Sydney FC in blue over new Melbourne Heart colours

DateApril 15, 2014 - 2:00AM 17 reading now



Dominic Bossi


Sydney FC have lodged a formal complaint to Football Federation Australia in response to an application from Melbourne Heart's new owners to rebrand the A-League team as a franchise of Manchester City, including a change of their playing strip from red and white to sky blue.

Melbourne Heart as we know them may have already played their last game as Fairfax Media has been informed that their new owners submitted a request to the FFA to make the club's name, logo and playing colours synonymous with the English Premier League giants. Under the application, the club will be renamed as Melbourne City, have a new logo and play in a sky blue jersey with white socks and shorts.

However, the proposed changes have not gone down well with the sky blue half of Sydney, with Sydney FC chairman Scott Barlow lodging a formal complaint to the FFA due to the clash of identities. Barlow is unhappy with Heart's bid to play in a similar strip to Sydney FC, who have become so renowned with the colour that "Sky Blues" has become their nickname.

Colour clash: Melbourne Heart's new owners have applied to change the club's colours to Manchester City's sky blue, a direct clash with Sydney FC.
Colour clash: Melbourne Heart's new owners have applied to change the club's colours to Manchester City's sky blue, a direct clash with Sydney FC. Photo: Getty Images

"Sky blue is much more than just a colour for Sydney FC, it's central to our identity. Sky blue represents our club, our harbour city and is the traditional colour of NSW," Barlow said. "We're extremely concerned about the proposed use of sky blue by Melbourne Heart, and we've made our concerns very clear to the FFA."



Manchester City's bid to change the identity of Melbourne Heart is yet to be approved by the FFA, which owns the trademarks of all 10 A-League clubs. It's understood that the FFA is open to the possibility of the rebranding of the Heart, just as they were with Newcastle Jets changing their shirt colours from gold to red and blue following the takeover by Nathan Tinkler in 2010. Any move will be met with fierce resistance by Sydney FC, who are unwilling to share their colour and identity with another club in the A-League.

"In a competition with only 10 teams, the idea of two teams wearing sky blue is nonsensical especially when sky blue is so closely associated with NSW. I believe it's critical to the integrity of the A-League that clubs have identities that are also in representation of where they come from," Barlow said.

There has been a mixed response from Heart fans over the proposed name change to Melbourne City but a change of colours from red and white stripes to sky blue has been met by widespread protest including large-scale banners displayed at games. Heart's current strip was inspired by the colours of the flag of Melbourne, and banners reading "Keep Melbourne red & white" were on display at the final game of the season against Western Sydney Wanderers on Saturday.

"In football, club colours are sacred, and they should represent where a club comes from and not the identity of its owner," Barlow said. "Melbourne Heart fans understand and value the history as to why the club wears red and white, and understandably they would want to protest that."

It's not yet known what the new emblem will look like although Manchester City have shown their willingness to give fans some voice with other football investments, such as their MLS club, New York City FC. The New York club will make its debut in 2015 and play in a strip identical to Manchester City although fans were given the choice to select their new emblem which was recently unveiled and incorporated symbols of the city such as the five boroughs and the subway token.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/sydney-fc-in-blue-over-new-melbourne-heart-colours-20140414-zqune.html#ixzz2ytEA0j1Z

A formal complaint ? Seriously ?????? Imagine if man United put in a complaint that liverpool must change their colours due to United playing in red and therefore Liverpool must change as not to get people confused :lol: Barlow is an idiot

Yeah quite stupid, shows Sydney's insecurity :lol:

Barlow has to be seen like he is doing something . He is a incompetent ceo and only reason why travenchenko hasn't got rid of him is due to Barlow being his son in law

Well done Scott Barlow.

Well done ? Sydney can't be this insecure ?? Oh wait they complained that ccm were trying to play games in the north . Complained about wsw. Complaining about stupid shit . Ffs your club should be big enough to not care ffs

No prob, when a team comes in looking to wear red and black I hope you still feel this way.

So I imagine Melbourne Victory would have no problems with Bordeaux buying the Mariners and changing the colours and logo to fit their global brand.

It was less than a month ago a bunch of SFC fans were having a cry on this forum about never getting the opportunity to wear their away kit. I just want to put that out there.

lol, how pathetic.

Not sure if I agree with another Sky Blue in the competition. Red has been identifiable with Melbourne Heart now they want to erase it because it doesn't suit there global branding.

Well done Barlow, keep fighting it till the end.

Whilst the dumbarses on here are trying to provoke all and sundry the fact is that we only have 10 professional football teams in Australia, not 80+ plus like they do in the UK so whilst there are only 10 teams it's stupid that a team should have exact colours especially when the team is already established with its own colours.

Exactly right. There are at least ten red teams in English professional football, but that's over an eighty team competition.

With a small, ten team comp it's a different matter. And Sky Blue isn't just a colour for us, it is the colour of NSW and part of our songs and chants.

A foreign team coming here and attempting to completely transplant itself is ridiculous and insulting.

Heart fans don't want sky blue, Sydney fans don't want sky blue for Heart.

And by the way, where the hell are Man City expecting to get new fans from if they have been so quick to alienate the current fan base?

Not ideal obviously.

But what do people want? New owners who can take the club, and possibly the league, to the next level. Or teams with different colours?

I think the point of difference- white shorts/socks v navy shorts socks is enough to differentiate. There is plenty that can be done with the trimming on the jersey to make them distinct even if the same colour is used. Could even be a slightly different shade of sky blue.
I don't necessarily think that Blackpool and Brisbane look too similar even though the "base" colour is the same.

Man City are using the Heart license to expand their brand (and possibly to shift costs to Australia to meet the financial fair play rules). So I would expect them to tap into the eurosnob market.

Would be an interesting fight. Sydney FC v Melbourne City.

I agree that Sydney have a claim to the Sky Blue colour as part of their identity but you can imagine the FFA were agreeable to this when City came shopping.

Hope Melb City retain their colours btw.

If Barlow wasn't Tratevenko's in law, he would have been lining up at centreline a long time ago.

Edited by SocaWho: 15/4/2014 08:23:04 AM

I don't think they are that concerned. A successful winning side, playing good football blended in with a bunch of high profile players will certainly get new fans along.

Despite all the debating i reckon they will
average more than 12k next year. Within 5 years be up to around 20k. They're an entity that knows what it's doing. I don't think they are too worried about alienating a couple of thousand fans.

Sydney FC vs Melbourne City, the billionaire's derby.

The Million Dollar Dud Derby.

-PB

Don't see a problem with Heart/City playing in Sky Blue.


Also, makes one less team in red for when Wollongong get a team. :cool:

Where are these fans to come from? If they convert 20K Victory fans then Victory will have almost none left. And I think the MV fans who weren't rusted on have already switched to Heart.

AFL fans? I don't think they're too keen on embracing a "foreign game", and certainly not to the extent of becoming regulars at home matches every fortnight.

And as for the bunch of high profile players, the salary cap ensures that they cannot buy premierships the way City, Chelsea and PSG have done over the years.

It'll still be a bunch of more or less average footballers with two marquees. They may get two incredible marquees but even that isn't enough for a title.

Well done Scott Barlow.
Those on here being critical of SFC attitude have no idea. A club's colours represent the area or city they are from - not the owners.
Who's to say if Man City will be around in the future? They could sell and move on and then what we change the colours again because a new owner wants poka dots?
FFA have the decision and this is a no brainer...there should be no chnage in colours. If they don't like it...sell and bugger off.

Like Adelaide already do?

The only person I know who actually calls them the "Sky Blues" that isn't on the SFC payroll is Simon Hill.

Not even close. Go away, little man.

No butthurt, just standing up for what's ours.

Like you would if the pension didn't transfer into your account every second Thursday.

Get a new picture mack. And try not to stretch the page next time.

This seems the simplest way for Heart to keep the original colours, and they can do as MV have and make a sky blue away jersey.

With only 10 teams in the comp Sydney has a point.

Would love to hear what those agreeing with it would say if their club was bought out and their colours changed lock, stock and barrel.

I don't think they are that concerned. A successful winning side, playing good football blended in with a bunch of high profile players will certainly get new fans along. [/quote]

Re marquee, i beg to differ. Case in point Sydney Fc. Last year and this year they avg more than 18k, more than 6k more than they had back in 2011 despite playing some of the worst football and not even making finals last year. You would have thought the intro of the wanderers would have diluted the fc fan base even more but it has 't.

My point is that ADP was the perfect marquee for attracting new fans. And i don't see why people won't flock to watch melb city if they have a successful team on the field with a couple of high profile players to get the casual fan along. With time some of these casuals will convert into regulars.

If they do go to sky blue it should be partial.

There kit should be sky blue and red. Could probably make a nice kit out of that.

I fail to see where Sydney fc have any sort of say about this in the first place.

But what is the point of compromising?!?

This wasn't an amalgamation. This was a takeover.

Nobody has paid $11M or whatever it was to oversee two completely different clubs become one loving partnership.

LOL, as if anyone didn’t see this coming. Heart should have formed an alliance with South Melbourne. The FFA have erred here.

Take the FFA to Court, South. South’s Licence is registered in Melbourne, Australia. Man City’s Licence is English-based but the owners are from the Gulf.

What’s the difference, on discriminatory grounds?

I think it shows disrespect to the A-league and it's short but still important history. I feel like the A-league may stop this for now and they will possibly go inverted for home and away compared to the Man City city but when promotion and relegation is introduced here they will probably go Sky Blue. Without Man City backing them this would be suicide and really shows they are not trying keep the Melbourne Heart part of the clubs history around.

Some other kits they could go with are the original black with white shorts which would probably just be a copy of Man City's away kit but using white shorts. More interestingly they could go with their 1956 FA cup final kit of Maroon. This would also give them a good slogan to use (From Wikipedia)





This again would most likely just be temporary until they can use more teams in a pyramid system to change to Sky Blue. Also if they get blocked I could still see them using sky blue home kits for ACL home games which they would see as more important than A-league games as mainland Asia is a lot bigger than Australia.

Eurosnobs who stay up to 2am every second week watching the EPL but don't care about the A-league on in prime time. Get a big Marquee and a pre-season friendly against Man City and they could pick up 5k new fans

Thupercoach, Where did the WSW fans come from, certainly did not take away from SFC's numbers. I don't think it will be a case of taking fans from MV, just a case of better utilising the potential fan base in Melbourne.

Edited by spfc: 15/4/2014 10:22:37 AM

It's a bit like the gay marriage debate really.

If you don't like Melbourne City in sky blue, then don't follow them.

I can't see SFC having a leg to stand on in this. All remnants of Heart will be eradicated and they join the NZ Knights to be little more than a footnote in A-League history.

Eurosnobs won't stay around long enough, the standard isn't high enough for their liking.

As for SFC, there was a clear, geographical point of difference between us and the new team.

Just as Heart have struggled with differentiation, so will City. But by getting away from red and white they will lose some of the fans they have today.

Losing some out of 'not many' won't cause Melbourne Citeh's front office too much heartache, I'm sure.

They should have read the fine print, South Melbourne could have gone ahead and bought CCM and then discovered they had to play most of their games at Gosford. The FFA actually owns the club , and control what they are called, jerseys etc even though they are usually a rubber stamp. The only thing I think they have not approved from the owners is Clive Palmer freedom of speech jersey. If the FFA decide to put their foot down this time they are 100% entitled to do it.

If they can make a decent argument it will damage the leagues overall marketability having two of the same color teams in terms of things like pre-season promotional material or that this will damage their product significantly enough they may argue the FFA are breaking possible promises which come with owning a license to an A-league club. We have no idea what is exactly stated in the licenses. on the recent license extension Gallop said:



Now if Sydney think this makes licences less valuable or means they will not have the peace in mind to further invest in the league the FFA are going against their own objectives and breaking possibly contractual agreements set out in the licenses.

Scott Barlow is the Chairman, Tony Pignata is the CEO. I'm not sure that the Chairman is even a remunerated role, maybe someone else knows. I'm quite certain at the FFA at least it's only an honorary role.

It's Manchester City, one of the world's richest clubs, who have bought out one of a start up leagues poorest performing (off field) clubs. Money talks and if Cardiff City, a Premier League club with 115 years of history, known as 'The Blue Birds can have their colours changed to Red than Heart sure as hell have theirs changed to blue.

I don't get the argument people are throwing about with existing sky blue clubs like Marconi and Sutherland. They already exist and are entrenched in their communitys' history. Should either of them qualify to play in the a-league I don't think Sydney would have any problem with them playing in sky blue.
The issue for me is that Melbourne Heart or City changing to sky blue is not with creating another a team in this country synonymous with that colour but the taking of ownership of that colour in this country by a team that plays on the other side of the world. When we see Melbourne play, in my mind, their colours should say Melbourne to the viewer not Manchester City.

i actually think that looks pretty good

lets face it Man City are pretty much bigger than Australian sport, sydney fc fans are deluded if they think they are a factor in this, man city wear a different shade of blue anyways its not like both home jersey's are going to look the same, and away jersey's were created for a reason

sydney fc and sydney fc fans are threatened by fucking everything

Edited by swarth: 15/4/2014 11:20:44 AM

I doubt very much that SFC can argue for a monopoly use of a colour. And we know the FFA will side with the new money coming into the league.

Catania does great with their kits and that colour combo.

While i can understand sydneys/nsw link with the colour sky blue, i think that now with the FFA Cup starting and one day hopefully becoming an Australian mainstream event and all the teams that wear sky blue, red, stripes etc barlows view becomes invalid.

Plus we have away kits for a reason ffs.

So you think FFA weren't involved in the negotiations? .....and you don't think those details were concluded at the time of negotiations? :-s

I think that looks great!

I'd be very much in favour of a colour mix. It offends no one, they won't lose the existing fan base,it keeps Citeh happy and we retain Sky Blue. Win win all round.

Edited by thupercoach: 15/4/2014 11:58:32 AM

Edited by thupercoach: 15/4/2014 12:00:14 PM

Marconi to file a formal complain against Sydney FC.

agree. if the premier league was 8 years old with ten teams teams just starting out - they would be a lot more particular about the colours.

you cant just let the money take away the culture, otherwise your left with something as culturally deficit as queensland.

That's not as awful as I was imagining... :-k

Maybe they did have a large role to play in these changed license terms as far as length but they announced at the time of the take over they were going to consult the fans and nothing of this sort was decided. They might have asked the FFA if they would have no issues with a change but there is no way the FFA would have changed the terms of the license regards this as its the cornerstone for being able to continue clubs after their owners go broke or turn rebel. The FFA is not going to give away that power.

As a Sydney fan I don't really care. I'm more concerned at seeing an A-League club being completely rehashed at the drop of a hat. It could potentially happen to any club.

The downside of a franchised league.

=d> totally agree

And Sutherland against them.

Marconi were green for a while weren't they.

Tbf, there isn't much stopping this happening to any club in the world unless they are publicly owned by a majority, so I wouldn't be all that concerned.

I dont have much of a problem with this, other than what happens when ManCity are no longer the owners?? Ultimately I think this should be down to Heart(??) fans as they are the ones that will be wearing and paying for the jersey.

Riiight. So from what I can gather, you are arguing that FFA 'own' all IP concerned with the individual franchises. Which is fairly correct as they have 100% control over the use and distribution of said IP as per their terms of licensees.

But none of that has anything to do with with what Melbourne City will be wearing next year. Just like when the consortium that applied for Queensland Roar requested as part of their bid to FFA that they will turn out in 'oranje' as part of their brand. To which FFA agreed upon - they had an agreement and hence the licence was granted.

Melbourne's new ownership negotiations are finished and the deals are done. The fact that they've had to put in an 'official request' to change name etc is merely an administrative formality.

Seriously though, if the City of Melbourne's colours are red and white, wouldn't the best option be to keep the colours and change the name from Heart to City?

And does happen, with Cardiff this year, and with club relocations like Wimbledon/MK Dons. In all cases the relevant association needed to approve the changes, and occasionally overruled the owners like in the Hull Tigers case.

Let's look at it objectively. Heart had a name that everyone ridiculed, a strip that was pretty cool, a lack of a separate identity in the city, a small dedicated fan base, and no historical record of proud achievements. The strip is the only positive the club has but that is far outweighed by the negatives. If any club was to be ripe for a change of identity it would have to be MH.



Edited by Angus: 15/4/2014 01:23:40 PM

Yeah, it would be best. But if they change to Sky Blue Im not gonna get my nickers in a twist over it. We'll just have to make sure that our jersey is better than theirs.

the sky blue version of their home kit is complete class, it just looks beautiful so you will have to come up with something impressive to beat that

wtf
like there aren't already a-league teams with the same colours.

barlow you fucking mouth breather

Nice gem: http://s14.postimg.org/88mrfgejl/Football_Men.jpg

Also, apparently NSW's colours aren't sky blue. It's a different shade (Light blue and Mid blue): http://www.nsw.gov.au/about-nsw/symbols-emblems

Euro snobs have their own teams, and they won't support Mini Man City, which is what Heart will have become.

I think this is a winner.

It just needs the man city white shorts like below. I also adjusted the blue to theirs as well.

That second link has only fueled my desire to get Sydney FC to incorporate the Blue Groper into their identity.

Isn't 'The Groper', Seb Ryall's nickname.

I'll see myself out. :-"

Not bothering to read 4 pages of waffle.

But, why not change colours?

They can wear their old Heart colours in away games.

They'll wear sky blue at home.

Sydney FC had ample opportunity to forge its identity but opted not to have one.

Let this be a lesson to teams who think xx FC or xx United is all they need to brand a team

I'm a SFC fan and frankly, I don't care what Melbourne City does. When we play each other at Allianz, they'll probably be playing in red colours anyway.

If we have to modify our colours slightly to differentiate our brand, so what? As long as whatever we change it to is representative of Sydney, and as long as the fans are consulted, I'm cool with it. I've always found the whole "Sydney is Sky Blue" thing a bit contrived anyway. Sky Blue is traditionally the colour of NSW, not Sydney.

The old colonial flag of Sydney is actually royal blue and orange. We could always add some orange back into the Jersey, as many fans have been asking for. Or you could even add a dash of Green on the Jersey somewhere - Sydney is, after all, nicknamed the "emerald city".

This really isn't the end of the world. Most football teams go through a colour change at some point, especially in their early years.

Wrong question. Flip it round, as the right question is: why change the colours?

The majority of Melbourne Heart supporters want the club to keep the colours Red and White, the colours of the Melbourne flag are red and white (The colours of Man City's NYC club are also the colours of the New York City flag), and Sydney FC is sky blue and is against Heart changing its colours to sky blue. So why change the colours?

Because the colours are a part of a dead club that failed miserably.

ignorance is bliss hey?? Forgetting that Marconi were green, with white shorts. But never let the truth get in the way of a good story...??

Yeah 442 is going down hill. When Cardiff changed colours every football fan in Britain said it was wrong, with the suggestion Hull City should be Hull Tigers there is very little support across the league. Fans realise if the name and colours of their club were to change they would oppose it. Yet here we have a situation in Australia where the owners are trying the change the identity of a club (a young one yes, but still one beloved by their fans) and opposition supporters simply take it as an opportunity to get stuck into Heart and Sydney.

People on here take anything as an opportunity to take shots at other teams.

Funnily enough Central Coast was the sky blue team back in the day.

i can sympathise with you wanting to keep your team colours but sydney fc are just a joke when it comes to worrying about another team having sky blue so should be mocked, heart fans not so much

Hey Jim,


Go fuck yourself,


Regards

Fuck 'em, mate.

We're the only team that stood on our own two feet, never asked for a handout from anyone.

Marconi didn't wear sky blue at all until after Sydney FC came around?

Yup, they definitely should've been the Sydney Blue Gropers. Hindsight is always 20/20

I wouldn't say that, I have no doubt the FFA would have been involved in selling the club's operations off to Man City. The FFA as the ultimate authority over all the A-League clubs have a huge say, and it was in their interests to bring in a big name venture.

Seriously comparing Cardiff for a team who has failed miserably and only existed for 4 years?

Heart logic.

Luv you Steffy.

I'm confident the red and white will remain, in some fashion at least, probably with the addition of some sky blue. My guess is that sky blue will be more prominent in our away kit.

I believe we 'll find that City won't rebrand the club totally in their own image, and won't alienate current supporters. Heart's four year history and club culture will be respected. Some people may scoff at this, but I'd suggest wait untill all is revealed. If the new owners don't respect our fans and our history, I'll be one of the first to drop my support for the club. But I'm confident that this isn't a Cardiff/Vincent Tan situation. If I'm wrong, I'll be happy to come here and own up to it.

#MelbourneisSkyBlue
#SydneyFCisFeelingBlue

Indeed.

Non-SFC fans just trolling SFC again - Barlow makes fair points. Sobowski you have got to be kidding, the traditional top 4 tiers (alone) of the English football league pyramid equals 92 clubs. Never mind the Conference tiers and co below.

The A-League is 10.

Many of those clubs are more than a century old, immersed in their local communities. We know the A-League's story and it's clubs' attempts to set up roots too, including the likes of 'expansion clubs' Wanderers and 'Heart'!

The contrasts, contrasting contexts, are clear for all - It's Apples and Oranges.

All the 10 and eventually 12-14 teams need to be distinct, especially in this market-place. The seconds of screen-time on the commercial media etc... they need to be identifiable and relatively unique - for both the local support base and the wider league supporters and even random punters. It's just practically appropriate, let alone other reasons.

Edited by GloryPerth: 15/4/2014 09:11:43 PM

People can't be serious over the use of red - we can all see how distinctive Adelaide, Heart and Wanderers are. Heart is as much white than red in their colours, especially alternate. Wanderers are more black aswell as red. Adelaide are well-arguably the true 'red' team of the comp, reflected in their colours.

Perhaps IF Melbourne City proposed Sky Blue as a 'minority colour', mixed with Red, White, Black, Maroon or whatever - that could work? Though colour scheme wise? ugh! Though the Jets have set the bar low there too, in the past :p

The main issue I see is 'distinct difference' - each club has to be as uniquely identifiable as possible, including in their playing strips. Also, again, with just 10 teams it's just not practical and there are still many 'colour combinations' co-ordinations that could be employed too - As Sobowski or somebody could also well find, looking through the hundred or so professional (And even Semi-pro) football clubs in England!



Hmm interesting. Queue Roars fans... ? :p Who can talk in terms of long-term? I hate to sound pessimistic, but who really knows if Man City's ownership will even last to then? Many suggest these owners are in it for the 'long-term' but we've seen others come and go and the league and it's football pyramid expanding and evolving to the levels you suggest won't happen for a very long time, especially at this rate. Heck, it's unlikely to happen at all?!

Edited by GloryPerth: 15/4/2014 09:10:44 PM

I was messing around on a design a kit website today and came up with this. This way we keep the red and white and incorporate the sky blue.

Well said. People are fishing away here but deep down everyone agrees with Barlow!

Perhaps - that was a travesty though and the club will outlast those owners, no doubt (Especially with the turn-over of English football club ownership these days!) and as soon as that ownership group is gone I would not be surprised to see the club colours and what not, return to 'tradition'. Same with the latest owner of Hull City and his toying with the club's name etc... Unlike the A-League, these are old, well established clubs and many outlast the whims of these fly-by-night owners.

In the A-League's case, the power or control is from top-down, rather than bottom-up with the English clubs (Where, with many of those examples - fans have just re-booted their clubs themselves after their original clubs went bust or 'moved' like MK Dons), so as people have discussed it's up to the FFA and the FFA value the importance of the optimum value in their brand with obvious caveats in relation to the progress of football in this competitive marketplace. IIRC That's why the league also rejects the likes of 'Red Bull' and the like!

Edited by GloryPerth: 15/4/2014 09:25:46 PM