TopGun Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29460187 The Hull mentalist still wants to call them Tigers. The Cardiff nutter is still in place. The Leeds bloke is still avoiding cracks in the pavement. The Fulham feller is playing lucky dip. I think Katherina might be ok though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 A few people did point out in the summer, when people were all up in arms about KL, that there are some really sh it club owners out there we're IMO very lucky with our owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 After the Mackay thing, think Vincent Tan needs benefit of the doubt. Yes, yes, I know he changed the shirt colour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 The old adage be careful what you wish for always rings true. We could do a lot, lot worse. We should be thankful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farawaysaint Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 A few people did point out in the summer, when people were all up in arms about KL, that there are some really sh it club owners out there we're IMO very lucky with our owners. Yeah, all of Pompey's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 I think the Hull owner is ok. "Tigers" is their nickname after all and he is trying to establish a better commercial base. Only ignorant, backward-looking, arch-traditionalists should have a problem with him. He has put them on the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 I think the Hull owner is ok. "Tigers" is their nickname after all and he is trying to establish a better commercial base. Only ignorant, backward-looking, arch-traditionalists should have a problem with him. He has put them on the map. I think it's more to do with his public sulking over the issue that's the problem. The name thing is tricky because most football fans are by nature "backward-looking, arch-traditionalists" history is an important part of being fan for a lot of people. I think he could of got the name change through with a more softly softly approach. The whole "it's my club I'll do what I like and I won't put a penny more in if you disagree" attitude while technical correct just puts the fans backs up football will never be the same as other business because fans aren't like other customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 After the Mackay thing, think Vincent Tan needs benefit of the doubt. Yes, yes, I know he changed the shirt colour. I agree with this. The only reason people went after him so badly was casual racism, and the fact he looks like a Bond villain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 I think the Hull owner is ok. "Tigers" is their nickname after all and he is trying to establish a better commercial base. Only ignorant, backward-looking, arch-traditionalists should have a problem with him. He has put them on the map.[/quote ...... Sorry. A senior moment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 I think the Hull owner is ok. "Tigers" is their nickname after all and he is trying to establish a better commercial base. Only ignorant, backward-looking, arch-traditionalists should have a problem with him. He has put them on the map. Perhaps we should become the "Southampton Saints" then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farawaysaint Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Perhaps we should become the "Southampton Saints" then? I am ok with that actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 You can be forward looking but still honour tradition. Tradition is very important in football and there is nothing wrong with that. It is what clubs are built upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 I remember Malcolm Alison coming into Crystal Palace, changing their nickname from the Glasiers to the Eagles and nicking the Barcelona strip. They are still Crystal Palace, the yo-yo club though. As for Southampton Saints? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrian lord Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 You can be forward looking but still honour tradition. Tradition is very important in football and there is nothing wrong with that. It is what clubs are built upon. Precisely - they are not mutually exclusive. If you want a club called "Southampton Saints" or "Hull Tigers" or even "Liverpool Plunderers", by all means go ahead and found one and build it up with it's own traditions. Just leave the original alone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW5 SAINT Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Perhaps we should become the "Southampton Saints" then? And then it is a short step to becoming Southampton Veho, no thanks. The whole City or United or any suffix for that matter is the identity of the club. Imagine if the two Manchester clubs changed their suffixes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Precisely - they are not mutually exclusive. If you want a club called "Southampton Saints" or "Hull Tigers" or even "Liverpool Plunderers", by all means go ahead and found one and build it up with it's own traditions. Just leave the original alone! Absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Perhaps we should become the "Southampton Saints" then? Sounds like an American cheerleaders club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Southmpon Red sox, and stripy tops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxon Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 You can be forward looking but still honour tradition. Tradition is very important in football and there is nothing wrong with that. It is what clubs are built upon. I think most younger fans will also agree with this (being one and knowing a lot, of various clubs). I know for me, a lot of the appeal of English football is our unique heritage. I like the tradition of it, it gives you a link through the years back to the previous seasons of your club. Logos changing over time is fine (and exciting, giving you a logo and banner to identify with in your time), same with kits, but names of teams and, for me anyway, of grounds are important. I know that many supporters are ok with renaming stadia as it can bring a large amount of revenue, but I feel more proud we're playing at St. Mary's and not at the [brand name] stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 (edited) The dwarf Italian loony is still unemployed, waiting for AC Milan. Edited 3 October, 2014 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cellone Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 (edited) Why is Kat in that list? Is it to crowbar a Saints connection for the OP? Edited 3 October, 2014 by cellone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 I think most younger fans will also agree with this (being one and knowing a lot, of various clubs). I know for me, a lot of the appeal of English football is our unique heritage. I like the tradition of it, it gives you a link through the years back to the previous seasons of your club. Logos changing over time is fine (and exciting, giving you a logo and banner to identify with in your time), same with kits, but names of teams and, for me anyway, of grounds are important. I know that many supporters are ok with renaming stadia as it can bring a large amount of revenue, but I feel more proud we're playing at St. Mary's and not at the [brand name] stadium. You do realise we were friends provident for ages don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farawaysaint Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 You do realise we were friends provident for ages don't you? Cut him slack Hypo, he flat out says he is a younger fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxon Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 You do realise we were friends provident for ages don't you? Firstly, what difference that makes to my post I have no idea whatsoever, it only makes my opinion stronger tbh. Secondly, I had heard about that. But that was (wiki) 2006? So its been just St Mary's longer than its been sponsored since it was opened. It's not called that anymore and even if we were the Sunseeker Stadium (not too bad for a sponsored name though? ) or something, my opinion wouldn't be any different... Anyway tbh, I don't quite understand the point you're trying to make it doesn't change my opinion, or are you saying that I'm not allowed that opinion since we once had a sponsored stadium? I didn't change the stadium name. That's as strange as asking a Cardiff fan giving an opinion about traditional first team colours, if they realized their first team colours were once blue, and now what did they think about their opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Is anyone watching the Blackpool protests? What the actual ****? 5 or 6 black balloons released onto the pitch, about 1 min of ''oysten out'' chants, and now a few mobiles being flashed in the crowd for 1 or 2 mins to show their disgust, or something. I'm so embarrassed for them, they probably don't know how utterly pathetic it looks on live tv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simo Posted 3 October, 2014 Share Posted 3 October, 2014 Best I could do sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now