Football 2013: An incomer decides that 109 years of history should be swept aside to rebrand the club as feline predators; another changes the shirts to red, sacks the head of recruitment and publicly tells the manager that no funds will be available at all to boost the team in the transfer window. Meanwhile, managers topple like skittles, slaves to the fortune of a linesman's flag or defender's backpass. An emptiness grows in my soul.
Completely agree and it is only set to get worse. Sadly the thing that made football loved by so many is the sport involved but it is now taken over by commercial business. The sport of football is slowly dying.
Sorry dying at the highest level. It is still a fantastic sport at amateur level and a fantastic release for kids and adults alike in any country.
Just read the latest installment of the Cardiff debacle, it's such a farce. Surely the owner has to take some responsibility for the £15m overspend, he must be signing off in the transfers at some point in the process, and he must also realise that failure to stay in the Premier League will cost him more than £15-25m (if he allowed more spending) in the long run? Does that mean Malky can try and bring loan players in, has to sell to buy, or simply sit back and watch nearly everyone around them strengthen? Much as I like Malky, I've love to see this decision bite Tan in the backside.
Is it really dying though? Or is that your hope as you don't like where it's moving? The truth of all those changes are that they happen because football is becoming bigger, winning is more important and yes money plays a big part. Also attendances are mostly increasing or holding steady and subscriptions to sports packages on tv have increased. Football is changing but I see no evidence that it's dying.
Sorry I meant as a sport it is dying. As in the business is now becoming more important then the sport and its history. If that makes any sense?
I sort of agree, I think as the business is based around sport then it still there. There's no reason that being a successful business should undermine all the history and tradition that's the mistake being made at Hull I feel. Personally I really don't see football going a business an issue. The issue is when it's badly run, but that doesn't seem to be a new thing.
Agree with this - it's now more about winning and the rewards it brings. Why oh why do players demand in excess of £100K a week (or in Rooney's case I believe it's over double that!!)???? Utter madness.
I say run as a business but if they were "real" businesses they would of gone under a long time ago. Seems to be somewhere between a business and a charity for want of a better word. But yes the big issues are with how these clubs/ organisations are run.
Ah agreed there tipsy. I would live to see a football club go bust. It's starting to feel very necessary.
Look at F1, how that has developed into a handful of teams capable of designing/building a car capable of winning a race. The same can be said of the PL - teams with rich backers who seem to use the team as a means to almost 'lose' some of their assets are the only ones genuinely in contention at the top of the league and the rest are left to fight out the lower positions and avoid relegation. Compare that to all those who were nominated for 'SPOTY' - who have all had to work incredibly hard to reach their goals, as opposed to being some multi millionaire's 'equivalent of an X Box/PS 4 etc'. Yes, it is all about winning, but not when one team can spend more on one player than the total cost of another team's squad!!!!
Is it really the case that retaining the name Hull City FC is critical to the identity of the football club? Or playing in blue as opposed to some other colour? Having a history does not preclude all change, and if you are going to argue that a particular change will destroy the identity and history of your club it surely needs to be something more plausible than a change of name or shirt colour. Moving Wimbledon to Milton Keynes? Yes! because Milton Keynes is not Wimbledon or even a mile or two outside it. But Cardiff "Reds" are Cardiff City FC playing in red not blue, And Hull Tigers will be Hull City FC under a new name. Plenty of clubs have made similar changes in the past without creating crises of identity. Furthermore, a club's history or even identity is not always admirable -- I'm not going to start a war on here by giving examples, I'm sure people can think of some for themselves.
But what is the motivation for change? Solely more of the pretty green. Of course small changes can't destroy the tradition of a club, but they can certainly tarnish it and that in itself can have knock on effects. Re-branding is not always a good idea and can have unforseen consequences. As to the finances/businesses of clubs, more and more seem to be following that lovely business model that worked out so well for Enron and its employees- running unsustainable debts is evidence of a malignancy in football, income is dwarfed by the outgoings for many clubs- these clubs don't have bottomless pits of cash to call on and the sooner there are problems for clubs that the world cares about, the better it will become- hopefully
I go along with much that has been written.OK it's not crucial that a team has a certain name or plays in certain colours.Although I would imagine that if a new owner decided that he wanted our team to play in blue and white that might cause a stir.
according to reports Tan has said malky will have no money to spend in january due to the reported overspend in the summer. Could Malky be the next one to go given the owners erratic behaviour?
Apparently, Tan backed his summer spending to the tune of circa £15m over planned budget. It is, however, starting to feel like a witch-hunt for Malky - I'm surprised he's still there after his second in command was unceremoniously dumped out of the club. Check this report at circa 4m.50s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLrfnJm_tcA&feature=c4-overview&list=UUE97AW7eR8VVbVPBy4cCLKg
I do agree that it is a shame to meddle with team colours, name etc but there was a time that Norwich played in Blue and White and were not called the Canaries. I wasn't around during this change, but am sure glad it happened and see it as a crucial part of our history. But I wonder what the fans thought of this change at the time.
Pretty sure that happened around 1912 when we were playing in third division south and had only been a team for about 10 years. There wasn't a huge amount of identity to change at that time.
