Jump to content
IGNORED

2016/17 kit


alexukhc

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, WTMS said:

You may wish to check your facts with historians like Ciderhead. The Robin was part of BCFC sixty years ago (?), so was the crest. Neither featured on the shirt for decades (?).

The crest however occupies the shirt now. It should not be altered without engagement with supporters.

Fans, or some of us laughed at the antics of the megalomaniac over the bridge. Bristol Sport / BCFC are acting in a similar lighter manner.

The deputy chairman of the Supporters club and FAN made a point. Why have consultative fan bodies if the are not going to be used?

Fans are the club, including those like myself who you imply are chavs.

I never implied anyone to be chavs. I described the angry robin as chavvy.

This site http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Bristol_City/Bristol_City.htm has the crest on the shirt from 1901-1903. I suppose you know better than a historical kit website though. 

Across the bridge was different to what's happening here, have we changed to play in a blue home kit? No. Have we suddenly changed our crest in a dramatic way? No. Have we picked up a new nickname out of nowhere? No. 

Even with the badge change to all red, as mentioned by others that isn't solely us doing it. Manchester United did in on one of their kits this season, now correct me if I'm wrong, but they are STILL Manchester United are they not? 

Cosultations with the fans should happen. But as others have already said to you, consulting a group of fans on the kit will always leave a huge group unhappy.

 

Please don't respond unless you actually answer or acknowledge some of those points. I've gone around in circles with you and some of the others who are anti anything Bristol Sport several times in the past and don't want to waste my time on it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Iron Man said:

That kit.. it just doesn't look like a Bristol City kit. The shade of red is too dark..

 

That was my initial reaction. It doesn't look like a Bristol City kit and it doesn't even look like a football kit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, glynriley said:

This is exactly how Nazi Germany started.......

Bristol Sport have a lot to answer for. I've heard they're also responsible for the the Irish potato famine, the bubonic plague, the  Fire of London, and my missing food vouchers 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Just Red said:

I've suddenly forgotten about the hashtags, what the he'll is going on with the red shorts????? Who the hell came up with this idea? Making Bristol proud my ass.

Presumably someone who had seen several of our previous kits with red shorts, or some of the post on here saying they like us in red shorts. 

Do you choose to be outraged at absolutely everything that isn't as you choose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, City169 said:

I never implied anyone to be chavs. I described the angry robin as chavvy.

This site http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Bristol_City/Bristol_City.htm has the crest on the shirt from 1901-1903. I suppose you know better than a historical kit website though. 

Across the bridge was different to what's happening here, have we changed to play in a blue home kit? No. Have we suddenly changed our crest in a dramatic way? No. Have we picked up a new nickname out of nowhere? No. 

Even with the badge change to all red, as mentioned by others that isn't solely us doing it. Manchester United did in on one of their kits this season, now correct me if I'm wrong, but they are STILL Manchester United are they not? 

Cosultations with the fans should happen. But as others have already said to you, consulting a group of fans on the kit will always leave a huge group unhappy.

 

Please don't respond unless you actually answer or acknowledge some of those points. I've gone around in circles with you and some of the others who are anti anything Bristol Sport several times in the past and don't want to waste my time on it again.

By implication fans who like/use the Angry Robin are chavvy ... No.

I do not disagree with a historical kits website, I am not a club historian, but the Robin is an intrinsic part of BCFC history. Maybe not your history, identity but clearly some of ours ... However that was not the point being made regarding consultation, positioning of the FC etc. A point you concede -  Consultations with the fans should happen. That consultation has not happened.

Bristol Sport are attaching #'s and slogans to the FC that are alien to the history of the club. The crest which you vehemently defend has changed colour. Yes that   -  Consultations with the fans should happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WTMS said:

By implication fans who like/use the Angry Robin are chavvy ... No.

I do not disagree with a historical kits website, I am not a club historian, but the Robin is an intrinsic part of BCFC history. Maybe not your history, identity but clearly some of ours ... However that was not the point being made regarding consultation, positioning of the FC etc. A point you concede -  Consultations with the fans should happen. That consultation has not happened.

Bristol Sport are attaching #'s and slogans to the FC that are alien to the history of the club. The crest which you vehemently defend has changed colour. Yes that   -  Consultations with the fans should happen

******* hell, now you're telling me that you know what I meant better than I do. Here it is in caps just to make it clear. I THINK THE ANGRY ROBIN LOOKS CHAVVY, I AM MAKING NO COMMENT ON THOSE WHO LIKE THE ROBIN. Is that clear enough for you?

Then you take a quote of mine and remove the rest. I said consultations should happen, BUT NOT ON THE KIT, I have already gone into why, as have others, but you seem intent on ignoring that part.

I have also said about how the crest having the colour made one colour is not unlike other clubs and even cited an example. Again you ignore this part.

 

So once again, do not respond if you are not going to address the points made, and don't delete parts of sentences or paragraphs when referring to in so you can ignore that meaning, just means you end up wasting both of our time. Yours by forming an at least partially invalid argument, and then mine in having to respond to the invalid argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...