New video. The Centenary with Tony Robinson

[1960maaan]

Highlights all done I'll start putting other odd stuff up. As the film company seems to have gone and it was 20 years ago, I thought I'd start with this one celebrating 100 years of Bristol City. That's 100 years of Bristol City, not other clubs changing names and becoming someone else that later you add the years on ! 
Anyway , an nice gentle look at our past in all it's dubious glory.

 

[handsofclay]

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

Highlights all done I'll start putting other odd stuff up. As the film company seems to have gone and it was 20 years ago, I thought I'd start with this one celebrating 100 years of Bristol City. That's 100 years of Bristol City, not other clubs changing names and becoming someone else that later you add the years on ! 
Anyway , an nice gentle look at our past in all it's dubious glory.

 

Absolute rubbish. Bristol South End had the same directors, players, manager, ground, supporters, printers of programmes, staff, etc, etc as the newly christened Bristol City. Bristol South End were therefore the same club as Bristol City. Just as Bristol City are the same club despite changing their name to BCFC (1982) Ltd 35 years ago.

Bristol City's centenary was really in either 1994 or 1987 dependant on whether we follow the Bristol South End/ Bristol City line or the Bedminster line from the amalgamation of 1900. Seeing that the season following amalgamation the majority of players were ex Bedminster and the ground, Ashton Gate, was Bedminster's, I would suggest 1887 as the year of foundation of the club we follow. It was definitely not 1897!

Ironic, isn't it, that Bristol City Council recognise the roots of Bristol City by naming a street off of St John's Lane Bristol South End - odd thing to do for a club that in your calculations only lasted three years more than 120 years ago - but the club itself doesn't acknowledge this on the badge the players sport!

[Sleepy1968]

Thanks for this @1960maaan. I great trip down memory lane. Even the most recent stuff is so old no one under 25 will remember any of it. I just missed out on seeing 'The Cheese' play, but I've always wondered how far we/he would have gone had he not had that career ending injury.

Anyway, keep up the good work.

[BCFCGav]

57 minutes ago, handsofclay said:

Absolute rubbish. Bristol South End had the same directors, players, manager, ground, supporters, printers of programmes, staff, etc, etc as the newly christened Bristol City. Bristol South End were therefore the same club as Bristol City. Just as Bristol City are the same club despite changing their name to BCFC (1982) Ltd 35 years ago.

Bristol City's centenary was really in either 1994 or 1987 dependant on whether we follow the Bristol South End/ Bristol City line or the Bedminster line from the amalgamation of 1900. Seeing that the season following amalgamation the majority of players were ex Bedminster and the ground, Ashton Gate, was Bedminster's, I would suggest 1887 as the year of foundation of the club we follow. It was definitely not 1897!

Ironic, isn't it, that Bristol City Council recognise the roots of Bristol City by naming a street off of St John's Lane Bristol South End - odd thing to do for a club that in your calculations only lasted three years more than 120 years ago - but the club itself doesn't acknowledge this on the badge the players sport!

Bristol South End became Bristol City in 1897, so the club Bristol City was born in 1897.

The 1900 amalgamation with Bemmy is irrelevant as we effectively absorbed them, remaining BCFC in the process. 

That's how I've always looked at it.

[handsofclay]

32 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

Bristol South End became Bristol City in 1897, so the club Bristol City was born in 1897.

The 1900 amalgamation with Bemmy is irrelevant as we effectively absorbed them, remaining BCFC in the process. 

That's how I've always looked at it.

Yes and Bristol City, following your line of argument, died in 1982 when they LEGALLY changed their name! You know that is rubbish just as South End fans knew it was exactly the same club etc back in 1897.

Jeez, Leyton Orient have changed their name loads of times. How can you be so fickle as to deny a club it's history prior to a change of name!

As for the absorption in 1900...where did Bemmy play????

[CotswoldRed]

46 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

Bristol South End became Bristol City in 1897, so the club Bristol City was born in 1897.

The 1900 amalgamation with Bemmy is irrelevant as we effectively absorbed them, remaining BCFC in the process. 

That's how I've always looked at it.

As far as I'm aware there are very few clubs who choose to ignore their origins in this way. 

[handsofclay]

10 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

As far as I'm aware there are very few clubs who choose to ignore their origins in this way. 

We are the only club who makes ourselves out to be younger than we actually are! Every other club is proud of their origins.

For nearly 100 years City's foundation was set at 1894. 1897 never appeared anywhere linked with the birth of our club. Then a new set of directors took over in the mid 1990s, just missing the centenary. They thought they had lost a golden marketing opportunity until they thought they could use the simple change of name and turning pro in 1897 to market that date instead. That's when the spin began. Unfortunately, as evidenced here, there are some gullible enough to fall for it. 

[CotswoldRed]

Just now, handsofclay said:

We are the only club who makes ourselves out to be younger than we actually are! Every other club is proud of their origins.

For nearly 100 years City's foundation was set at 1894. 1897 never appeared anywhere linked with the birth of our club. Then a new set of directors took over in the mid 1990s, just missing the centenary. They thought they had lost a golden marketing opportunity until they thought they could use the simple change of name and turning pro in 1897 to market that date instead. That's when the spin began. Unfortunately, as evidenced here, there are some gullible enough to fall for it. 

Exactly as I see it. 

A very sorry, and plastic, manipulation of the facts. 

[freezer]

For me. We we're formed in 1894 as Bristol South End, who became Bristol City and then amalgamated with Bedminster. 

@Olé get designing the merchandise babber. I'm in. South Bristol worked. Let's go the whole hog with Bristol South End and the date.

Up The City

[WTFiGO!?!]

1 hour ago, handsofclay said:

Yes and Bristol City, following your line of argument, died in 1982 when they LEGALLY changed their name! You know that is rubbish just as South End fans knew it was exactly the same club etc back in 1897.

Jeez, Leyton Orient have changed their name loads of times. How can you be so fickle as to deny a club it's history prior to a change of name!

As for the absorption in 1900...where did Bemmy play????

I broadly agree with your view of our origins but if we're to be purer still, should we not change the name back to Bristol South End?  

Preston North End did not bother changing to Preston City on joining the national league, as we changed from South End to City. 

Re Bedminster FC, I believe their lads were happy enough at the time to sacrifice their name as it meant they got to obtain league status via Bristol City.  That was quite some compromise to be fair but who knows?  Maybe they saw the writing on the wall and saw that they'd be forever in Bristol City's shadow if they didn't?  

What a bloody shame Eastville Rovers never had the same sense!

 

[BCFCGav]

1 hour ago, handsofclay said:

We are the only club who makes ourselves out to be younger than we actually are! Every other club is proud of their origins.

For nearly 100 years City's foundation was set at 1894. 1897 never appeared anywhere linked with the birth of our club. Then a new set of directors took over in the mid 1990s, just missing the centenary. They thought they had lost a golden marketing opportunity until they thought they could use the simple change of name and turning pro in 1897 to market that date instead. That's when the spin began. Unfortunately, as evidenced here, there are some gullible enough to fall for it. 

Not so much gullible as it is not getting too hot and bothered about the technicalities of the clubs formation. The badge says 1897 and the official stance is 1897 so what's the harm? Anything of any real note in the clubs history (joining the FL, the FA Cup final loss, finishing runners up in div 1.) happened after then anyway.

[1960maaan]

8 hours ago, handsofclay said:

Absolute rubbish.

Thanks for your support, glad you enjoy my input.

my point , that you missed, was that the other Bristol club(that ironically spent a large time outside Bristol) go on about being the oldest club blah blah. Well , there has been an actual Bristol City longer than there has been a wherever Rovers. I don't know why the club didn't use the original birth date of THE Bristol club, but that wasn't my point.

[handsofclay]

8 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

Not so much gullible as it is not getting too hot and bothered about the technicalities of the clubs formation. The badge says 1897 and the official stance is 1897 so what's the harm? Anything of any real note in the clubs history (joining the FL, the FA Cup final loss, finishing runners up in div 1.) happened after then anyway.

There was no formation in 1897 just a change of name upon adopting professionalism to enter the Southern League (the SL clubs voted Bristol South End into that league having not done so the previous couple of seasons that they had applied).

You say that the badge says 1897 and the official stance is 1897 so what's the harm? If we were taken over by Americans they might organise officially to commemorate the centenary of the outbreak of WWII in 2041. Do we then go along with it because it would do no harm or do we think, heck there were millions killed in the two years where they are airbrushing history and millions who fought and were affected by the war in that time that will no longer be acknowledged.

I dare say there were thousands of Bristol South End fans who went to every match they could in the three years before the name change and were proud to say they had been supporting the club for X amount of years before their deaths, that X amount including the three years from 1894. There would be others who supported the club and died before the change of name. It is disrespectful to them to say they have to knock three years off or say that they never supported our club at all, simply because someone seen fit to tamper with history to take advantage of a marketing opportunity in the mid 1990s.

[handsofclay]

4 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

Thanks for your support, glad you enjoy my input.

my point , that you missed, was that the other Bristol club(that ironically spent a large time outside Bristol) go on about being the oldest club blah blah. Well , there has been an actual Bristol City longer than there has been a wherever Rovers. I don't know why the club didn't use the original birth date of THE Bristol club, but that wasn't my point.

OK, I accept your original post was tongue and cheek and aimed at our neighbours. I apologize for holding you to account for it. I mistakenly thought you were making out that unlike clubs such as Leicester City (Leicester Fosse) or Manchester United (Newton Heath) and many, many others that we had kept the same name since our inception which isn't the case.

 

[Wolf Island]

10 hours ago, handsofclay said:

We are the only club who makes ourselves out to be younger than we actually are! Every other club is proud of their origins.

For nearly 100 years City's foundation was set at 1894. 1897 never appeared anywhere linked with the birth of our club. Then a new set of directors took over in the mid 1990s, just missing the centenary. They thought they had lost a golden marketing opportunity until they thought they could use the simple change of name and turning pro in 1897 to market that date instead. That's when the spin began. Unfortunately, as evidenced here, there are some gullible enough to fall for it. 

It does cover all the various possible dates and mergers and name changes within the first two minutes of the video. Anyway, thanks to @1960maaan great video.