Yeah it was sarcy, and for the record I do not think the crest should change at all.Northern_Light wrote: Not sure if you are being sarcy or not.
But just to wind YeahWhyNot up...
Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks
Yeah it was sarcy, and for the record I do not think the crest should change at all.Northern_Light wrote: Not sure if you are being sarcy or not.
Clearly you are someone with time in your hands.sutts07 wrote:But just to wind YeahWhyNot up...
I'm not for changing the crest, but nice posts N_L.Northern_Light wrote: I was thinking one chimney stack and factory building.
Thanks. I appreciate being treated with civility even though you might basically disagree.Doc H Ball wrote:I'm not for changing the crest, but nice posts N_L.
Interestingly, even the Castle Swifts link has more to do with boats than castles, as it was the Castle Line shipping company that instigated the football team and which also named their boats after castles. Also, the link with West Ham comes from some of their players deciding to join Thames Iron Works after the Swifts folded. That link is quite tenuous, but it's basically more to do with ships than castles per se.Doc H Ball wrote:- but surely the old anchor should make a comeback? The stadium is on the river and it harks back to the Ironworks.
With the cross of St George instead of the Union Jack, this does look quite modern and I like it, however, I do hope we do not follow the trend and change our emblem, the change of stadium is more than enough for now, however, should the club ever announce they are looking into it, I hope you bombard them with this image Sutts.sutts07 wrote:
They won't be allowed to be for copyright reasons. Even the BBC had to pixelate them out of news reports when not actually broadcasting the games themselves for which they were the rights holder.and also whether the olympic rings should be included