By Adrian Musolino
February 1st 2010 @ 2:47am
Related coverage
Melbourne Heart and Rebels: A tale of two franchises
Wallaby Chris Latham (left) of the East Coast Aces (Gold Coast) and Melbourne Rebels captain and former Wallaby David Croft share a joke at Olympic Park in Melbourne, Friday, Aug. 17, 2007. (AAP Image/Julian Smith)
As the dust settles on the flurry of announcements that followed Melbourne Rebels’ clearance to join what will become the Super 15 rugby competition in 2011, there is still a heavy silence surrounding their fellow expansion side in the Victorian capital, the A-League’s Melbourne Heart.
In their embryonic stages, the Rebels have achieved more traction in 2010 than the Melbourne Heart, despite the fact the Heart debut six months (approximately) earlier than the Rebels.
With an announcement predicted to come this week from the Heart franchise – hopefully to confirm its name, strip and a website (currently only a syndicate site exists – with the term syndicate in the title!) – the long wait for news from the A-League franchise will finally come to an end. But it’s unlikely the Heart’s announcement will cause as much of a raucous as the Rebels’.
Fuelled by the scepticism and doubts about Melbourne’s ability to sustain a rugby franchise (especially alongside an NRL club), the Rebels announced some impressive signings in quick succession to form the nucleus of their structure – coach Rod Macqueen and former Melbourne Storm NRL chief executive Brian Waldron.
Importantly, as opposed to the Heart, the Rebels already have an identity – a name, colours, website, and a forum for their fans to engage and rally online.
The Rebel Army, the unofficial supporter group of the franchise, is already building an impressive following on their corresponding social networking sites.
Such interest was undoubtedly helped by the speed of announcements following their acceptance into the competition, which created enormous hype – featuring prominently in the sporting headlines and causing much debate in the state.
In contrast, the Heart franchise has been conspicuous by its silence.
Their snail-paced approach in deciding and announcing its branding, particularly the incredibly drawn-out name saga, has failed to generate any tangible signs of excitement, be it in the football community and the press.
It appears almost certain the franchise will stick with the Heart name, despite the Herald Sun poll put to Victorians to name the club.
As discussed previously, this was probably the only option considering the recognition that’s built around the Heart name.
Uninspiring for many, Heart lacks imagination and certainly doesn’t help the franchise significantly differentiate itself from the Melbourne Victory. Judging by the whole naming debacle, you sense the franchise has been forced to stick with the working name that they were unconvinced about to begin with.
And even that name is causing some consternation amongst the AFL fraternity.
Heart is, sadly, yet another intangible name, joining the ranks of Glory, Power, Fury and Roar.
The Rebels branding and name, meanwhile, is certainly noteworthy.
The name Rebels, and use of the Eureka flag by the supporter group, reflects the state’s history.
As Harold Mitchell, the owner of the franchise, made clear in the Fairfax press: “The name the Rebels had its origins in the goldfields of Ballarat in the 19th century in the uprising at Eureka Stockade. The rebel miners were fighting for a fair go, and in many ways Eureka represented the beginnings of the Australian egalitarian spirit.”
The association with the Eureka Stockade gives the club meaning. It stands for something; it matters.
And by sticking with the branding and name of the Melbourne Rebels franchise that played in the now defunct Australian Rugby Championship (ARC), there is continuity in terms of recognition.
The names and brandings may be for the eye of the beholder to judge, but the traction the Rebels have achieved in their comparatively shorter existence (since being accepted into Super rugby) has highlighted the flaws in the Heart’s slow approach.
There’s no definitive time-frame or guidebook for an expansion franchise to follow in terms of building the club’s structure, generating publicity and building a fanbase. But you sense Heart have stagnated for too long, and have left themselves with an awful lot of work to do before their debut in next season’s A-League.
The Rebels certainly have the edge on their compatriots at present.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(205)
Both the sydney clubs seem to be pitching for the more committed...
Tifosi said | February 1st 2010 @ 4:09am | Report comment
How can Melbourne Heart Football Club be confused with the Demons?
If this has been the reason for the delay in the announcement of the team name it would be silly.
Anyway, not unusual for the FFA to drag the chain.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 5:05am | Report comment
Tifosi -
did you not read that there was NO official action taken regards the Demons,
however, the point remains, both for Victory and Heart, that they have to promote themselves on the point of difference – i.e. as ‘Victory’, or ‘Heart’ and NOT as Melbourne FC (the Hearts).
Pretty simple really.
It’s the Lord Mayors charity that’s taken official action.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Lord Mayor’s Charity = AFL in Melbourne, the AFL Capital of Australia.
The legal action was taken by the Melbourne Lord Mayor’s charity on behalf of the Melbourne Demons, so the AFL didn’t look like anti-football bad boys again.
A legal challenge is a legal challenge and intented to hurt the Melbourne Heart Football Club, who don’t have the political, leagal or financial backing of the AFL.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:35am | Report comment
“Lord Mayor’s Charity = AFL in Melbourne, the AFL Capital of Australia.”
That’s just plain stupid given that the only 100% Govt funded stadium in town is just being finished this year to house the Rebels and Hearts.
Get over yourself with your anti-AFL hatred and petty conspiracy theories. To make such claims about a Lord Mayor’s Charity is really low.
Either back it up with something solid, or, please, let’s leave respected charitable organisations out of this.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:14am | Report comment
ItsCalledFootball,
I fully concur with you—–just another dirty trick campaign to suppress the greatest game of all in Australia…
AFL hijacked the Brisbane Lions name from the Brisbane Lions Soccer Club forcing the name change for the Brisbane Roar FC. They (the AFL) haven’t got a leg to stand on.
~~~~~~~
AF
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Perhaps it’s karma given the A League have tried to hijack the term ‘football’ in Australia.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:28am | Report comment
The name football never was AFL’s to claim in the first place as it was coined for the round ball game in the UK… Let’s all remember the game that was invented in Australia had an indigenous name which I’m restricted from using because of the AFL’s secret police stopping me doing so.. Shame on them..
But more importantly, a shame for Australian indigenous culture.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:34am | Report comment
Australian Football League.
You just need to fix up your name, would be perfect.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:47am | Report comment
Actually I agree with you—–morally we own it. Looking forward to seeing you in court…
Mikey said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:05am | Report comment
yeah, totally AF! It’s like how my great grandfather said he had his own version of peanut butter before anyone else independently came up with it. I’m pretty sure that means my family are entitled to demand Kraft and all the other peanut butter producing companies stop calling it ‘peanut butter’. Because lets face it, it’s not the real original peanut butter that my grandaddy made and he never intended for their particular types of salty/crunchy peanut butters to be called peanut butter. They should be forced to call it something else because morally my grandaddy had a truer, more purely peanuty butter before they did and it was more definitively peanut butter.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:33am | Report comment
Mikey,
Yep the French stopped the Australian Wine industry from using the name Champagne and Coca Cola stopped Pepsi from using Cola so I agree with your Granddaddy. The AFL should tow the line as well. And use the Australian Indegenious name—-it would be great for the code.. (I am prevented from typing it in my comment by the AFL secret police, but you can view it on Fox TV or even google it up—-or do a search on You-Tube if you have any doubts of its existance).
~~~~~~~
AF
Mikey said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:49am | Report comment
Really AF? So my great grandaddy didn’t even need to patent the name “peanut butter”? Just show that he had invented it first? Wow that’s good news considering he didn’t take the trouble to gain legal ownership of the name. It’s a good thing the law recognised “moral ownership”. But just to make it easier for me, could you direct me to state/federal law, or the international treaty Australia has signed which has as one of its clauses that “moral ownership” shall be observed retrospectively in the naming of products? You know, just so I can direct the family lawyers who’ve been searching all this time in vain.
.
Cheers
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
I think if he had a mountain of evidence for intellectual property name “Peanut Butter” that he can produce I think he would have a case. However, if he contacted the French Champagne people that obviously had the same process problems to go through as the patent laws were not to be found anywhere a hundred years ago so in the light of that, I would suggest your granddaddy contact the French immediately to see how they got around that small obstacle of intellectual ownership property—-I sure he can do it—-just remind him when he does and I believe he would be successful in his just rewards who it was that suggested he had a case… I will settle for just a mere $1b Aud—no questions asked—-please send the cheque to:- AS, C/- Currumbin RSL on the Gold Coast Queensland… Good Luck
~~~~~~~
AF
Harry Kimble said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
My dear old grandfather was a Georgie who migrated here and was on the board of a local district soccer team. To him, only the round ball game was called football. For him, all the other games were handball and he let you know that.
Mikey said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
Good for your immigrant papa Harry! It’s nice to know that immigrants to whom English is a second language feel entitled to educate native speakers.
AF,
Checked out your claim buddy, and it turns out we don’t have a case after all because the name peanut butter is simply too generic; not referring to a specific place like Champagne. Apparently generic names just can’t be claimed that long after the fact… I suppose that’s why FIFA have never demanded the Americans stop calling their game “Football” nor the Irish their game “Gaelic Football”.
Oh well, these legal matters are rather tricky I guess AF, so don’t feel too bad for not realising that you don’t really have a case
.
Beast-A-Tron said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
“I suppose that’s why FIFA have never demanded the Americans stop calling their game “Football” nor the Irish their game “Gaelic Football”.”
If it could be done, FIFA would have attempted it already.
But yeah ‘football’ is a generic word that lends history to several sports. There is no ‘true’ or ‘real’ football, no matter how much a fanatic will kick and scream.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
But Rugby have dropped their claim and want to be known just as Rugby, (good decesion) the process maybe slow but in the end all will comply to their own product name.. Because of Globalisation and there can only be one real Football World Cup. Btw we have a Rugby World Cup and a Rugby League World Cup.. So with your own expansion plans—what are you going to call your World Cup—–surely not “Football World Cup”? So that brings me back to my original argument of the indigenous Australian name Marngrook World Cup would be a appropriate description for the Australian code.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
Your granddaddy has given up too easily. Cola maybe considered generic. However, Coca Cola stopped Pepsi in their tracks using the name Cola… C’mon laddie I could do with the cash..
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:51am | Report comment
ah, but, there was no issue when the names were suffixed by a “SC” compared to a “FC”.
the legal situation around Melbourne Football Club and Storm, Victory and Hearts and Rebels, is simple – they (these other 4 clubs) have to be very careful to NOT present themselves as “Melbourne FC”,
thus far, that seems to be being achieved.
The irony, is that it was Victory who opted OUT of the ‘Team Melbourne’ concept that was dabbled with a few years back – - which at the time I thought Melbourne FC should’ve been the club least wanting to dilute the brand, so to speak.
Harry Kimble said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
I remember from years ago that both in Britain and here, soccer clubs were known by the initials AFC, an abbreviation of Association Football Club, just as Rugby clubs had the initials RFC but Rugby has now dropped the word football.
By the way,” soccer” is purely an truncation of the word “association”.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:50pm | Report comment
HK -
we then get the muddied waters of “AFC” for ‘amateur football club’,
or, “AFC” for “Australian Football Club”.
Mikey said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:38am | Report comment
Suppress the greatest game of all? How are they trying to suppress the Melbourne storm?
Beast-A-Tron said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
“Lord Mayor’s Charity = AFL in Melbourne”
That’s a nice tinfoil hat you got there.
Tifosi said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
My apologies, i read this at about 4.30am when i got up to go to work. Not even sure what i read !!!
Justin said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:02am | Report comment
Considering there is Melbourne Victory FC I dont see why Melbourne Heart FC is any different for the AFL.
PS Go Rebels!
Nam Turk said | February 1st 2010 @ 6:35am | Report comment
If AFL clubs weren’t so prissy about their nicknames being unofficial, there’d be no confusion at all. They’re the Melbourne Demons. Just accept it and welcome to the 21st century.
Froar said | February 1st 2010 @ 6:59am | Report comment
Maybe we should just put all of the little culture to the sword on the basis that this is the 21st century.
Nam Turk said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:34am | Report comment
“Demons” has more culture than the generic “Melbourne Football Club.” It’s why they were branded the name in the first place; it adds character. The hypocrisy of featuring a mascot and then scoffing at it is ridiculous. I mean, clubs like Collingwood or Essendon can get away with it because they’re more unique, but Melbourne? If you gave me an unqualified “Melbourne,” I’d think you were talking of the Storm or maybe the Victory because they both currently represent all of the city. If you said “Demons” or even “Dees,” we’d be on the same page. For the same reason, I don’t think this new soccer club should go down that path, either.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:44am | Report comment
“If you gave me an unqualified “Melbourne,” I’d think you were talking of the Storm or maybe the Victory because they both currently represent all of the city.”
Did you just arrive in Melbourne?
In AFL circles, teams are generally either called Essendon or the Bombers, or Dons. They’re interchangeable, same with Melbourne or Demons or Dees. In footy terms if you speak of Melbourne it’s Melbourne.
The Melbourne football club is low profile at the moment due to a lack of on field success, I think your getting confused with current day on field success somehow making it more legit for Victory or Storm to be Melbourne.
Melbourne FC was created a few years ago, obviously to protect the brand as much as possible with some many new entrants, I cant see why it is a problem – happens all the time in business.
In these days of internet search engines and intellectual property rights it is wise to protect your name. The AFL would have like most organisations would have someone whose job it is to protect intellectual property.
The AFL did not proceed with the objection – it’s a beat up.
Redb
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:03am | Report comment
150 years versus 15 minutes. Pffftt.
Absolutely no-one calls Melbourne, the Melbourne Demons. Nor the Collingwood Magpies or Essendon Bombers or Carlton Blues.
The Melbourne Football Club is one of the oldest in the world dating back to the 1850s. The Melb Heart are a private nothing of a sporting franchise.
Redb
Sam said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:08am | Report comment
Blah blah blah. It’s absurd that a team can complain about having Melbourne and FC included in another teams name. Hopefully sanity prevails and the name is allowed. Can’t see how anyone will confuse Melbourne Heart FC with Melbourne Victory FC or Melbourne FC. People never call all three by their fulls names anyway. What a frivolous waste of everyones time.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:19am | Report comment
I think the point is who cares about the Melb Heart anyway
The AFL has not proceeded with the block of the name – it’s a nothing story. The Lord Mayors Fund has the major problem with it due to their charity “heart of Melbourne’.
Blaming others for Melb Heart’s name delays is BS. How long have they been stuffing around with it.
Redb
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:58am | Report comment
evidently people didn’t actually read the linked article – otherwise they’d be commenting on this paragraph instead of attempting to belittle MelbourneFC.
IP Australia, the federal agency which grants rights in patents, trademarks and designs, has no record of an objection from the AFL and only two weeks ago granted approval to the name Melbourne Heart FC, a formal protest was lodged by the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Fund seven days ago, on January 22.
Any ongoing delay is not due to MelbourneFC, – obviously there was some earlier communication, but, for a more official legal delay – that’s the domain of the charity. Oh gosh, what meddlers those charities are!!! (must be anti-sokkah!!!).
Mr Real Australian it's called Football Man formerly known as Kurt said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:07am | Report comment
It will be interesting to see how both clubs go. It’s been an article of faith amongst soccer fans (at least since A-league crowds and interest levels went into freefall) that there are vast teeming hordes of soccer fans out there who haven’t gotten into the a-league because it isn’t ‘Euro’ enough. If the Heart develop their own unique base this may indicate some truth to that assumption – otherwise it will just be those Victory fans keen to watch a game every weekend.
As for the Rebels, personally I think Rugby fans are getting a bit bullish with their predictions, citing 50K plus crowds at major Wallabies test matches as an indicator of true levels of support. I’d suggest they should be setting their expectations a little lower – if the club averages 20K per game for the first couple of years they’ll have done well. I’d be surprised if the hear average half that.
Sam said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:11am | Report comment
I don’t think anyone is silly enough to predict 50K fans for the Rebels. I agree that 20K would be pretty good. As for the Heart, it may help the A-League to have some real derbies, and if they are going to have another expansion team, then Melbourne is probably the best place for it.
Justin said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:12am | Report comment
Snap Sam
Justin said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:11am | Report comment
I dont think anyone one is expecting 50k crowds. 20k is certainly an attainable crowd for the Rebels. I think for big matches (Aus derbies, Crusaders, Blues, Canes) they can go close to full at the Bubble and might only get 10k for some SA matches.
jeznez said | February 2nd 2010 @ 1:47am | Report comment
As a rugby union football fan ‘d be with 20K in the first couple of years. Definitely agree that a suggestion that you’d get the same crowd for the Rebels in their six or seven home games as the Wallabies pull once every couple of years is wildly optomistic.
I think the Rebels have made some great announcements but they went through some trauma and comedy capers to get this far. Hardly a model birth to the new club but the last couple of weeks looks like they have gotten the ship in order.
And to Harry Kimble, I don’t want to start a big debate but every rugby club I’ve ever been in has been a RUFC, the English are still the RFU. Most rugby fans actually differentiate their codes by the League or Union descriptive to try and avoid confusion. Us Union lads (and lasses) are hopefully not too precious and don’t mind other codes sharing terms like Football or Rugby.
True Tah said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:30am | Report comment
Adrian,
I think the Heart can actually afford to drop the ball here and do things at their own pace. Futbol has big grassroots following in Vic, the Victory have paved the way and the fed govt will back the FFA on anything.
On the other hand, the Rebels need to do as much as they can as best they can. They represent a sport with virtually no grassroots in the area and a sport which the Fed govt couldnt give a damn about.
agga78 said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:36am | Report comment
The Rebels will get very good support just because their are enough toffs and ex pat Kiwi’s to sustain the team. Heart have been very good at getting a top manager which you failed to mention, who is more qualified to manage Australia than the dud we have at the minute. The Rebels will continue to get good media support through their connections with the establishment in Victoria. Redb Melbourne Demons are not one of the oldest football clubs in the world, because they don’t play football.
Mr Real Australian it's called Football Man formerly known as Kurt said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Funny, here’s another one who has bought into the weird idea that the Melbourne establishment is rugby mad.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:22am | Report comment
Actually the current UEFA President Platini was the aggrieved party in some marital shenanigans in the French team…. then again they are French so probably less agrieved.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:37am | Report comment
“Melbourne Demons are not one of the oldest football clubs in the world, because they don’t play football.”
Do you really want to go down this path??
TahDan said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:44am | Report comment
I know… I find it is astonishing how soccer fans can be so ignorant of the origins and meanings of the word “football”.
Simmo said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:56am | Report comment
it belongs to everyone
Ghost said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:50pm | Report comment
To me thats a cop-out.
JohnB said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:50pm | Report comment
But more accurate than most of the statements on here re rights to the word.
LT80 said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Adrian, why do you constantly use the term “franchise” rather than “club”?
Do you think it adds gravitas to the writing?
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:55am | Report comment
when it’s a privately owned start up organisation – that is actually yet to form a playing group, let alone define names/positions etc – - – then, ‘franchise’ works pretty good. The ‘Heart’ is solely a business proposition at present. The Rebels are more advanced in building thier club.
In the AFL context, GC17 is well and truely a club presently, however, GWS18 is – even if not privately owned – is not yet a club so to speak, although, is more advanced in structuring up than Hearts by some way.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:46am | Report comment
“The names and brandings may be for the eye of the beholder to judge, but the traction the Rebels have achieved in their comparatively shorter existence (since being accepted into Super rugby) has highlighted the flaws in the Heart’s slow approach. ”
Heart are following in the Victory’s footsteps for soccer whereas the Rebels are the first rugby franchise for Melbourne and are yet to tap into the latent following of that football code. Hence a bigger story than the ‘who cares about Heart’ mob.
Even Melbourne A League fans seriously question how they will differentiate from Victory for their soccer fix.
Whereas rugby followers in Melbourne have been waiting for a long for a team.
Rebd
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Heart are following in the Victory’s footsteps for soccer whereas the Rebels are the first rugby franchise for Melbourne
Exactly, it’s hard to get excited about MV lite and any excitement they will generate will be on the back of their playing roster. With a Salary cap that’s not going to be huge but Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Super Rugby though is new and shiny for the Victorians and something different.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:17am | Report comment
Melbourne Heart have already signed up their manager John van’t Schip, a few high profile A-League players and CEO Scott Munn, the former head of AFL licensing. At the end of the European season they will announce some overseas signings and are still negotiating with Mark Viduka and Josip Skoko’s agent, among others.
The delays have been compounded by the AFL and Melbourne Demons mounting a legal challenge against Melbourne Heart calling themselves a Melbourne football club, despite the fact that Melbourne Victory has been calling itself a Melbourne football club for over 5 years.
The FFA also have limited resources and are working very hard and spending most of their time and money on the WC bids.
Melbourne Heart is not the only A-League team lacking marketing, promotion and publicity at the moment.
Still with the sort of money the FFA will make out of this year’s world cup and if they are successful with a WC bid, understandably their priority is on the world game and not the local game at this moment.
AFL see football as their major threat in Melbourne and are not helping the FFA currently by doing all they can to slow down any progress for the World Cup or the A-League and emphasising the negative issues in the AFL dominated press in Melbourne.
The AFL and its press seem to be leaving the Rebels rugby team alone for now, during their honeymoon period.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Please provide links for the negative articles by AFL writers on Melb Victory and Melb Heart? This is the typical soccer paranoia about AFL coming through yet again. Err just who is obsessed with who?
You fail to mention the major objector to the name – the Lord Mayor’s Fund. Funny that.
Redb
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:35am | Report comment
Huh?
Don’t you read the papers or blogs, watch TV or listen to the radio in Melbourne – all the stories about the WC bid ruining the AFL season, Melbourne Demons outraged by Heart calling themselves a Melbourne football club.
Lord Mayor’s Charity = AFL in Melbourne, the AFL Capital of Australia.
The legal action was taken by the Melbourne Lord Mayor’s charity on behalf of the Melbourne Demons, so the AFL didn’t look like anti-football bad boys again.
A legal challenge is a legal challenge and intented to hurt the Melbourne Heart Football Club, who don’t have the political, leagal or financial backing of the AFL.
Mr Real Australian it's called Football Man formerly known as Kurt said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Loving the fact that the soccerinas are getting their excuses in early for the impending failure of the Melbourne expansion team. “It would’ve been a huge success with vast crowds if it wasn’t for the pesky AFL” etc. etc. Talk about a lack of confidence in your product.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:39am | Report comment
No – we’re just elaborating as to the main reason the announcement of the Melbourne Heart Football Club’s public naming was delayed – a legal challenge from the Lord Mayor of Melbourne’s Charity.
Its a commercial world out there and some AFL clubs have had to move a couple of thousand kilometers and take millions of dollars from the AFL and state Governments, so they wouldn’t go broke.
Of course Melbourne Heart will have to prove themselves and the new owners are taking a business risk as did the owners of Melbourne Victory.
But if you want to predict they will go broke before they even start playing then that’s up to you.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:42am | Report comment
The fear is strong with this one yes.
Beast-A-Tron said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
“The legal action was taken by the Melbourne Lord Mayor’s charity on behalf of the Melbourne Demons…”
Are you at any point going to prove this? Or are you just going to keep repeating it, again and again, hoping someone will eventually believe you?
Mr Real Australian it's called Football Man formerly known as Kurt said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:36am | Report comment
Ah yes, but the lord mayor’s charity is nothing but a front for the AFL didn’t you know!
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Its the farking Judean People’s Front of AFL – Splitters!
Why would a charity spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a legal challenge to contest the naming of a football team?
But that wouldn’t seem strange to the brothers of the Judean People’s Front of AFL, now would it.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:13am | Report comment
Then please answer the question – Why would a Melbourne high profile charity spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a legal challenge to contest the naming of a football team?
Matt said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:34am | Report comment
because they think they will win and subsequently have their legal expenses covered by the defeated party. That is probably why.
Dogz R Barkn said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:21am | Report comment
I’m no expert in the field, but I imagine they would do it for the same reason that Absolut vodka challenged the use of the word Absolut in marketing a range of swimwear sold on line.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:36am | Report comment
so you have no evidence or you would not be asking.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:55am | Report comment
I think this is the most famous one
Mike Sheehan – Herald Sun.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/soccer-just-too-ho-hum/story-e6frfbro-1111112946158
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:58am | Report comment
Ok their were about 6 posts i didn’t see before I posted that …in those 6 posts the thread went a bit loony.
I would have thought this would all be solved by a simple the Lord Mayors Charity becoming the Mleboune Hearts preffered Charity and a bit of cross promotion.
Lets not forget the Brisbane Lions received $$$ for letting the AFL team use the name
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Haven’t you ever seen Life of Brian?
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:09am | Report comment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PrheWm2bF4
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:05am | Report comment
oh gee- – - and how far back is this dredging? Relevance to the Rebels and Hearts???
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:12am | Report comment
So clearly there has been a plethora if you have to go back to 2007 to fine one
I’ve been to 3 A League games including a semi final and find the game mostly ho hum as well It just doesn’t compare to AFL footy but everyone is different.
It;’s called soccer made it out like there is this army of AFL writers churning out anti soccer pieces daily about the nw team, its just rubbish.
i doubt any AFL writer has even mentioned Melb Heart positive or negative.
Redb
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:46am | Report comment
I was just replying to RedB’s request “Please provide links for the negative articles by AFL writers on Melb Victory and Melb Heart”
I didn’t actually look it up, I used an old site (hasn’t been updated in 3 years) that has quite a few anti soccer pieces from AFL people but you specified “melbourne victory or Melbourne heart” which narrowed it down a lot, most attacks are just on the game itself.
Why do we keep such lists…… no reason….it’s definitely not because after the revolution we have a list of names that we will send to work in the Pilbra mines or our new Skoda factory.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:55am | Report comment
the point is they are still few and far between, given Lynch, Foster, Hill and their anti AFL agendaet al – the arrows have been crossing back and forth for awhile.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:08am | Report comment
I am not claiming the high ground either.
I am quite comfortable where football is, it’s not like the old days where a Phil Rothfield piece bagging football would represent 80% of the football news in that paper for the day with the other 20% being European league scores tucked next to the horse racing.
Once we get on FTA people can make their own choice and if they don’t like then so be it, if they do like it I don’t think they are going to be discouraged by an anti piece in the newspaper.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
heh heh….the Skoda Falcon claims it’s 5th straight Bathurst title defeating the Proton Commodore…..
Lazza said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:06am | Report comment
But you reckon that an 80 point thrashing in a game that’s all over by half time is interesting to watch so we have to question your judgement?
The best matches in sport are close, absorbing CONTESTS.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:30am | Report comment
“The best matches in sport are close, absorbing CONTESTS.”
agreed,
however,
Just as a soccer die hards can quote occurrences of teams coming from 0-3 down at half time to win, so too, sadly, can Australian Football fans quote of teams coming from 12 goals down just before half time to win (Essendon over my North Melb almost 10 years ago!!),
just as soccer die hards can quote of teams who scored 3 times in injury time to miraculously win, so too can AFL folk speak of teams that came from 40 pts down at 3/4 time to win, or slam through 3 goals in 3 mins in ‘red time’ to grab an unlikely win.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:35am | Report comment
edit – actually, I forgot, the last para was meant to be :
A couple of things are important. One, is that the potential to get smashed makes a close game all the more enthralling,……even for soccer, the potential to get smashed 6-0 makes you appreciate a 2-1 all the more (surely??),
and, the knowledge of the history of magical comebacks and boilovers is what provides hope when trailling heavily – - and if it were easy to comeback from X goals down……then, the miracles and magicals wouldn’t be described thus.
Therefore, for every 1 goal margin, it’s good to have the odd 50+ point margin – - it reminds you of what’s at stake and helps classic games elevate themselves more clearly – - as, after all, many a dud game (of any sport) has produced a close scoreline that falsely gave the impression of a good game if it hadn’t been observed to be otherwise.
whiskeymac said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:27am | Report comment
Interesting comparisons.
heart have signed some good players and installed someone who appears, on paper at least, with a reasonable pedigree and experience. but it is just a bit boring re: the name and colours dragging on. Is too late to apply for the name Melbourne Ennui it shd help differentiate them from the Victory. At this rate they are destined to become the equivalent of an everton to liverpool, the spurs to an arsenal and an altetico to real, why rush into 2nd place? on the other hand I sincerely hope they do well – Melbourne derby cld light up the HAL like no other.
As for the Rebels – i hope they make it too. Using the name rebels and euroka stockade etc is interesting – i may be wrong but i thought Melb HAL teams/ suporters at least werent allowed to do the same re: too political (as if, those red shirts need to be taught a thing or too). I hope that they all grow 1850 style beards, something for the props to bind onto. Unions a good sport and the Wallabies need as many feeder teams as possible!
Simmo said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:58am | Report comment
I suggest the Ennui play in beige
Bay35Pablo said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:27am | Report comment
How about Melbourne Schadenfreude?
Nathan said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:48am | Report comment
“Importantly, as opposed to the Heart, the Rebels already have an identity – a name, colours, website, and a forum for their fans to engage and rally online.”
What a pathetically uniformed author!!
If he had bothered to spend a few simple minutes searching on the net (instead of writing this dismal effort) he would have found the Melbourne Heart Syndicate website and forum.
Website: http://melbourneheartsyn.com/
Forum: http://www.melbourneheart.proboards.com/index.cgi?
Get behind the club in terms of support – not behind it with a knife
James said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:50am | Report comment
Nathan, how can you compare this basic forum (which you need to be registered to even view) – http://www.melbourneheart.proboards.com/index.cgi? – to the Rebels fan site with its pages on facebook etc – http://www.rebel-army.com/
It’s chalk and cheese.
The Heart site is a syndicate site. Hardly inspiring much passion with the supporters.
Nathan said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:23am | Report comment
I agree it is not the most aesthetically appealing forum but it is a temporary one until the official colours + emblem are released. The main point is that there are passionate fans on it who ‘engage and rally online’ – something which yourself and the author of the article has suggested we do not!
James said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:47am | Report comment
Heart don’t have an identity, as suggested. There may be a forum run by fans (not the greatest forum, as you say), but it pales in comparison to what the Rebels are doing on the fan front that’s cause of the inaction of the Heart syndicate.
Nathan said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:54am | Report comment
My point is that Heart have a group of dedicated fans who are passionate about football!
My original point is that whether it looks good or not – we have a forum and a website – something which the author of this article failed to recognise!
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
. . . and a venture that is unable to start an official Melbourne Hearts Football Club website due to impending legal action from the AFL and the Lord Mayor of Melbourne.
James said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
@ItsCalledFootball, had they settled on a name ages ago – when they were awarded the place in the A-League (how long ago was that?), they would have all this legal issues sorted and could have made an announcement sooner. It’s been too drawn out a process and now its getting to the crucial stage where things need to come together pretty quickly.
Worlds Biggest said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:55am | Report comment
True Tah, I agree with you regarding the Rebels need to do as much as they can as best they can. However not sure if your comment abour virtually no grasss roots is accurate. Rugby is played in Schools all be it in the Private system ( this system has produced a couple of Wallabies ) and there is a Club Competition in Melbourne. This is certainly a head start compared to the Storm who basically started from scratch.
Dogz R Barkn said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:08am | Report comment
In relation to this whole Intellectual Property debate, I have a vague recollection that the Freo Dockers were barred from using the word “Dockers” in their logo, because the word was used as a brand name for some jeans.
Can’t remember the exact details, but our Melbourne or Perth friends might be able to shed some light on that.
Towser said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:22am | Report comment
As a person who comes from a 2 team town Sheffield often I ponder how did the vote get split. What decided Owls or Blades. Blue or Red. Is it the colour clash? Red Vs Blue. Same as Liverpool/Everton,ManU/ManC. Because in reality there is no discernible difference between supporters. My family is split down the middle(Interesting conversations at Xmas gatherings etc ).
Australia of course is vastly different . For starters that was 150 years ago when their was no history of fans flocking to professional Sport. In Melbourne the sport where people split 150 years ago was AFL. Football was developed primarily from post war migration & tradition evolved through most football fans following the large ethnic clubs like Melbourne Croatia(Knights) & South Melbourne Hellas. If not they still traditionally followed clubs from whence they came overseas. Some also clinging to the country of birth/descent also. Also some in the general sporting community have mainly followed overseas football in my experience.
So from that mix where does Melbourne Heart get its fans from? How many of the old NSL supporters turn up at Victory matches?(for instance I’ve followed Brisbane football for 30 years,never see the old timers who used to grace the NSL scene at the Roar ). Will the Blue & Red split support? Can the Heart lure the “Euro” followers by clever recruiting? Ie ex Greek/Italian/Croatian International etc. Or is there another market like Costa Rica. Decent players ,but poor country unable to pay big wages to its players. Or will the coach bring a different style of play that appeals?
In other words what is the Heart offering that MV are not.
Having lived in Sydney its a no brainer. Sydney Rovers are distinct from SFC by their geographical location. No need to ponder the above its “Us vs Them”. How are the 2 Melbourne clubs going to generate an “Us vs Them” scenario? From what sources.
Will it come back to my origonal question about derbies what drives them? What is it that provides that combustible mix that provides often at times fiery matches in front of supporters from the same town. Will it suddenly just appear in Melbourne as it did for English football clubs & AFL clubs 150 years ago?
That to me despite the other questions pondered is the great unknown.
Savvas Tzionis said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:39am | Report comment
In a word…no.
Same applies to the Union and AFL expansion.
The Great Depression as applied to Sport in this country is around the corner.
It appears Rugby League have foreseen this and have re-inforced the ramparts rather than send out further colonial expedtions. Smart thinking.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:51am | Report comment
More like rugby league does not have the money to fund expansion. Given they dollars they would be looking at Perth in an instant.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Interesting thoughts Towser, rivalry is a strange beast, a bit like respect you can’t make it happen, it just evolves or is earnt.
This is what David Williamson (playwright) wrote about Collingwood’s origins in Melbourne and his theory on the development of rivalry based on religion and social status:
“There’s a secret history of Australian rules football. It’s never been given much of a run in the press, which is more comfortable with the myth that we are an egalitarian, classless and non-sectarian culture, but in the days around the turn of the century when the Victorian Football League was born, everybody knew who and what their team represented.
Essendon was a staunch lower-middle-class Protestant club, Melbourne was the Establishment Protestant club. Richmond and North Melbourne were Catholic clubs. Carlton, St Kilda and South Melbourne saw themselves as “respectable” working class clubs and everyone saw Collingwood as occupying the lowest social status of all. Working class, Catholic and located in the poorest, most crowded, most unsanitary part of Melbourne, Collingwood players and supporters alike were regarded as aggressive, unruly, and profane.”
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/09/26/1064083199539.html
Redb
Towser said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:02am | Report comment
Redb
What that article indicates & reinforces for me is that it is folly to compare the dynamics of clubs expanding today with clubs that formed in the latter part of the 19th century. Regardless of sport.
The ingredients indicated by David Williamson show vastly different times socially. What happens then, is that future generations dont really have a clue why they follow a club ,they just do. But the origonal followers did have a clue. Thats why to me its far simpler for clubs expanding today to make geographical location the key indicator for identity.
Then its more a matter of improving standard of play, gaining success & maintaining it. Clubs with rusted on supporters are allowed more leeway in this respect.
Mr said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Agreed Towser, that’s why I feel Sydney FC v Sydney Rovers will work from Day 1.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:20am | Report comment
Towser,
That’s right. It sticks out like the proverbial that Melb heart has no such geographical identifier. Apart from Geelong, a fair chunk of the current AFL teams in Melbourne would not reside in the suburb/town of their club.
If Fiztroy did not change its name to Brisbane would it have been able to gather support from people in Brisbane?, same with he Swans,etc. Geographcial tags as artificial as they are compared to religious/social and historic ties at least give fans a parochial identifier.
Redb
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:21am | Report comment
edit: ” fair chunk of current AFL fans”
True Tah said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Probably the smartest post on the Roar today thus far.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Spot on Towser….
~~~~~~
AF
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:24am | Report comment
Interesting though – that the evolution in Melbourne was perhaps more able to evolve ‘naturally’ – even along such lines which I reckon explains what some people observe questioningly – the way that footy and club is so deeply rooted in Melbourne society.
In England, London and surrounds, the society was all the more entrenched, the institutions both religious and cultural (such as schools/uni’s etc) were far more entrenched. { Especially compared to a city founded (illegally) in the 1830s!!!!!! } Thus the Eton Royal college vs the more common Yorkshire folk from Rugby – which seemed to drive not so much a red vs blue, but, a handling vs no-hands division of ‘football’ into very distinct (like red and blue) codes.
Melbourne was a city like few others – not even a penal colony imperial city like Sydney – it was far more ‘free’. It’s institutions were far younger. The smaller city size etc meant that everyone was forced into the single ‘football’ melting pot – if for no other reason than that there was not sufficient resources to all go it alone – so, whilst the League or game was pretty egalitarian – - the clubs embodied the divisions, or social castes so to speak.
Whereas, in other regions – the choice of code might be seen as defining – - and I’ve often felt this from Sydney – - in Melbourne, it was the choice of club that was more defining,
which, brings us to that whole situation where people from outside Melbourne seem unable to comprehend the way that footy and choice of club was so ‘ingrained’, so important…..because….it was. The code was common, the club wasn’t and the club defined the person as much as anything.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:49am | Report comment
Good post Towser.
Good analogy about the red versus the blue – Liverpool v Everton, Man City v Man United and many more.
Blue Victory v red Heart.
Sometimes the rivalries just happen without any forethought or pre-promotion.
I still don’t understand why fans hate SFC and like to see them lose, when MV are the ones winning the most trophies and have the most money.
Just being in the same town and not liking Vctory would be inspiration enough for some people.
Just wait till Kevin Muscat takes out Mark Viduka in the penalty box and see the cross town arguments start.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:43am | Report comment
re anti or pro press -
this story seemed to eminate from fairfax theAge soccer reporter Michael Lynch, with the following quote:
The Heart syndicate had been hoping to announce details before Christmas, but was held up by legal wrangles. It is believed that part of the delay was caused by a need to mollify the AFL, who argued no other club could use the words Melbourne, Football and Club in its official business name because of Melbourne Football Club.
So, soccer people go off blaming the AFL, when, the main delay and legal wrangle is around the Lord Mayors “Heart of Melbourne” charity.
Ah, if only that pro-soccer anti-AFL media could get their facts straight!!!………..but, they’re so weighed down by a giant chip on their shoulder!!
(note – last comment half in jest).
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:56am | Report comment
Well Well,
there’s your evidence and from a Melbourne Age AFL journalist as well – he even agrees with me that the charity was used as the Judean Peoples Front for the AFL to create a delay to the Heart announcements last year with a legal challenge.
And also to make the Heart spend a few hundred thousand in leagal fees.
rugbyfuture said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:01am | Report comment
i thought we were the people’s front of judea.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:09am | Report comment
No you’re the farkin Popular Front of Judea for Rugby – Splitters!
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Nah its “the Farkin People’s Front of the Melbourne Heart Charity Front of Melbourne ” that are responsible for the delay once again… not the AFL nor the FFA.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:11am | Report comment
” Melbourne Age AFL journalist ”
Mate – I explicitly quoted and referenced Michael Lynch,
Michael Lynch is a 100% soccer writer for the soccer friendly sponsor of MElb Victory fairfax press rag called “the Age”.
Lynch is a pommy expat soccer freak,
You really have no idea, you’re just arguing for the sake of it.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Michael C
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/heart-fc-ignites-row-with-afl-over-name/story-e6frg7mf-1225824479635
The AFL, on behalf of the 151-year-old Melbourne Football Club, sent a legal letter of complaint to Football Federation Australia late last year about the prospect of the 11th A-League outfit bringing Melbourne and FC together in its name.
Caused delays while the lawyers were brought in to clarify the position which was the delay before Xmas. Michael Lynch is spot on 100%.
Inside mail from Benjamin on 442 is current delays due to FFA and they should have already negotiated with the Charity if they knew what they were doing.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment
And the fact that Victory have had Melbourne and Football Club in their name for nearly six years didn’t stop them going through with this ridiculous and expensive excercise.
I hope the brothers of the the Judean Peoples Front for the AFL are happy with the way the AFL are wasting your millions of dollars.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:51am | Report comment
AH, but, for Lynch to go on about that only now, January 27 – where upon it’s evident that no continuation was pursued on behalf of the AFL,
but, that continued legal action HAS been pursued by/on behalf of the “Heart of Melbourne/Lord Mayors charity” – - rather blurs it all don’t you think.
Lynch was reporting old stuff, no longer relevant – and the greater delay – due actual action, is NOT due to the AFL. And NOT reported one bit by Lynch.
Had his article been penned Jan 10 or the like – I’d agree wholeheartedly with you. But, for an article published Jan 27….well, perhaps the Age editors where sitting on it for 3 weeks??
It looks and smells like pretty needless AFL bashing by Michael Lynch…..attempting to portray the AFL in the worst light and to ignore other valid (non code wars) concerns along similar lines.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:40am | Report comment
I believe the action from the Charity only happened on the 22nd January (and surfaced later) and he does use the word PART and is correct in his wording because over the length of delay more time was lost due to the AFL objection.
His statement
It is believed that part of the delay was caused by a need to mollify the AFL, who argued no other club could use the words Melbourne, Football and Club in its official business name because of Melbourne Football Club.
Is 100% on the money at present…. but that’s the entirety of his mention of AFL, hardly Pearl Harbor.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
. . . because the age editors were on paternity leave.
Saji said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:50am | Report comment
I hope they go with Sporting Melbourne FC and adopt the green and white stripes of Sporting Lisbon. I think the traditional sounding football names and simple colours are better.
TahDan said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:53am | Report comment
Interesting article adrian. I have to say that given how disenchanted much of the rugby community were getting with the constant delays and controversies over which body would be given the Melbourne Super15 franchise, it’s interesting to hear such a positive spin on the whole thing. But then I had no idea how badly the A-League side had bungled its own expansion side. Indeed, I didn’t even know they were planning a second team in Melbourne.
That said, I’m still some what sceptical about how successful the Rebels will actually be. Melbourne is often touted as a sporting town that will watch almost anything, but I still remember going to the MCG a couple years ago to watch the bledisloe cup and being well outnumbered by All Blacks supporters in a barely 70% full stadium and thinking people just didn’t want rugby down there. I’m not sure though; it may have had something to do with the fact that there was a lot of AFL on that weekend, or simply due to the fact that the MCG is an atrocious place to watch Rugby (or any of the rectangular football codes).
Bay35Pablo said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:35am | Report comment
The rebels timed it well with getting their big announcements out during the off season. Can you imagine if this had happened in 2 months time with the AFL season underway. Wouldn’t have got as much traction IMHO.
mattamkII said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:47am | Report comment
“Just wait till Kevin Muscat takes out Mark Viduka in the penalty box and see the cross town arguments start.”
MMM…yep and I cant get over how Soccer fans cant pic the issues that will come out of this! wait until one ethnic group sides with the heart over the victory and the riots begin.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
Thanks mattakill for regurgitating last century stereotypes about football supporters.
Good to see you keeping up with the times.
How long has it been since the Sydney Daily Telegraph or Melbourne Sun ran the back page blockbuster “Ethic Soccer Hooligan Violence”
Lets start another 700 plus blog argument about it again shall we.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
Actually though, in Melbourne at very least – I’d be very curious to see what happens,
largely becauase, a lot of that ‘ethnic violence’ that was logically associated with ethnic based soccer clubs – has now been most obviously seen associated with the Australian Tennis open – and especially anytime a Croatian plays a Serbian.
It may well be that if opposing ethnic groups align with Hearts vs Victory – then, an ill-defined 2 team city such as Melbourne (as distinct to the clear geographical destinction in Sydney) might be cherry ripe for being used in such an anti-social manner.
ONe hopes not – but, I never anticipated that sort of carry on and mini-riots as have been seen at the tennis (….of all things…..what next? the Polo??).
Lazza said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
All the ethnic hooligan violence is in Tennis now. Obviously, it’s the lack of on-court violence by the players that’s causing the fans to misbehave.
Beast-A-Tron said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
“Thanks mattakill for regurgitating last century stereotypes about football supporters. Good to see you keeping up with the times.”
10 years ago is not a long time. These problems don’t just disappear within a generation, let alone a decade. I’ve seen the ethnic based soccer clubs around Melbourne suburbs so you can’t tell me they don’t exist.
His hypothetical is grounded in reality, your response is an attempt to defend against what you perceive to be an ‘attack’ on your chosen sport. Not everyone is out to get you [soccer fans], you know.
stu dog said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
It’s ALL Football !
An Most Australians support and follow all of them to some degree!
Lazza said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
Yes they are all Football even if 90% of the time they use their hands.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
or sometimes their heads and chests.
Lazza said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
90% of the time?
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
Don’t even need to kick the ball to score. Kicking requires the use of the foot.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
AFL players can score with any part of the body – particularly the behind.
Gotta love your footy!
Dogz R Barkn said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:18pm | Report comment
I think van Dijk scored the winning goal with his derrier the other night.
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 5:59pm | Report comment
AFL, use hands/foot combo 99% of the time—-big difference there… Football; foot to head, goal 10% foot tofoot, goal 90%
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:28pm | Report comment
AF -
what within the rules of soccer provides a specific reward for kicking?
You really only have rules that prohibit hands (most of the time), and a couple of times legislate that a corner ‘kick’ must be a kick.
But – are there any specific rewards that only a kick gains??
in AFL a kick is the ONLY means to achieve either of a Goal, or, a legal mark.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
INteresting stat really,
probably true in the Rugby codes,
if propulsion of the ball is taken into account, Aust Footy is anywhere around 40-60% by foot in general,
but, then, what’ proportion of goals in AFL are NOT scored by foot? 0%.
What proportion of soccer goals are NOT scored by foot? 30%, 50%….100% of Timmy Cahills!!!!! (a nice little header over the weekend).
Ghost said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
I used to support and follow AFL a bit until I spent some time on this site. Unfortunately the views of some here have massively diminished my regard for the game; not through the intrinsic fault of the game itself but rather because I can’t dissociate watching it from thoughts of the bias / puffery / overhyping, neurotic competitiveness, and gullibility to manufactured “tradition” that I read from those same few culprits here each and every time I visit.
Dogz R Barkn said | February 1st 2010 @ 4:07pm | Report comment
Manufactured “tadition”?
That seems an odd term in a thread about two brand new sporting franchises.
Beast-A-Tron said | February 1st 2010 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
Yep and I used to support the HAL until I visited 442.
Of course me saying that, doesn’t actually make it true, nor would I expect anyone to swallow such tripe.
Froar said | February 1st 2010 @ 6:48pm | Report comment
Yeah, I am not an AFL fan although I do like the fact that it is uniquely australian. I have tried to get into football/soccer recently but I find the chat amongst supporters to be just rubbish.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:26pm | Report comment
I just loved out ItsCalledFootball went for ‘RealFootball’ calling him ‘FakeFootball’ because he showed…weakness…compassion….empathy….I dunno – - but, eat their own.
Ghost probably doesn’t like Pip and myself, perhaps not Redb either – - but, perhaps needs to understand that we’ve been enjoying ongoing banter with/against the artist formerly known as ‘KB’ (from the ‘flog days’) for quite some time……in the main it’s harmless.
btw – I too would like to know what this ‘manufactured’ tradition is??? (especially as distinct to anyone elses!!! – cos, ain’t no code perfect, and I know one thing, that exposure to other codes has helped me understand the AFL a whole lot better…..they can still annoy the crap out of me, but, I understand it a bit better!!!).
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:38pm | Report comment
Some football supporter you are.
We don’t want you anyway and stick with your AFL thank you very much.
Froar said | February 2nd 2010 @ 6:49am | Report comment
I am no AFL fan. Only ever been to see one game.
Spanner said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Heart has no intention of pursuing the other names as they have not gone any further on the trademark applications. This opposition will not be successful. Melbourne Heart Football club it will be.
Jeff Dowsing said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
Perhaps the line ‘our heart beats true for the red and the blue’ in the Dremons’ song makes the issue a little more sensitive so far as branding goes.
In any case, so far as semantics goes, the whole football / soccer debate is very boring. If the Association Football orientated people could just accept the term ’soccer’ saves a hell of a lot on confusion, and isn’t under the auspices of disrespecting the game, then things would be so much easier. Sure us heathens could refer to ‘AFL’, but personally I objected to the point where the League became self annointed owners of the whole code.
Good post by Towser – the main point in getting any new club off the ground is to have a demand in the first place. Not a commercial one based on TV, but a people generated one. Rebels yes, Heart, I’m not so sure. We will see in the AFL that Frankenstein clubs like Gold Coast and West Sydney will be money pits that will kill clubs that have been around for many generations. That will be Demetriou’s sad legacy.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
Agreed with most of that, except the last part. I think Gold Coast has some people power and grass roots behind it. Certainly Aussie Rules on the Gold Coast would be the equivalent of rugby union in Melbourne comparatively.
Western Sydney perhaps? Then again you could argue that prior to the Melb Storm there was zero demand for rugby league, rugby union yes.
Being a little dramatic re killing clubs, given that both Fitzroy and South Melbourne died in Melbourne long before Demetriou. The same issues around the smaller clubs starved of success still exists whetehr the AFL expands or not.
You could argue that the national footprint of the AFL and its TV deal has actually bank rolled several Melbourne clubs for sometime and well into the future.
Redb
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
Yep – it’s another topic – but, the whole premise of the early clubs paying their $4 million licence fee was to bank roll the bankrupt VFL clubs. That’s one reason Sth Aussie didn’t join up initially and Brisbane Bad News Bears got ‘created’.
The AFL is unfairly attacked all too often – - and for us Footy fans, we need to look at where the ARL, NRL, QRL, NSW Country RL etc etc have got themselves to – - begging and crying for and forcing to be established an independant commission to oversee the game as a whole. Reality is – someone HAD to take ‘ownership’. We don’t have to like ALL that it entails.
btw – have you seen GWS signing a South African recruit. The major impact of GC17 and GWS18 is a forced broadening of the horizons. Thus far – it’s 1 good (interesting at least) news story after another.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
It will be interesting times especially since I have lived in both areas. I think the club on the Gold Coast will do ok, in the Gold Coast bulletin I felt their was even more AFL news about non lions clubs than in the Courier mail. The Lions are doing well and are now part of the city and that helps media stories in relation to little brother.
There are heaps of ex Victorians on the Coast and the experience amongst other codes has been if your going to attend an away game interstate the Gold Coast one is normally high on the list.
The only problem is that the pure scale of the AFL means doing ok would mean losing money. Clubs like North Melbourne and Port Adelaide would be huge in any other code but are struggling in the AFL and Gold Coast will be competing against teams with 30 to 40k members.
I don’t know what type of stadium deal the GC will get but I am guessing it will be much better than what the other QLD teams (I suspect Lions included) because they put money in. Otherwise if they were on the same terms as the Titans or GCU they would struggle as both those teams have had to charge the highest ticket prices in their particular league due to the stadium rent. North Melbournes crowds were really bad on the gold coast when they took the freebies out of it.
West Sydney I believe may work. I don’t buy that Western Sydney is over subscribed for sporting teams. We only have 3 ½ Rugby League teams, no union team, no cricket team or Basketball team. Finally getting an A league team but that’s only 4 1/2 professional sporting teams for a huge working class population.
I do think it’s risky but I just hope that with Sheedy around (who is a little bit nuts) that they take on my suggestion of only using NSW players (and having sleeves on their jumper) and really making it the NSW club, which should in turn the Swans into the nice traditional club. I think that would be best for the club long term and means the team would be interesting to Melbourne fans too.
Beating Franchise 18 that’s been around 2 years…ho hum. Beating NSW that’s something to look forward too.
Again the scale of the AFL means GWS is going to lose bucket loads of money though, getting 30k paying members for a team branded West Sydney but playing at Homebush hmmmm good luck.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
AndyRoo,
I think the biggest problem for Western Sydney will be a small expat base. Like the Melb Rebels who will be relying on expats initially, the Gold Coast has heaps of Vic and SA expats to support the game. I would read zero into Nth melb crowds, but they got 12-13k at times prior to their rejection of the coast.
Please dont start on free tickets, EVERY code does this.
Gold Coast is definitely a winner for away fans, I would suspect that this was a big attraction to the QLD Government putting in funds for the stadium at Carrera. As it is for the Vic govt in building the new rectangular (bubble) stadium to attract visitation for the rugby codes and soccer.
Make no mistake the new Melb bubble stadium is as much a tourist attraction as a sports stadium.
Redb
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Gold Coast (for a holiday) and Melbourne (for the shopping) are pretty easy destinations to sell too the Mrs.
bob said | February 2nd 2010 @ 9:41pm | Report comment
Actually, A-League clubs do not give away free tickets to regular matches.
There are occasional promotions with free tickets, but those generally rely on existing tickets example:
Adelaide had a promotion where each member/season ticket holder could pick one night to bring 4 friends along for free.
Sydney FC did a double-header type deal when buying a ticket to a match got free entry to a second match (iirc, it was buy a ticket for Adelaide, get free entry to the Central Coast match).
I believe North Queensland have a policy of allowing free entry to children under 16 for free with any adult ticket.
But to suggest they give away “free tickets” is just plain wrong. The closest most teams get to real, free tickets is giving 2 or 3 junior club teams free entry to be part of the half-time entertainment.
Lazza said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
I’m bored with the whole debate. Soccer/Football is nothing compared to calling yourself by the competition name, AFL.
So what sport does the SANFL play here in SA? We can’t play AFL because that’s already taken. You should be taking all those Sydney/Brisbane newspapers to task for corrupting Aussie Rules into AFL and not worrying so much about ‘Soccer’.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
re SANFL What they have always played: football. No need to make it complicated unless your the FFA.
Lazza said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:35pm | Report comment
I thought they were all Football? Which one?
Dogz R Barkn said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
…deep purple heart.
Which reminds me.
Which group had a hit with “Barracuda”?
Their name is on the tip of my tongue…
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
oh,…Magic…Man!
at least we know the heart of rock and roll is in Cleveland, so, no worries there……you wouldn’t think!!
Jeff Dowsing said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Redb – I think the problem with Gold Coast & West Sydney is similar to Hearts. They are trying to set up in resistant or low market bases that struggle to sustain one team. The Rebels also face this, but at least they have no existing competition battling for traction. Worst of all, through draft concessions they WILL kill off at least North in the near future. Whilst the national comp afforded some kind of existance for Swans and Roys fans, that was in an era where TV Rights was a pittance. There is no excuse to let such clubs wither on the vine now.
Tasmania = a sustainable & passionate market to set up a team. Unfortunately for them there’s no rugby or soccer for the AFL as part of their ego driven world domination plan to try and kill off down there.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
The argument for Tasmania has nothing to do with ego, although it is very likely the next round of expansion will include Tassie. Tassie with a pop of 500K spread throughout the island in a economicially depressed State versus Western Sydney with a 1.9M pop is a no brainer for expansion and widening the talent pool and fan base.
The ARU have bypassed some of their ‘heartlands’ like Western Sydney and Gold Coast to go for Melbourne.
Western Sydney is a much more difficult proposition for the AFL than the Gold Coast.
Redb
The Phantom said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
Those heartlands are already serviced by the NSW Waratahs and Queensland Reds
Redb said | February 2nd 2010 @ 7:25am | Report comment
Yet both areas bid for their own Super 15 licence.
mitzter said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:36am | Report comment
yes unfortunately the waratahs and reds never leave sydney or brisbane respectively.
We even have a hoohar whenever the tahs play at homebush because it’s further from the eastern suburbs (but hardly western sydney)
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
GC17 aren’t entirely setting up in a resistant market. The AFLQ and the Gold Coast section is pretty healthy – having produced a pretty good number of draftees in recent years – there are now almost 60 QLD origin players on lists. That’s almost more than the QLD NRL SoO side have to pick from within the NRL ranks.
Having the Southport Sharks on board is important too – there’s some might fine facilities up there amongst some of the clubs…..ah, what we Vics missed out on for decades by NOT having Sports clubs with pokies.
re Tassie – it’d be nice, but, alas, there’s greater participation in both QLD and NSW. It’s a scale thing. As a proportion of state population, Tassie has a healthier footy demographic – - but, as a proportion of Australia wide footy demographic, NSW and QLD now account for 30% and QLD is definitely state number 4 in line.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
Alleged logos are here
http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/tmimages/cgi-bin/oracle_get_tm_images.pl?1342740
http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/tmimages/cgi-bin/oracle_get_tm_images.pl?1342741
Art Sapphire said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
Adrian – everyone knew that Heart were going to do their launch after the tennis. You could have held out for another day or two before posting this piece as you would have had more to work with.
Andyroo had the good presence to post the links so we can view the new logos but everyone as usual is too busy bickering to have commented on them. Here are the link again for those who missed it the first time around.
http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/tmimages/cgi-bin/oracle_get_tm_images.pl?1342740
http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/tmimages/cgi-bin/oracle_get_tm_images.pl?1342741
What do people think of them??
Space invaders anyone?? My first impressions are pretty positive.
Someone on the Victory forum is reporting that they have spotted the Heart manager in front of Flinders St Station doing a photo shoot with the logos in the background. So stay tuned…
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:34pm | Report comment
Are sure they’re not the new logos for the metro train system?
they look very ordinary.
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
Reminds me of the old Mercantile Mutual signs around the domestic cricket one day ovals – hit the sign on the full and win a bucket load!!
actually, also reminds me of those illusionary pictures of the never ending stairway going up and up on all 4 sides – an Escher’s optical illusion. It hurts to look at it!!!
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:41pm | Report comment
What a surprise.
the Judean peoples front of AFL don’t like the new Melbourne Heart logos.
Michael C said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:20am | Report comment
where did I say I didn’t like it???
and I’m not the only one to think of the Merc Mutual Cup signs.
AndyRoo said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
It took me a while to realise the H component but then I guess the logo will be around for a while so first impressions aren’t that important and the subtlety could be a good thing.
I thought of Mercantile Mutual, wonder if you get $500 for hitting it
Art Sapphire said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
Here is a lovely logo of Heerenveen a Dutch football team – a team logo with hearts in it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Heerenveen.png
and one of Hearts of Midlothian
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eamoncurry/1251845196/
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
Art,
I hope the Melb Hearts show more heart when they tangle with one of us Queensland Greeks.. 
what about my boys on Friday night—–no heart shown from Melbourne Vic on Friday night.. Kruse, what a sook..
~~~~~~~~
AF
Art Sapphire said | February 1st 2010 @ 7:42pm | Report comment
AF – the score now reads Pantaledis 5 weeks – Muscat 2 weeks.
My mates who went up on the weekend caught up with him after the game and he admitted he was gone for the rest of the season. Pity the 4th official did not see the incident, the result would have been different, and considering Sydney’s result, Victory would now be on their way to the Premiership. Oh well, lets see what happens next weekend.
Brett McKay said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
the second one looks like a Transformer head!!
Art Sapphire said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
I am getting that comment in the office as well Brett – also space invaders
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
Just Brilliant—-first I time I’ve laid my eyes upon them. No wonder the AFL want to throw cold water on it—-I would like to see them in colour. Or is it just the one colour, red on white b/g..?
mattamkII said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
‘itscalledfootball’
Mate get your head out of the clouds. Although I am primarily a union man I support all codes and wish the A-League all the success it can have. But if you think there isn’t a major risk in two Melbourne based sides splitting the ethic population and causing issues then you are crazy.
Mate, violence hasn’t even left the A-League…most Melb V Adelaide games have some sort of blow out and more than once mini riots have taken place… once at Southern Cross Station and once at Hindmarsh in Adelaide. I saw one of these with my own eyes.
PS – Mate, if you think getting on this forum, acting the martyr and generally touting anti soccer conspiracy theories is doing the code a favor you need to check yourself.
***General Statement *** As I have said once before. People who have issues with the term ‘football’ being used for anything other than ‘association footbal’ (soccer) really need to get out more. Maybe put the xbox away, go down the pub, buy yourself a drink and try talking to a girl…?
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:30pm | Report comment
Matta mate mate mate . . .
I think you are the one who perhaps needs to get out more – maybe an A-League game would be a start.
Then you might see for yourself how many families and young children go along and how well behaved the crowds are and you mightn’t make such ridiculous statements.
What ethnic group does Victory represent?
What ethnic culture is Heart going to adopt?
What evidence do you have that another Melbourne team will cuse ethnic issues?
Do you suggest stopping the Australian Open Tennis or the Bulldogs rugby league club because a few ethnic people caused trouble?
Or the T20 cricket
http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/adelaide-security-stepped-up-after-t20-incidents-20100124-msmw.html
Mate, the A-League aint that bad. Really.
You can call the sport whatever you like mate, but the FFA and FIFA have asked their members to call it football as it is known in the vast majority of the world.
People who have issues with the term ‘football’ being used for the sport really need to get out more. Maybe put the penis away, go down the pub, buy yourself a drink and try talking to a girl…?
Cheers
Mate
Froar said | February 2nd 2010 @ 6:57am | Report comment
Welll there are significantly more people at the Aus open and a bulldogs game to begin with.
You are right about football though. That is what other people call it so we should be like them. They thing I find funny about it is how upset Australian association football supporters get when you use the dreaded soccer word. You can use it throughout Europe and people won’t even blink. It is a non-issue. You won’t even get a funny look. Especially when a number of the football related television shows and newspaper lift outs include soccer in the name. Both sides need to get over it. Perhaps AFL could be tweedle dee and soccer could be tweedle dumb.
Michael C said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Froar -
re “You are right about football though. That is what other people call it so we should be like them. ”
the problem though is that this issue seems an Australian invention – the dreaded ’s’ word and the loathing of it.
‘Soccer’ – variously has been labelled an American invented put down term……..obviously wrong – we know it’s the Brits on abbreviation of ‘Association’. It is a cool word, it is fine to use interchangeably and is done so even in the UK – where one of the longest and most respected publications is “World Soccer”. Just ask Les Murray about his “October 1960 copy of World Soccer magazine, the very first issue of the monthly that has since become the world’s most prestigious English language football publication and is going stronger than ever today”.
Do you reckon he’s scribbled over the ‘Soccer’ in title and changed it with “it’s called football”……no, of course not.
“That is what other people call it so we should be like them” – but who are we talking about. In the English speaking world, the US, Canada, Ireland all have local variants of football such that soccer is very widely used. Around Australia – likewise (other than the SMH!!). Why should we be like any body else outside of that selection? Noting that ’soccer’ has been used widely in NZ and South Africa – - but, from a marketers perspective, there does appear a battle for ownership of the term ‘football’……and that’s really just sad.
So – celebrate difference rather than seek uniformity and mono-culture. Celebrate the Italians where Associazione Calcio Milan, or AC Milan is their unique phrasing – - – none of this cultural cringe to suggest they should be just like everybody else. Bugger everybody else!!!
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | February 2nd 2010 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
If its called Football, why is our national team the Socceroos?
Australian Football said | February 2nd 2010 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
It’s for folk just like you—–but for the Football purist like me and my comrades, it’s the “Australian National Football Team”
~~~~~~
AF
Punter said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:55pm | Report comment
There was way too much Soccer v Football talk for me.
jimbo said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:57pm | Report comment
I don’t think its a case of paranoia Froar.
Lets look at what’s transpired.
It seems Melbourne Heart are not officially allowed to use the title Melbourne Heart Football Club, because of legal action on two fronts.
The AFL has objected to the use of the words “Melbourne”, “Football” and “Club” in their name, because the Melbourne AFL team or the Demons is already known as the Melbourne football club. This is despite the fact that Melbourne Victory has called itself the Melbourne Victory Football Club already for several years.
Secondly, the Melbourne Lord Mayors charity has raised legal objections to the Heart using the term “Melbourne Heart Football Club” becuase the charity is also know as the “Heart of Melbourne Charity”.
Where is the paranoia in all that?
The legal action is stopping the Melbourne Heart kick off their team and set up an official website.
Do you think they are two valid legal objections?
bever fever said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:37pm | Report comment
Dont know the leagalities of it all but Melbourne Football Club has been around for 150 years and as such its petty of a another club/code attempting to steal its name and rebrand itself football, when in that state its been known as soccer for 100 years. The word football clearly means australian rules football in Viictoria and the southern states.
Try starting up a new restaurant by naming it Macdonalds or even maccas or anything remotely the same, try starting up a new sporting franchise called Man U hearts FC and see what happens.
Whats wrong with Melbourne Hearts soccer club.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:48pm | Report comment
Whats wrong with Melbourne Victory Football Club or Melbourne Heart Football Club?
How can they possibly get confused with Melbourne Demons Football Club?
How ever long marn grook has been played in Victoria, the AFL still doesn’t own the patent to the terms “Melbourne” or “Football Club”
bever fever said | February 2nd 2010 @ 12:03am | Report comment
Well itscalled football , real football, australian football , football is us etc etc etc it actually is just FC as far as the registered name is concerned, soccer supporters should focus on more important things, like actually playing soccer and finding some people to turn up to games.
Mr Real Australian it's called Football Man formerly known as Kurt said | February 2nd 2010 @ 12:40am | Report comment
Even by the standards of The Roar this is weird line of argument from the soccerinas. To quote from the linked article: “My understanding from the FFA is that we have been permitted to proceed provided there is sufficient differentiation in the name to avoid any confusion,” Munn said. “That if we want, just as an example, to call ourselves Melbourne Jets FC, with Jets clearly being a point of difference, then we can.”
So there is no ‘legal challenge’ from the AFL, no attempt to stop the new soccer club from using the term ‘FC’ in its name, nothing of the kind whatsoever. So please everyone move along, nothing to see here.
Towser said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:04am | Report comment
If Viduka starts for the Heart it may give them an initial leg up:-
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,26664377-5000940,00.html
Redb said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:32am | Report comment
Therein lies their Ace card. Play that card, Melb Heart will go well from the start. I’d go to a game to see Dukes.
Redb
James said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:30am | Report comment
So Melbourne Heart have unveiled their logo and announced the name as Melbourne Heart and there has been little to no fanfare. Where’s the big launch, photos, media, anything? I couldn’t even find the story of the name and logo on the Herald Sun website and they ran the comp to name the team!
Redb said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
It’s in the back pages of the Herald Sun today. Rubbish logo IMO.
Midfielder said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:46am | Report comment
In my humble opinion the Heart have not been good at promoting themselves … they always said Heart was not going to be their names etc…
Dogz R Barkn said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Watching all this Heart stuff unfold from afar, I can’t help thinking that the extra year afforded Rovers will be an absolute godsend for us.
Make no mistake – we will hit the ground running with a good deal of committed support from the word go – and there won’t be any mistaking our team with the Bling.
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:47pm | Report comment
well somebody obviously doesnt appreciate monty python and took my post down regarding the people’s front of judea
Westy said | February 3rd 2010 @ 8:17pm | Report comment
Reckon the supporters group shouldve been “The Rebel Alliance”
at least they can get a couple of headlines/saying from the nickname…
still better than some of the headlines ive heard from melbourne heart…
I reckon that the heart name is kinda weird. arent nicknames supposed to be ‘threatning’ or something, but, just my opinion
Australian Football said | February 3rd 2010 @ 8:38pm | Report comment
Westy,
One of my biggest gripes was when Jack Gibson changed the nick name on Newtown RL club from Newtown Blue Bags to the Newtown Jets…
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:47am | Report comment
How could they possibly win the case when Melbourne Victory Football Club has been in existance for six years already with the words “Melbourne, “Football” and “Club” in their title.
Ridiculous really, because even the City of Melbourne official website calls them the Melbourne Victory Football Club
http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/ParksandActivities/SportsandRecreation/Pages/MelbourneVictory.aspx
If the AFL or the Melbourne Lord Mayor’s Charity won the case, then they would have to do the same to Victory and Victory would have to stop operating till it was fixed.
I’d love to see that.
Dogz R Barkn said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:53am | Report comment
I’m not 100% sure here, but I think you would find that they are officially registered as Melbourne Victory FC.
So, yes, Melbourne Heart FC is probably acceptable, but Melbourne Heart Football Club may not be acceptable (in terms of offically registered names).
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:57am | Report comment
The Lord Mayor’s Charity is NOT concerned with any use of “Melbourne”, “Football”, “FC”.
It’s the “Heart of Melbourne” charity brand/image that is of concern here – and any marketing of Melbourne Hearts/Heart of MElbourne with respect to the soccer team will have to be done very carefully.
That’s why it’s ludicrous to claim this action as a covert pro-AFL move by the city council – because, the “Heart” bit has nothing whatsoever to do with the AFL.
Haven’t you figured that bit out yet???
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
“If the AFL or the Melbourne Lord Mayor’s Charity won the case”
How can the AFL win the case?
THe AFL aren’t proceeding any actions.
Melbourne Victory FC has zero to do with “Heart of Melbourne”
AFL has zero to do with “Heart of Melbourne”.
you’re stalling better than Redb could by arguing about something that isn’t happening or going to happen.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Same thing isn’t it? What does FC stand for all over the world and how can the AFL lay ownership to it?
Really – just stalling tactics and being a PitA.
Redb said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
Keep trying.
Beast-A-Tron said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
“Same thing isn’t it? What does FC stand for all over the world and how can the AFL lay ownership to it?”
But that just isn’t true, you are lying; the AFL has done nothing of the sort.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
Yes I can see your point now and agree Michael.
Everyone will get confused with the Lord Mayor’s Hearts of Melbourne charity when they really want to go to the Melbourne Hearts Football Club games – it will be chaotic.
And these people too can expect football fans to knock on their door by mistake
http://melbourneheart.com.au/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdScsag3WbE
http://www.rmit.edu.au/browse/News%20and%20Events%2FNewsroom%2FNews%2FMedia%20Releases%2Fby%20title%2FN%2F;ID=vr8tg67cojv2;STATUS=A
http://www.melbourneheartsurgery.com.au/
http://www.egov.vic.gov.au/pdfs/CaseStudies/Bcase9.pdf
http://www.hotfrog.com.au/Companies/Melbourne-Heart-Centre
http://www.melbourneheartcare.com.au/
http://www.hotfrog.com.au/Companies/Melbourne-Heart-Care
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:34pm | Report comment
Is the Lord Mayor making a legal challenge against these poeple too
http://melbourneheart.com.au/
I can see how the poor people of Melbourne will get easily confused and end up at a Hearts football game instead of donating to the Lord mayor’s charity or seeing their heart specialist.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Keep stalling . . .
Michael C said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
What probably started coming to their notice was reporting of stories like this one the heart of melbournes new aleague bid, that would’ve probably rung some alarm bells.
The “Melbourne Heart” medical specialist centre probably don’t go claiming to be the “Heart of Melbourne” medical centre.
One would imagine the main aspect of all this is a confirmation that the club NOT actively engage in or encourage “Heart of Melbourne” type marketing/references, such that suggestions for “Sporting Heart of Melbourne” would probably not be tolerated.
But, where the club to call itself “St.Vincents”??
Australian Football said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
ItsCalledFootball
Further damning evidence of the AFL/lord mayor’s true disgraceful attempts in trying to strip “Hearts” from the new Football Club’s Franchise name..
~~~~~~~~
AF
Towser said | February 1st 2010 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
Have a heart. Your just heartless. I know I wear my heart on my sleeve,but I’m just trying to get to the heart of the matter.
Still Its good for a hearty laugh .
Whats that English sea shanty “heart of Oak are our men”. Change the name to the”Vampires” then we can just drive a stake into it. Perhaps their supporters can come from the “Tin man Club” of Melbourne. There also looking for Hearts.
Do they have a big membership in Melbourne?
Froar said | February 1st 2010 @ 6:43pm | Report comment
I don’t understand why some of my fellow assoc football supporters are still so paranoid?
I doubt that the charity is taking this on under political pressure. Legally, they risk losing their charitable status which would effectively disolve the organisation.
It kind of shoots the conspiracy argument in the foot.
ItsCalledFootball said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:08pm | Report comment
Huh?
Paranoia.
How in the world is Melbourne Lord Mayor’s Charity going to lose its charity status, because of Melbourne Heart Football Club?