A-League wins Villa, loses it's Heart

I'll just say again (as it hasn't been corrected) maybe there were no editors that day, as the dud apostrophe is still in the headline and in the article. If a writer can't get that one straight, I'm not going to spend too much time on the content of the article -- and the term "pro" should definitely have an asterisk next to it!

Sorry Tony, it is not a personal attack - it is just that the article is so light weight. The name change does not come as a shock to anyone who follows football....it has been on the cards since the takeover. It makes perfect sense to formalize it at the same time as the Villa announcement, which really is news and gives Heart supporters a reason to make the transition. Everything you have written just comes across as poorly informed opinion - no need to write an article to do that, simply post your opinion as a comment to another football article under the Stevo moniker (not you MH Stevo!). Chin up buddy!

A tongue-in-cheek article surely. So what have we lost and what are we gaining? What is the A-league gaining from these changes? Does anybody really think supporters wanted to see more years of treading water and medicority under Sidwell? That we barely had the finances to keep going and that whenever we had good players we were prepared to sell them to get some much needed $$$$. Yes we were well run, balanced the books, had community programs but it seemed we barely had enough to catch up to HAL clubs that had been around since season one. Very difficult to get real traction in Melbourne when we're competitng with a well established outfit. CFG ownership is the circuit breaker and they have done a good job so far with the changes. I'm pretty sure the HAL is in for one heck of an upward swing. We can all enjoy the ride.

It is pretty ruthless in here haha. But from my short time on this message board I've noticed that any attempts to chase after negatives when the positives outweigh them significantly, is really frowned on and attacked as your article has been. I think you've made one very crucial mistake here and that is, you've failed put yourself in the shoes of the A-League bosses. CFG wanted to take control and make changes to one of the smallest and youngest teams in the comp, those changes could very well have an enormous impact on Australian football, all they asked for in return was the ability to re-brand the club as they saw fit. It would take a very very naive and silly sporting administrator to knock back that offer. I understand that you probably sympathise with those who strongly affiliated themselves with the Heart red and white brand. But I imagine given the prior circumstances of their club, they would welcome these changes (maybe with gritted teeth)

@ Tony Loedi: Ok, well without trying to be ruthless, here is why I thought it was a piece to stir up debate: - Your choice of words makes it obvious that you are against the name change (that's fine, you're allowed just as much of an opion as I or anyone else on here), but the loaded terms you use are asking for people to react (eg: Melbourne City is a 'franchise', but Melbourne Heart was a 'club'). - You express a cynicism at the timing of the announcement believing it a was cover-up designed throw people's attention away from the name & colour-change. Whilst I'm not a Mel City fan as such, I much prefer them over MV and am happy with the name & colour-change (although as an SFC fan, I didn't want them playing in Sky Blue as they tried to do). From what I have read, there are a number of Mel City fans who are happy about the changes (although most wanted to keep the colours) and, as has been speculated in the mainstream media, I think CFG did acknowledge this in keeping the red & white stripes as the away strip. And as for the timing of the announcement, why could it NOT have been down to simply the logistics of organising the contract? David Villa is currently with the Spanish NT in the USA and has only just recently (after the UCL final) confirmed he would not renew his contract with Atletico Madrid, so it's not as if things would have been easy to negotiate these past couple of weeks. - The comparison with Manchester City is spurious. Melbourne Heart had been in existence for 4 years and had struggled to identify itself to the broader Melbourne community (it's main defining feature was that it was NOT MV - not a successful branding strategy in the long-term you'll agree!). Manchester City is a club that has existed for over 100 yrs (since 1894 in fact) and has a well-established culture & identity (which is not souly based upon it NOT being Man Utd!). Of course the fans would reject such a move by new owners just as any fans of another well-established club would. - You mention a name dispute with an established lower-league club in Melbourne. This is being discussed by both clubs according to mainstream media reports, so this is potentially a non-issue based upon the quotes from the HAL club administration. (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/west/melbourne-city-denies-dispute-with-aleague-club-has-been-resolved/story-fngnvog3-1226944671733) - Finally, you end off with your own assertions but without any evidence to back them up: "Now I don’t claim to be the biggest football supporter in this country, but to me the Heart name and their playing strip looked like a very marketable product. All the franchise was missing was some more wins on the pitch." Really? This is your opinion so unless you have first-hand knowledge of what MH was doing to market themselves its open to counter-opinion. "Given more time they probably would have caught up to the Victory in terms of supporters. But after the name change this seems less certain." Really? Again, an opinon of yours and unless you are assuming the Law of Averages is in place and a bottom-less pit of money was available to MH ownership this is a bit more difficult to prove. The results on the pitch & in the stands seem to suggest that this was not going to happen. "Instead the A-League has given in to the wealth of the City group, in turn gambling on short-term marketing gains." Really? Who else exactly apart from the previous MH owners have done this? SFC in fact didn't do this (some might say they were stupid for that decision!). And is this a gamble? Mel City have reportedly signed David Villa to play for max. 10 matches this coming season (ie: up until the break for the Asian Cup in January) so do you really think CFG are going to walk away from Mel City before then? Or for that matter any time within say the next 4 yrs (an equal time to establish an identity & culture that MH had) after having spent $11.5M in buying the licence to the club? CFG are rolling in money and without suggesting that they waste it away on bad investments, that sum is the proverbial 'drop in the ocean' for them in terms of what their ambitions for the club might be - they spent 100s of millions of £ in establishing Man City as a Top 4 club in the EPL so why would they suddenly think their purchase price & subsequent millions of $s ($10M perhaps over the next 4yrs?) is too much to justify continued involvement. I highly doubt they would walk away from the club if they hadn't achieved their goals within this example timeframe of 4yrs, but rather would try to change how they are doing things first. Ps. As a final comment to your critique of the CFGs actions, I'd suggest that your article in actual fact could NOT "have been written about any club in any sporting code in Australia" as the majority of these clubs have established cultures, identities & traditions and would represent a major difference between what has happened to MH. There are even plenty of examples of established clubs with decades of traditions changing their names (eg: most Sydney-based NRL clubs have done so with examples being the Roosters, Bulldogs & Sharks amongst others). I think you'd find much more sympathy for your argument in relation to the recent events surrounding the Melbourne Tigers NBL club/franchise...

Cpaaa Good post Champ , I just simply cant understand the negativity. I dont think the author knows a great deal about football he says Villa is somewhat in his prime , Alvaro Negredo cant even get into the Spanish squad. Cpaaa I checked Marca.Com English version last night the Villa story was there . Fabregas has signed for Chelsea, thief, for 33 mill .

Fuss keeping it real and straight to the point as always. Just a few points from the tabloids of Spain today for those that are interested... Front Cover Spanish sports paper today (AS) leading story is that Arsenal are chasing Iker Casillas and inset is David Villa with the caption “ David Villa with the shirt of his new club Melbourne City” The inside story is more or less what has already been said apart from, - he will wear number 9 for Melbourne and go back to 7 for NYC. - he is excited about experiencing a new culture and Football style - after the World Cup he will travel back to his home town of Asturias for a short break and then fly to Melbourne with his family where he will start training with MC. As the World Cup approaches its packed with WC news and its so Cool to see our own Ange Postacoglou’s name appear in the Spanish press. - Describing when the Socceroos arrived in Brasil and the players didn’t do any interviews - Ange has taken a gamble with Breciano who is suffering sore ribs. - And his last test will be against Croatia who are feeling humble yet confident about this years tournament. Barcelona papers went with the front page story that Ivan Rakatic is about to sign with the Catalan Club while Villa to MC was reported but didn’t get a front page spot.

@ Cpaaa: +1! He's entitled to his opinion, but it's so obvious he's trying to stir the crowd a bit by being cynical about yesterday's anouncement that it undermines his credibility...

Well spotted Cpaaa. Tony Loedi you are pathetic.

It is classic Stevo! (Not MH Stevo)

Just to add to what Fuss has written, the FFA have confirmed a rule change to the way loan players are counted towards the Salary Cap - only the portion Melbourne City pay will be counted towards the Salary Cap. What this in effect means is that clubs like Melbourne City who are owned by a consortium with ownership interests in other clubs can 'subsidise' additional 'marquee'-type players - ie: intentionally underpay the star player in order to fit them under the Salary Cap, whilst the player receives their additional wages from their parent club. I wonder whether this will become a problem in the HAL and if so what the FFA intends to do about it... "Under A-League regulations, only the portion paid directly by Melbourne City for on-loan players will count towards the salary cap, irrespective of the net wage paid by the owning club. While guest players are excluded from the A-League club's salary cap, Villa may set the precedent for Melbourne's next three foreign player signings, after club sources confirmed they will use their owners' 32 active talent scouts in their pursuit of a new marquee and two other visa players." Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/david-villa-to-play-with-melbourne-city-20140605-zryfi.html#ixzz33q6qU5EZ http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/david-villa-to-play-with-melbourne-city-20140605-zryfi.html

An "FFA fail” article written within hours of the announcement of David Villa to MCFC written by a person that has only ever written on afl and cricket. Nice try buddy but my comments have been moderated for less, so how this one got past the editors only they will know. But while we are here, to those that feel sad of a name change, Ive got this to say. $11.5 Million dollars, David Villa, A Football emblem you can be proud of, One of the most successful football administration teams on the planet, more to come and a ball hasnt even been kicked yet, this is evolution. Yeah right, lets start a campaign " bring back heart" express your interest here !

I used to refer to the club as 'Heart of Melbournian', a nod to the famous Edinburgh team, who could probably do with a bit of CFG's cash themselves these days.

Almost everyone I have spoken to prefers City over Heart, not many like the sky blue on the kit, but I just look at it as symbolism of its connection with man city and New York , as soon as City leave, change the home kit and make the sky blue band on the badge red. As for name, I prefer "Heart of Melbourne City FC"

It's not yet confirmed as a "guest spot". MelbCity say they may designate that Villa is a "loan player", which means he's a normal member of the squad (under the Salary Cap) - e.g. same as Rogic was for MVFC.

Oh, and Villa is not the biggest "signing" in a-league history. That honour goes to ADP who did actually SIGN. It's a guest spot just like Romario.

Now they can be even better!

Agree Clayts. Heart were very solid, on and off field.

I am amazed at how precious some are about the changes. The name "heart" was nauseating and had to go, i just wish that the other almost as bad monikers of "glory" and "roar" could also be consigned to the dustbin of history. Glorious hoofball. sickening.