Controversial Malaysian owner Vincent Tan decided to accept market research which showed the colour red to be more “winning” in the eyes of the public, and more popular among a potential new fanbase in Asia.
There are other reasons for Tan’s unpopularity but, in general, meddling with the history of clubs angers supporters who, perhaps, have less reason to hate their team’s owners.
Hull City are a case in point. The Allam family – who rescued the club, funded their promotion and have all-but assured survival in the Premier League – were hugely popular until they decided that the club’s nickname should be incorporated into its official title.
‘City’, according to the owners, is “too common”, so ‘Hull Tigers’ it shall be. Cue righteous anger, protests and indignation that these damned foreigners don’t ‘get’ the history of the club (never mind the fact that Assem Allam has been in Hull since 1968, and that his children were born there).
How to prevent such meddling then? Look no further than Luton, who look set to be promoted back to the Football League from the Conference Premier, which they lead by 15 points with 11 matches remaining.
The Hatters are subject to widespread interest from prospective foreign owners, as they have one of the bigger supporter bases in the lower leagues, and are fairly close to London.
While the interest is most welcome, Luton do not want eccentric owners mimicking the antics of Cardiff and Hull.
“We are delighted to announce that 2020 and Trust in Luton have agreed a deal to protect the exclusive image rights of Luton Town, which includes the name, nickname, mascot, colours and crest.
“The Trust, the official fans’ shareholders in the club, will from now on have the legal right to veto any changes in the decision on club name, kit colours and alterations to the club crest and mascot identity.
“This means that the club’s image is protected and protected by people who will always care and always be there.”
- Sports & Recreation
- Cardiff City