I see that on Twitter (or X), whilst the club's handle is still @hrbfc, the name is now "Hampton and Richmond FC" and the description is the "Official Twitter account of Hampton and Richmond FC".
How long before the owner of @hrfc, someone called Hollye Waters Reid, is bought out? The #hrfc hashtag is already used throughout social media.
-
EastTerracer
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2023 8:40 am
Always a bad idea to change club name, colours or badges without consulting fans. In fact, the government has announced plans in its recent White Paper for reforming football goverance including protection of club's cultural heritage. Specifically, under the proposals "The Regulator will require clubs to comply with the Football Association (FA) on its new rules for club heritage, which will give fans a veto over changes to the badge and home shirt colours, in addition to the strong existing protections for club names".
FA rules introduced for season 22/23 already require that clubs must undertake a thorough and extensive consultation process with supporters when looking to make a material change to its club crest, or change its recognised home shirt colours.
Section M8 of the FA Handbook defines what is considered a material change to a club crest as e.g. changing a colour from blue to red, adding or deleting text, or adding new design features and/or deleting established design features. Upon making such a change (M9) a club must be in a position to evidence that a majority of supporters are in favour of the change and (M10) register the new crest. Similar rules apply for home shirt colours.
FA rules introduced for season 22/23 already require that clubs must undertake a thorough and extensive consultation process with supporters when looking to make a material change to its club crest, or change its recognised home shirt colours.
Section M8 of the FA Handbook defines what is considered a material change to a club crest as e.g. changing a colour from blue to red, adding or deleting text, or adding new design features and/or deleting established design features. Upon making such a change (M9) a club must be in a position to evidence that a majority of supporters are in favour of the change and (M10) register the new crest. Similar rules apply for home shirt colours.
-
EastTerracer
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2023 8:40 am
I am advised by the National League that that Rules of the Football Association relating to Heritage Assets (which involves the directive that no Club shall make any material changes to its Club Crest without first undertaking a thorough and extensive consultation with its supporters) only apply to Clubs participating in the Premier League, EFL, Step 1 of the National League System, the FAWSL and the FAWC.EastTerracer wrote: ↑Wed Aug 02, 2023 4:40 pm Always a bad idea to change club name, colours or badges without consulting fans. In fact, the government has announced plans in its recent White Paper for reforming football goverance including protection of club's cultural heritage. Specifically, under the proposals "The Regulator will require clubs to comply with the Football Association (FA) on its new rules for club heritage, which will give fans a veto over changes to the badge and home shirt colours, in addition to the strong existing protections for club names".
FA rules introduced for season 22/23 already require that clubs must undertake a thorough and extensive consultation process with supporters when looking to make a material change to its club crest, or change its recognised home shirt colours.
Section M8 of the FA Handbook defines what is considered a material change to a club crest as e.g. changing a colour from blue to red, adding or deleting text, or adding new design features and/or deleting established design features. Upon making such a change (M9) a club must be in a position to evidence that a majority of supporters are in favour of the change and (M10) register the new crest. Similar rules apply for home shirt colours.
That is I believe correct as matters currently stand. Of course if we were promoted to the NL then it would apply to us. The White Paper on football governance may introduce heritage asset protections right across the game if it is passed fully into law but that is in the future. Clearly the direction of travel is to encourage clubs to consult with fans on any changes to heritage assets as a matter of best practice and a sign of good governance.
-
TW3 Beaver
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2021 10:56 am
- Location: Lampton Village
-
EastTerracer
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2023 8:40 am
Someone seems pretty desperate to rid the club name of 'Borough'.
Last month of so has seen excessive use of #HRFC instead of #HRBFC
Now they've changed X (Twitter) to @hamrichfc as obviously couldn't acquire the handle they wanted.
Website now has URL as hamrich.com , although old hrbfc.co.uk still redirects there.
We heard how these new owners were experts and branding etc was their skill set.
It seems like no plan at all, and no checks done first.
There are better run social media and branding by sunday league teams.
The above mentioned protective paper not applying to step 2 is an oversight, it's just lucky it doesn't apply to them. Those still on the board, like Richard Parsons, Jacques Le Bars, Ben Hudson etc, not to mention to massively silent Chairman of the Supporters Trust, Phil Weller, should be having conversations with the brothers explaining these things aren't acceptable - they've all gone quite, why stay as a director or on the board if you just sit by doing nothing. Hang your heads in shame!
Now they've changed X (Twitter) to @hamrichfc as obviously couldn't acquire the handle they wanted.
Website now has URL as hamrich.com , although old hrbfc.co.uk still redirects there.
We heard how these new owners were experts and branding etc was their skill set.
It seems like no plan at all, and no checks done first.
There are better run social media and branding by sunday league teams.
The above mentioned protective paper not applying to step 2 is an oversight, it's just lucky it doesn't apply to them. Those still on the board, like Richard Parsons, Jacques Le Bars, Ben Hudson etc, not to mention to massively silent Chairman of the Supporters Trust, Phil Weller, should be having conversations with the brothers explaining these things aren't acceptable - they've all gone quite, why stay as a director or on the board if you just sit by doing nothing. Hang your heads in shame!
-
EastTerracer
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2023 8:40 am
It's all very well having generic hastags like #forwardtogether but actions speak louder than corporate slogans.