- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The new coach of A-league team John van't Schip (right) takes questions from the media in Melbourne, Monday, Oct. 12, 2009. Dutchman van't Schip has been appointed coach of Melbourne Heart team whose syndicate hopes to gain entry to the Soccer A-League. AAP Image/Julian Smith
Sydney Rovers FC. The name, and colours, of Australia’s newest football club has caused much debate on forums and blogs across the Internet. And while it seems they can’t please everyone with their choice of branding, there are some trends emerging as new clubs are born in this expansion phase.
There appears to be a move away from the Americanised names of inanimate things that appeared so popular during the last round of expansion – Port Power, North Queensland Fury, Brisbane Roar, and so on – to more traditional choices.
When discussing the potential names for the new Sydney franchise, Ian Rowden wrote on the Roar: “So those of you who want us called The Octopuses, The Buffalos, The Rhinos, The Metros, The Kickers, The Strikers … blah, blah, blah. Sorry to disappoint you, but we are going to stick to our strategy of remaining traditional.”
Likewise, in an interview with FourFourTwo Australia, Melbourne Heart CEO Scott Munn said: “Personally, I like historical names. It represents what football’s all about. Let’s not kid ourselves, this is the biggest game in the world, so why try and Americanise it?”
Maybe they have learned a lesson from the aforementioned clubs – Fury, Power, Roar – who, partly as a result of their odd branding choices, have truly failed to engage with their supporter bases.
The Victory may not be a tangible thing either, but it is no less evocative and is more of a generic name than the likes of the Fury.
It’s interesting, therefore, that the names discussed for the second Sydney franchise – Rovers, Rangers, Wanderers – hint at a return to the traditions of Anglo-football, joining the likes of United and FC in the comp, while the colours of the team reflect the history of football in the region rather than a baseless branding.
It’s been fascinating to watch this process and how such patterns have emerged, let alone how such decisions are made and rationalised.
It’s also painfully clear what works and what doesn’t, and new football clubs need to heed these lessons to ensure the branding and naming of their clubs suits the market they exist in.
I’ve always thought it odd, therefore, that the Gold Coast franchises chose such traditional names and uninspiring club branding considering it is a place of such eccentricity and vibrancy.
Instead they went for the traditional and conservative United brand in the A-League, while the AFL side has registered FC for their name.
Not only is it important to get your branding right, it’s also important to ensure it is done so in a correct manner.
In the aforementioned interview with Scott Munn, he states: “I’ve been looking at some blogs and some have suggested we’ve already decided a name, but I can assure you, it’s never been discussed at a board level. It’s a process so far of engagement and getting the feedback.”
Heart is the syndicate name and the readers of the Herald Sun will help decide the name of the club.
But surely they are too well associated with the Heart name now to consider any future change, and the mundane branding that has appeared during club press conferences hints at an indecisive direction on this front – disappointing considering the head start they had time wise on Sydney Rovers FC.
Let’s hope both clubs look and sound good when they make their debuts over the course of the next two seasons.
It’s been so encouraging to see a real divergence in the look of the A-League this season with stripes, new colours and different away strips adding much to the competition.
They may appear mere aesthetic things, but they are none the less crucial ingredients to the league’s success.