Heart had to be the team that was sacrificed for it all.

To summarise: some aren't fussed, many aren't happy but accept it, many actively dislike light blue that is the colour of New south wales, Victoria's traditional rivals, some will disengage from the franchise. Light blue pants would be a better alternative to a light blue jersey. If you look at the poll on this site only a tiny minority want to change our home colours. Almost all are perplexed that CFG have tried so hard to engage the potential NYCFC fans over colours and logos but have virtually ignored us. Surely by now all evidence points to a scenario of a big announcement of high calibre players to mitigate the disappointment of a sky blue home kit,

I'd be surprised if it worked.

And you may be right if we weren't wearing Man City's home kit, using their name, loaning players from them, and spending great piles of their money. If that were to occur, we would be "mini man city", no discussion.

Perhaps spending 5 minutes on this forum reading the hundreds of posts about how the fans feel about colour/badge/name would be the best compliment. Nice try though

I agree that the silence has been deafening, but this at best, a bit unfair.

Spot on. This is the crux of the matter I feel. One can bandy around figures of money and rhetoric about how nobly CFG will handle this so called metamorphosis. But at the end of the day, it seems all but certain the name and badge will change in this great transition, and if the colours change too, then it bears no more resemblance to the club we all stuck behind during those dark Aloisi times. The club stands on the edge of something. Success lies at the end of both roads, but in one direction, a brand new shiny club with a fresh coat of sky blue paint. In the other, our beloved Heart, scars and all, and we Australians love an underdog story more than anything. If the club isn't given the opportunity for a rebirth to actually feel like a rebirth, then the only memories we'll have are a wonder goal from Engelaar, a 4-0 win against the visitors, and a 19 game winless streak.

Interesting question. Lived here 23 years, and my work has always been outside the city so I probably have not ever had much of a chance to see the flag flying anywhere. I have seen the flag only twice - the first time as a carving on a decorative wooden mantelpiece in a country property down near Warrnambool, the second time only as the tifo at AAMI Park! The arms of the City of Melbourne are on the web-site but I have yet to find a direct reference to the flag on that site. The red cross on the coat of arms is actually the Cross of St. George of England...which might not be so popular after all... As an unashamed Melbourne Flag lover even I have to admit that its depliction of Melbourne's Industries is very out of date. (I mean you wouldn't find many PPL in Melbourne in favour of Whaling would you?) I believe a few years back it mooted that the Flag should be changed to more reflective of Modern Melbourne. Clockwise, a cappuccino, a square graduate hat, a cappuccino, and a bank note.

Welcome BlueWolf. I can't see how the age of the team is relevant. Unlike all Hull/Cardiff supporters, many of us are foundation STHs, we have helped establish the identity of the franchise in the ground, It may 'only' be 4 years but we have a connection with the franchise right from its beginning. The name is an issue for some here, the colours are an issue (to varying extent) for almost all. Fair enough, but when you consider the thoughts I mentioned are coming from fans of clubs over 100 years old steeped in tradition and history, it's not difficult to understand their stance when they look at a 4 year old club. That said, some have suggested that a compromise would be the red and black stripes that City initially brought in the 60s. I imagine City have already considered this. It'll be interesting to see if they listen to any Melbourne fan's thoughts or whether they'll just think "fuck it - we;ll do what we want, and the Australian FA will bend over backwards and allow us to do it, too". Not suggesting that would be right, but we'll see what happens in the off-season. You must also consider it's not just about the club's age, it's about the rivalry between Melbourne and Sydney, which as been around since before the Federation of Australia, it gives this argument about pride in the colours history. The colours of the City of Melbourne flag are Red and White, New South Wales' colours are sky blue. The team Sydney FC already play in a sky blue kit, and our cross town rivals play in dark blue and white. I feel, a team called Melbourne City FC NOT playing in red and white would be missing out on something special. Having said that, Sydney Swans play in red and white in AFL and St George in the NRL So, essentially what you are saying is that it's all rather fucked up, and it really matters not a jot? Only beating Sydney to a pulp is considered to be paramount? If that's the case, you're on the wrong foz, pal. Here, let me help you out - www.hmfckickback.co.uk They use the same forum software as us, so it should be a smooth transition for you... You should go on tour with that routine, fella. You do know I am on your side, yes, and want to learn as much as possible? Pity no-one wants to educate me properly. I may have not have been clear as I could have. But the point I was trying to make, EVEN THOUGH there are teams in other codes with red and white representing NSW/Sydney, It would be a hugely wasted opportunity to not keep red and white for Melbourne Heart/City FC. Aside from any skirting around FFP in Europe, I can see nothing but trouble coming from a sky blue home kit AND City FC renaming. Melbournians are not big City fans, there are probably more Crystal Palace or Bolton Wanderers fans, they'd hardly flock to see mini Man City regardless of quality.

Welcome BlueWolf. I can't see how the age of the team is relevant. Unlike all Hull/Cardiff supporters, many of us are foundation STHs, we have helped establish the identity of the franchise in the ground, It may 'only' be 4 years but we have a connection with the franchise right from its beginning. The name is an issue for some here, the colours are an issue (to varying extent) for almost all. Fair enough, but when you consider the thoughts I mentioned are coming from fans of clubs over 100 years old steeped in tradition and history, it's not difficult to understand their stance when they look at a 4 year old club. That said, some have suggested that a compromise would be the red and black stripes that City initially brought in the 60s. I imagine City have already considered this. It'll be interesting to see if they listen to any Melbourne fan's thoughts or whether they'll just think "fuck it - we;ll do what we want, and the Australian FA will bend over backwards and allow us to do it, too". Not suggesting that would be right, but we'll see what happens in the off-season. You must also consider it's not just about the club's age, it's about the rivalry between Melbourne and Sydney, which as been around since before the Federation of Australia, it gives this argument about pride in the colours history. The colours of the City of Melbourne flag are Red and White, New South Wales' colours are sky blue. The team Sydney FC already play in a sky blue kit, and our cross town rivals play in dark blue and white. I feel, a team called Melbourne City FC NOT playing in red and white would be missing out on something special. Having said that, Sydney Swans play in red and white in AFL and St George in the NRL

Who did you support before Heart. Werder Bremen in the Bundesliga. When I heard the A-League was starting it did little to interest me, also growing up in Essendon all of my friends were old NSL supporters and constantly talking down the quality of it. Why did you start supporting Heart. When I heard of a new Melbourne team being formed I realised the A-League was becoming a serious vehicle for football development here, I began to take an interest in the competition, but it wasn't until the beginning of season 2 my friend gave me her boyfriend's season pass (I forgot why) and I started attending games. If you didn't support Victory, why? By the end of season 3 half my co-workers were all mad heart fans, attending every home game. It started off as a way to antagonise the one shitcunt victory supporter at work, but grew into a passion.

Jesus christ, they don't even have a squad yet do they?

What would that be hoping to achieve exactly?

I've started taking more of an interest. I don't have any real affiliation with any epl clubs. But from watching, I now have more knowledge of City and their players than any other clubs. I happen to have a friend who's a City supporter and he adopted Heart a couple of years ago, at least partly due to my encouragement, so I'll probably return the favour. But any support will be dependent on how they treat us. I am almost in the same sort of frame of mind. I like watching, the EPL but don't really have any allegiances, but have been taken more interest in city. Probably due to the takeover but also because of how good there travelling lately and also they play such an attractive style. Their last game was the best game of open end to end attacking soccer I can recall. (pity they lost). Likewise, After the takeover I took an interest in the EPL for the first time in a long time, and that interest lay with Man City. But hearing all this talk of the colour change, I'm not sure I could follow this new Sydney FC City, and Man U will be getting a new fan. (long time listener, first time caller)