handsofclay

There's a huge difference in the class of the opposition, too.

So it is black stockings for playing away. Thanks for the reveal.

Maybe we should start teasing them by sending part pictures of the card or cheque we may or may not use to buy a season ticket or just provide a couple of letters from our name and a couple of numbers from our card etc. Keep them guessing until the last possible moment about how many season tickets they're going to sell.

That's ok, just got back from playing football at the time so was out of puff and thus didn't explain it properly. To put it better: 117 years ago the coat of arms first appeared on the City shirt. The majority of years since then it HASN'T been on City's shirts, thus it can't have been that popular.

Yes, I was going to say that there were possibly other pictures which might show the players wearing a top with a badge in the same season as there are pictures in which they aren't wearing one. So it does mean there were two seasons in which they wore the badge pre-war. So it isn't as many seasons as first quoted. Also, City's nickname at that time was 'The Babes' so a robin wouldn't have appeared on a badge until after WW2 anyway, so it is only fair to count the years when the robin had a chance to appear on the shirt. It would be fair to say that seeing that the coat of arms has appeared on City shirts for 117 years it has been unpopular because the majority of those years it HASNT appeared on the shirt. Indeed, as the robin has only had chance to appear since about 1946 it can be said that the robin has appeared on the City shirt for a greater proportion of the time it could have appeared than has the coat of arms.

I've looked at all the team photos from 1901 to 1914 and some action pics of that period and we never sported a badge of any kind, except, of course, the 1909 final. Indeed, it seems that hardly any clubs sported badges during that era. So I would say the historical kits people have got it wrong. I believe I am also correct in stating that the 1909 final was the first time Manchester United sported a badge too, the red rose of Lancashire.

Fair enough, as I've stated, I'm not sure but I will check photos of the era and get back to you.

I cannot be arsed, you have shown your true colours using juvenile icons. Hey, you know what, I could do that too and rubbish every single post you've ever placed on here. But, you know what, I'm a bit more grown up than to do that and as I've stated, I haven't used any rubbish icons and never intend to. You do what you want, but don't forget to put all your crayons away after. I only debate issues with people on an adult level.

I'm not aware of City having a badge on their shirt as early as 1901. The earliest I believe, although I could be wrong, was the 1909 cup final when we had the coat of arms of Bristol on a blue shirt. I am pretty sure that both periods we have been in the top flight we had a robin on our shirt. Definitely 1976-80 and there's a fair chance that between 1906-1911 that in all the times Mrs Wedlock or other players wives hung out the washing in the days before tumble driers that Mrs Wedlock etc said 'Hey, Billy, come and look at this. There's a robin on your shirt'. Surely, that must've happened at least once!

Hey, Owl visiting, a penny for your thoughts. On another thread we are having a debate about the great news, for most, that the iconic robin and suspension bridge badge will be back on our shirts next season instead of the Bristol coat of arms. How well would it go down with Wednesday fans, like yourself, if it was announced that the owl would be replaced on your badge by the Sheffield coat of arms?

Quite agree, it doesn't need the wording as the three things used virtually say Bristol (suspension bridge) football club (the ball) and the team that plays in red and is known as The robins (City). People who say a five year old could have drawn it are condescending about its simplicity. But the very best designs always strike the beholder as simplistic. Jeez, if a design was complicated it wouldn't be fulfilling its function.

You said that you went along with what the club's decision was and the club chose 1897 (not 1987 as you state in your reply here) as you stated that there was no point in arguing about it because the club had decided that and any designer that they engaged would be told to use that year so you stated that it was in effect pointless to argue with it. However, surely if the club have decided to use the robin and suspension bridge badge it means that any designer engaged to design it will be told to use that, so applying your same logic, it is pointless arguing about it. Yet, a day later you are doing exactly what you accused those of us against 1897 of doing!! I'm confused. Btw, when I argue a point with someone I at least do not stoop to the juvenile reaction of awarding them a rubbish icon as you have done with mine. Indeed, yesterday I had the good grace to praise one of your designs, ignoring the year, and that still stands today. Indeed, all I ever do is award positive reaction. I have never awarded negative reaction for people just expressing their views. There is enough negativity without adding to it.

You were telling us yesterday that it was the club's decision to use 1897 as the date of foundation so you went along with it because that was what the club decided. Well the club seem to have decided that a design from 42 years ago is THE design, so why are you now arguing the toss about it? Yes, to me it screams out that I was designed 42 years ago. But it also screams out, 'There were some bloody good designers 42 years ago' as well.

In that case we could sell them our redundant coat of arms for Zaphod Beeblebrox!

Tbf to Ivor Guy, he comes from a generation when if there was news it was just broadcast as in President Kennedy has been assassinated.They aren't used to how news is delivered today. If Kennedy was assassinated in 2018 it would go something like this: Nov 21 - President Kennedy announces on Facebook that he will be passing by the Texas Book Depositary in Dealey Plaza, Dallas at about 12.30 tomorrow early afternoon. It would say below this info that Lee Harvey Oswald Likes This. Nov 22 - At 12.30 Jackie Kennedy would tweet that the President has been shot. At 12.31 Jackie Kennedy would post a selfie showing her self covered in blood on instagram and ask if anyone has any good ideas regarding efficient means of stain removal as her brand new outfit will be ruined otherwise. 12.31 Jackie's followers on social media start retweeting the tragic news. 12.33 The assassination is trending on Google at number 2. It fails to knock Love Island off of top spot. 12.34 News of the assassination appears on fora worldwide. 12.35 Lee Harvey Oswald takes sole credit for the assassination on Twitter and deletes all his associates on LinkedIn. 12.36 Monkeh posts on Otib that Lee Harvey Oswald sounds like the sort of target man City should be after. 12.45 Tomarse moves Monkeh's post to the Transfer Rumours Forum. 12.47 The EFL learning of City's potential interest state that Lee Harvey Oswald would have to serve a 5 match ban, slightly less than they dished out for Fammy. 1pm - Pretty well everyone in the world has heard the rumour that Kennedy has been assassinated. 1.12pm - Pretty well everyone in the world is watching a TV news channel. However, nothing is mentioned on the news because it arose online it could all be fake news. 1.20pm - News is at last officially broadcast that President Kennedy has been assassinated. 6.28pm - President Kennedy's brain appears on eBay starting price $12,000,000 with $6.75 postage. Years later, when people are asked where they were when they heard the news that President Kennedy had been assassinated they will all say the same. They were in front of a TV screen waiting to hear news that President Kennedy had been assassinated. You see how much better it is.