If a football club changes its colours, is it still the same football club? It’s an old philosophical question provoked by the latest report from the BBC:
Cardiff City are considering a rebranding which could mean a change of colour and a significant cash injection, BBC Wales Sport understands.
This may involve the team playing in red instead of their traditional blue.
The club’s Malaysian investors believe red is a more dynamic colour for marketing in Asia, as well as of more national significance in Wales.
Read ‘dynamic’ as ‘more visually similar to Manchester United, Liverpool.’ First, this is one of those articles you read about in the British papers that is designed to provoke terror and xenophobic outrage from the right, and aghast, it-was-all-better-in-the-olden-days nostalgia from the left.
Cardiff City are not going to change their colours. Not now, not ever. Is it ridiculous and—goddammit—a “sign of the times” that a foreign group wants to waltz in and fuck up football and history and shit?
No. Chances are this was part of a set of proposals from some asinine corporate consultant. It’s idiotic, certainly, particularly the bit about “national significance in Wales,” as if a colour change will suddenly provoke Wales to get behind the Bluebirds, which are called the Bluebirds and feature a picture of a bluebird on the crest.
So read my lips: Cardiff City will never, ever change their colours. If Toronto FC adjusting from red to blue to perhaps better match the iconic Toronto Maple Leafs would provoke outrage among TFC’s remaining fan base, than there is simply no way fans would allow a 113 year-old club to change their spots (although there have been precedents in football history, see Green and Gold at Newton Heath). Because the colour of the shirt and the ground are the only two constants in most clubs. Take that away, and, well, you’ve got franchises!