The A-League of silly club nicknames
Roar Pro
By Mr Sports, 19 Nov 2009 Mr Sports is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- A-League, football, melbourne heart, Socceroos
Related coverage
There is a debate going on as to whether the new Melbourne A-League franchise should retain the working title of Melbourne Heart or whether they should adopt a new name.
However, this debate misses the point entirely. The real debate should be, what in the world is wrong with the people selecting team names for A-League franchises?
The A-League has undoubtedly the stupidest collection of team names in world sports.
We have a Glory, a Roar, a Fury, a Victory, and presumably with the addition of Heart, they will be able to form Captain Planet.
Who comes up with this nonsense?
I can only assume that it is the work of rugby league or AFL saboteurs masquerading as ‘marketing experts’ perhaps using the Dark Side of the Force to influence A-League bosses.
Why else would otherwise perfectly sane and competent sports administrators select various meaningless nouns as the nicknames for teams that they presumably intended people to take seriously?
The question to my mind is what is wrong with using either local flora and fauna or the tired and true mythical beasts for a team nickname?
Ok, I’ll admit that going with the name of a plant is always risky and sure a lot of the local fauna is already spoken for but there are still some wonderful creatures left available for a club to use.
How about the Melbourne Emus or the Melbourne Platypi?
Oh and don’t try telling me the Emu and Platypus have nothing to do with soccer because they have about as much to do with it as a random emotion such as ‘Fury’ or a random bodily function such as ‘Roar.’
On reflection, perhaps the answer to why the A-League chooses such ridiculous names is not so difficult.
Perhaps it’s the old truism “monkey see, monkey do” at work. After all the number one football team in the currently has arguably the silliest name of them all.
I mean seriously, Socceroos?
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Phoenix need more than flash in the pan crowds (133)
- ‘New football’ fans may help save the game in Australia (124)
- Does Tasmania have a case for A-League inclusion? (119)
- What happened in Port Said was not a football riot (118)
- Is the ACL the FFA’s Achilles heel? (70)
- Magilton struggling to make a mark (68)
- A-League needs to entertain more consistently (61)
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (10)
- Capello ‘walks’ from England’s top job (13)
- Fabio Capello quits as England manager after Terry fallout (3)
- Kewell confident Victory can make charge
- FIFA decision a blow to Olyroos
- Why Manchester United are never really beaten (12)
- Die Lowen a chance for a Bundesliga rise? (2)
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (10)
- Capello ‘walks’ from England’s top job (13)
- Why Manchester United are never really beaten (12)
- Die Lowen a chance for a Bundesliga rise? (2)
- Hey, Victory! Give them kids a go (9)
- The problem with Melbourne Victory’s ‘hole’ season (25)
- Time for a Sydney FC clean out (24)
- Explore:
- A-League, football, melbourne heart, Socceroos
albe said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:59am | Report comment
Socceroos aka Australia … its a nickname, that is all. Most world football nations have them, no big deal. For me they’ll always be ‘Australia’ first and foremost.
As for the rest of the league, we have a decent mix of names. Some traditional, some not so much.
Luke W said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:01am | Report comment
I don’t mind Glory, Victory or Heart at all. I agree they are from the “new school” of team names, but I like them. The less said about Roar and Fury the better.
Chris said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:23am | Report comment
“We have a Glory, a Roar, a Fury, a Victory, and presumably with the addition of Heart, they will be able to form Captain Planet.” – Great line, the first time I’ve actually laughed while reading the Roar.
sheek said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment
I agree, Mr Sports, the A-League probably has the “stupidest collection of team names”.
Roar was formally Brisbane Lions, before Fitzroy Lions became Brisbane, BTW. But the AFL successfully argued they were the bigger name team (before A-League) & you couldn’t have two ‘Brisbane Lions’. So Roar it became. Fair enough there, as far as having only one Brisbane Lions is concerned.
John O’Neill recently suggested the Melbourne S15 franchise find another name apart from Rebels, as historically, it gave the impression of being anti-establishment. Of course, the real reason appears to be O’Neill’s desire to wash away any trace of the previous ARC & administration before he returned.
Someone else suggested the reason why we have the ethereal type names – Heart, Glory, Victory, Fury, etc – is so we don’t offend anyone in a highly litigatious world. Frankly, it’s a cop-out as usual, but there you have it.
As for Socceroos, it will probably become an anachronism, not that it is really such a bad handle. The Socceroos have the opportunity to change to Footyroos, although i suspect some smarty has put a patent on it. I thought you couldn’t do that sort of thing anymore?
So there’s always Emus. Anyway, no major team sport is officially called the Emus, & it is our national bird. Like the Kangaroo, it can’t walk backwards (retreat) naturally. It is also an aggressive, pesty animal, & can “run the pants off a kangaroo-roo-roo”.
Good qualities for players in a national team to have! Won’t retreat, never surrenders, niggles their opponents, & outflanks them in the process!!!
Aka said | November 19th 2009 @ 11:19am | Report comment
In general I don’t have a problem with the names. They are contemporary in that the trend at the moment is to use ‘ethereal type’ names, it used to be that teams were named after animals – in many cases just as meaningless, or parent companies.
Virtually any name is prone to sound contrived even if you are aiming for instant tradition like wanderers or rovers (what century are we in?).
The attachment and appreciation for the names will only come with time – more quickly with team success. I’ve heard many people comment that the Melbourne Heart should keep the name now as that’s what they have been referred to since they were vying for the license. And yet the name was ridiculed originally.
SImone` said | November 19th 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
The captain planet comment was hilarious… The rest of this article was just silly… “Local Fauna” -> seriously?
Tink we need more Euro traditional football names, such as Sporting, Atletic etc…
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:45pm | Report comment
The European names don’t suit the Australian A-League franchises. “Sporting, Atletic” etc are indicative of a “greater club” that has more to offer.
Stuttgart Kickers is a name that indicates the place (as most teams do) and the Kickers refers to a decision to ONLY play football whereas a lot of other clubs (across Europe) combine different sports within their organisation. Real Madrid with basketball is quite well-known, Unterhaching’s logo ( http://www.fussballwurst.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/spvggunterhaching.png ) will tell you the story of their club and so on.
The franchises just needed to get away from words such as Fury and Glory, it’s like American people naming their kids with the characteristics that they want them to have when they grow up, there is a whole generation of girls named “Hope”, “Charity”, “Honor” etc.
Sometimes marketing people have their place in sport, other times they just ruin it. The naming of A-League clubs certainly falls in the second category, I bet they listed of possible newspaper puns while coming up with the names and used it as part of their decision.
Nam Turk said | November 20th 2009 @ 5:08am | Report comment
I knew this couldn’t run its course without blaming Americans…
Redb said | November 19th 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
Port Adelaide have led the way. Hire a seven year old, problem solved.
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:46pm | Report comment
Didn’t Port Adelaide make the decision in a televised event?
I seem to remember they had shortlisted the names and then they had some tv show where they decided on … “Power” … From memory Pirates was a name that made it close to the end and for mine (while very American) would have made much more sense being on the coast.
Andrew said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:50pm | Report comment
Storm isn’t much better than Power to be honest. I just don’t understand how people can feel an attachment to a club that has a stupid moniker like that.
AndyRoo said | November 19th 2009 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
I can’t beleive Fire Sharks is still available for an Australian team.
I do doubt though that in 100 years people will be talking about the latest expansion team with the likes of “why couldn’t they go for a traditional name like Fury”
jmo said | November 19th 2009 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
I just watched the news report on France vs Ireland and forget the hand ball by Henry, that’s just a bad miss by the ref, what about when Nicolas Anelka tripped over nothing more than a sunbeam in the penalty zone. A Sunbeam ! ! It was ten times uglier than the hand ball. His team should be called The Sunbeams.
Michael said | November 19th 2009 @ 6:52pm | Report comment
As opposed to:
Red Devils, The Old Lady, The Toffees, The Villains, The Baggies, The Citizens, The Spurs, The Gunners, The Tigers, The Cottagers, and The Lactics
Nam Turk said | November 20th 2009 @ 5:09am | Report comment
Don’t forget the Lilywhites. That’s intimidating.