Once again, Hull City have managed to make themselves a laughing stock amongst Premier League clubs, this time trying to hide a new shield/badge design in the media furore over England’s World Cup misfortune.
Now this wouldn’t have been so bad, but for recent events. Back in the spring, the FA Council refused to sanction a change of playing name, much to the club’s annoyance. Their response? To remove all mention of the club’s name on this new shield. I kid you not… Look.
The other complaint is that back in August, a promise was made to not change the club’s badge without proper consultation. Back then, supporters had no reason to believe this was not going to be adhered to. After all, the chairman was a good man, a stalwart of the community.
How foolish we were. The promise was broken, and this was rushed out with no consultation with any supporters, with the excuse that consultation wasn’t possible as the club was waiting for the FA decision.
Without putting too fine a point on it, this is so laughable, its not even funny. The new design looks like its been cobbled together in an afternoon, and removes almost all branding, other than the tigers head and a date. If this is supposed to be part of new strong branding, its right out of the David Brent School of management.
Show that to a football fan in Europe and it will give them no idea who it represents; at least with the old one, it was there printed for all to see.
To be honest, does this do anything but confirm what we’ve all known for a while, that the management still is over-concerned with the City Council and the spat from last year?
This all shows that the club is still treating the fans as a compliant mass who have to be grateful for there still being a club, and to be milked at every opportunity.
Its juvenile and petty, and makes older fans like me yearn for the days of Adam Pearson. We might not have been in the Premier League but we had a club that treated fans right, consulted them where it could and made you proud to be part of.
All this can only end in tears; question is, whose?