Its clean and more contemporary. From my perspective its got the clubs name on it so that's a step in the right direction. Some may question why it was ever changed in the first place, some will never like it as its from the Allam era, however as the old adage goes its impossible to please all the people all the time, so i'll personally settle for some of the people all of the time on this one!
What kind of pernickety total **** chipped in with "The markings. We need to change the markings."? Who allowed them to contribute this stupid 'change for the sake of it' tweak ? The original 1972 Tiger's head was fine in every way: no tweaks of any type needed whatsoever. Meddling know nowt jobsworth ****ers
It will always be associated with the owners, so any new owners, if we ever get them, will need to change it anyway It at least has the name on, which is somewhat of a climbdown by them (and maybe why Assem felt the need to go on radio and make it clear that he wouldn't be going or backing down on anything else anytime soon?) It's not a tiger...it has no stripes...it some unusual animal with weird splodges on it. It also only has one ear. I don't mind 1904 on it, but only if everyone uses that as a reminder to join in with City till we die, and follow on songs calling for the Allams to leave, at 19.04. Really disappointing that has dropped off lately Badge shape is OK I think
Don't think it is much of a tigers head, more a tabby cat. Saying that I agree with it being a step in the right direction. It pretty much has the club name and it is still better than the hinchcliffe thing that appeared on the badge.
There are many better tiger heads they could have used. The post by Mrs Blue Mountain Bear reminded me of this one for example. please log in to view this image Richmond Tigers seem to produce good badges. please log in to view this image
https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-photos-of-tiger-leopard-hybrids-found-in-the-wild Looks like we got a tigard or a leoger
Don't see the need for AFC on the badge. Not that many teams are AFC and some that are, like TWS only use FC.
But we are Hull City AFC, it's our name. We have a situation where half the country don't know the difference between Hull City and Hull FC. Putting AFC on the badge clarifies that.
Have you ever, when asked who you support, replied Hull City Association Football Club or even Hull City AFC? The name Hull City should distinguish us from Hull FC to all but the dimmest. TWS are AFC because there was a rugby league club in Leeds first. But they only use the FC. I don't think anyone has ever mixed up the Leeds clubs. Liverpool's name is Liverpool Football Club And Athletic Grounds. But they manage either out their full name on the badge.
I must mix with some real dim ****s because yes I have been asked who I support and when replied "Hull City" got the response "that's rugby innit?"
