Jump to content

The Greatest Football Club Name


Percival King
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Ominous said:

My dad played for them in the late 50's. Think they were a league team back then.

Yes they were. They lost their League status in 1969-70, sadly.

Photo of their stadium…

 

2297D11D-1C81-4C73-A554-59A465B358F8.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Footballfirst

    6

  • Smithee

    14

  • PortyBeach

    13

  • Hmfc1965

    6

All roads lead to Gorgie

I looked up Plymouth Argyle as I wondered if there was a Scottish connection and indeed there is one theory that they took their name from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders regiment who had a football team of their own back then. Others say it is just from the name of the pub the founders frequented or a local street near the ground. 

The choice of colours they chose for the team was a huge mistake though 🤢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jamboozy said:

Kaiser Chiefs.


Once went to a Mamelodi Sundowns v Kaiser Chiefs game.

Sundowns won 1-0

Hola 7 👆

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
3 hours ago, Percival King said:

Well, at least to be consistent after they named their team after natives of another country, they then named their ground after a road on which their stadium ISN'T located. A bit like our team being called Cymry and our ground being called Ardmillan Terrace Stadium. And that would just be stupid!

Hahahahaha good point 😆

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PortyBeach said:

Yes they were. They lost their League status in 1969-70, sadly.

Photo of their stadium…

 

2297D11D-1C81-4C73-A554-59A465B358F8.jpeg

He used to tell me stories about playing down there where his football boots had studs nailed in and came up through the sole and paperback cowboy books for shinpads haha.He would have liked to have seen this picture to bring back some memories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
23 hours ago, tian447 said:

Heart of Midlothian is easily the best, followed in second place by Queen of the South. 

 

 

I think it was the late John Fairgrieve who described Heart of Midlothian Vs Queen of the South as the most romantically  named fixture.in football. Nothing on this thread to challenge that certainly not in the English language.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ominous said:

He used to tell me stories about playing down there where his football boots had studs nailed in and came up through the sole and paperback cowboy books for shinpads haha.He would have liked to have seen this picture to bring back some memories.

Sounds depressingly like the situation I’ve read about at Third Lanark FC in the years leading up to that club’s demise!

I was in Stockport about 3-4 years ago and took in the County match against the re-formed Bradford Park Avenue FC. That was in the “Conference” league (or whatever their fifth tier was called). 
 

Edited by PortyBeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Nah it’s the name of a country ffs, like us being called Alban, and there’s a team called Hibernians too. Unoriginal and unimaginative, like their supporters 😜

I think it simply means “Irish” which was an accurate description of the club’s heritage. 
It’s part of Edinburgh’s rich social fabric and as such I agree with “Martoon”’s assessment that we should revel in both clubs’ names.

In his 1959 book, “The Hearts”, Albert Mackie writes that Hearts needed a “stable-mate”. He went on appreciatively: “Was it by chance that the two names happened to alliterate - Hearts and Hibs?”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Savage Vince
23 hours ago, Smithee said:

Aye!

Never really thought about it, but aye!

 

I found out something today, I didn't know Hull's not a place, it's a river.

The place is called Kingston upon Hull, and the team is called Hull City.

 

Hull City is also the only team in England whose name doesn't have any letters that you can colour in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
3 minutes ago, PortyBeach said:

I think it simply means “Irish” which was an accurate description of the club’s heritage. 
It’s part of Edinburgh’s rich social fabric and as such I agree with “Martoon”’s assessment that we should revel in both clubs’ names.

In his 1959 book, “The Hearts”, Albert Mackie writes that Hearts needed a “stable-mate”. He went on appreciatively: “Was it by chance that the two names happened to alliterate - Hearts and Hibs?”

Not quite but close enough I suppose. 
I like that quote though 👍🏽.

 

C3FC16C3-2609-4FEE-85B0-6F215CE4E552.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

Hull City is also the only team in England whose name doesn't have any letters that you can colour in. 

And only one in Scotland. With the condition you use capital letters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/01/2022 at 19:02, Smithee said:

Oh, and I always liked Albion Rovers, it's like being called City United or something.

Albion is the old name for the island of Great Britain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Albion is the old name for the island of Great Britain

Indeed, but you only ever see it as a suffix - West Bromwich Albion, Burton Albion. They got their name as Albion FC and Rovers FC merged. I like thinking of them as Britain Rovers though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PortyBeach said:

I think it simply means “Irish” which was an accurate description of the club’s heritage. 
It’s part of Edinburgh’s rich social fabric and as such I agree with “Martoon”’s assessment that we should revel in both clubs’ names.

In his 1959 book, “The Hearts”, Albert Mackie writes that Hearts needed a “stable-mate”. He went on appreciatively: “Was it by chance that the two names happened to alliterate - Hearts and Hibs?”

I always found it interesting that DUFC used to be Dundee Hibernian but changed it in 1923. No idea if it was a political decision and they decided having a link to Ireland wasn't a good idea around the time of Irish independence but it seems the United part is more about the people being united as it wasn't a merger of any sort...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spellczech said:

I always found it interesting that DUFC used to be Dundee Hibernian but changed it in 1923. No idea if it was a political decision and they decided having a link to Ireland wasn't a good idea around the time of Irish independence but it seems the United part is more about the people being united as it wasn't a merger of any sort...

As you say, against a backdrop of rebellion, partition and civil war in Ireland it seems there was a feeling that being seen as an “Irish” club would be polarising.

 I think the feeling was that the name-change might open the club to a more diverse fan base and attract wider commercial benefits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PortyBeach said:

Yes they were. They lost their League status in 1969-70, sadly.

Photo of their stadium…

 

2297D11D-1C81-4C73-A554-59A465B358F8.jpeg

 

Thank you for this wonderful photo.  The stand to the left had 3 roof gables in total, one being out of picture.  It was designed by Archibald Leitch, and also had seating on the other side facing the cricket pitch.  Absolutely beautiful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The White Cockade

Shotts Bon Accord

OFK Kikinda I mind us playing them

Grasshoppers

 

Edited by The White Cockade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

heartgarfunkel
17 hours ago, superjack said:

Away and Wash your mouth with soap and water. Hawick are the borders answer to hibs, inbred mutants.

Not even from Hawick, but will fight for the corner of the Queen of a’ the Borders! 
 

Gala man? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sassenach said:

 

Thank you for this wonderful photo.  The stand to the left had 3 roof gables in total, one being out of picture.  It was designed by Archibald Leitch, and also had seating on the other side facing the cricket pitch.  Absolutely beautiful!

Glad you enjoyed it! Archibald Leitch certainly got around, didn’t he?

Interesting point you make with the adjoining cricket ground. Echoes of today’s Headingley with a cricket/rugby set-up.

I found a couple more photos of Park Avenue including one showing the cricket ground and another shows a model of the football ground (complete with three gables!)…

 

 

 

67A80138-4465-4968-9697-F670BD06A64E.jpeg

27CCCE1A-68EE-4785-B257-874D86BCE42A.jpeg

Edited by PortyBeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, PortyBeach said:

Glad you enjoyed it! Archibald Leitch certainly got around, didn’t he?

Interesting point you make with the adjoining cricket ground. Echoes of today’s Headingley with a cricket/rugby set-up.

I found a couple more photos of Park Avenue including one showing the cricket ground and another shows a model of the football ground (complete with three gables!)…

 

 

 

67A80138-4465-4968-9697-F670BD06A64E.jpeg

27CCCE1A-68EE-4785-B257-874D86BCE42A.jpeg

Thanks also for that, I'd never seen the model.

 

I've watched Yorkshire playing cricket at Park Avenue, but all that remained of the football side by then was crumbling external walls and entrances.

 

Back on topic, I believe that the bracketed "Park Avenue" part was never part of the club's official name.  They were simply called Bradford FC and converted to Association Football from Rugby.  The Park Avenue bit came to be widely used to distinguish them from Manningham after that club changed its name to Bradford City.  I'm happy to be proved wrong if the name ever was official (not including the modern new club).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, sassenach said:

Thanks also for that, I'd never seen the model.

 

I've watched Yorkshire playing cricket at Park Avenue, but all that remained of the football side by then was crumbling external walls and entrances.

 

Back on topic, I believe that the bracketed "Park Avenue" part was never part of the club's official name.  They were simply called Bradford FC and converted to Association Football from Rugby.  The Park Avenue bit came to be widely used to distinguish them from Manningham after that club changed its name to Bradford City.  I'm happy to be proved wrong if the name ever was official (not including the modern new club).

Someone earlier in the thread mentioned the use of brackets when adding “Park Avenue” to the club’s name, and I did read somewhere that this was only done to distinguish the club from Bradford City. 
So, yes, I reckon you’re correct about the name.

Mind you, if we’re talking about great football club names, I think “Bradford Park Avenue” is classic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, heartgarfunkel said:

Not even from Hawick, but will fight for the corner of the Queen of a’ the Borders! 
 

Gala man? 

Although born in Edinburgh, I was brought up in gala. Used to watch fairydean if I couldn't get to see the famous. JJ was the manager at the time as well.

Fairydean and Hawick, the borders equivelant of hearts and hibs. Hawick play in green. Their people are inbred and they smell. Gala used to play in the famous maroon until a split in the team in the 70s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, PortyBeach said:

I think it simply means “Irish” which was an accurate description of the club’s heritage. 
It’s part of Edinburgh’s rich social fabric and as such I agree with “Martoon”’s assessment that we should revel in both clubs’ names.

In his 1959 book, “The Hearts”, Albert Mackie writes that Hearts needed a “stable-mate”. He went on appreciatively: “Was it by chance that the two names happened to alliterate - Hearts and Hibs?”

 

When first started they were Hibernians, meaning Irish people, like Barbarians or Rovers.

 

After they died and started again, they were Hibernian, which as you say means just Irish.

 

Just a small addition to the tapestry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

When first started they were Hibernians, meaning Irish people, like Barbarians or Rovers.

 

After they died and started again, they were Hibernian, which as you say means just Irish.

 

Just a small addition to the tapestry

And a welcome addition! Interesting point about Hibs having “died and started again”. I haven’t found anything definitive on that and one view is the club formed in 1875 merely ceased playing football matches for a couple of years before picking up where it left off and resuming in 1893.

If so, then the 1887 Scottish Cup win is quite rightly counted among the current club’s honours. 
But…if it could be established that the resumption of football in 1893 was by a new Hibs football club and not the original entity, then the 2016 Cup win represents only the current club’s second success in that competition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PortyBeach said:

And a welcome addition! Interesting point about Hibs having “died and started again”. I haven’t found anything definitive on that and one view is the club formed in 1875 merely ceased playing football matches for a couple of years before picking up where it left off and resuming in 1893.

If so, then the 1887 Scottish Cup win is quite rightly counted among the current club’s honours. 
But…if it could be established that the resumption of football in 1893 was by a new Hibs football club and not the original entity, then the 2016 Cup win represents only the current club’s second success in that competition.

 

 

It used to be on their website that the club folded after Celtic took their players. There was a clear year and a half between the Hibernians' last game and Hibernian's first IIRC, but I have in mind it was between 1889-1891 they didn't exist at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

 

It used to be on their website that the club folded after Celtic took their players. There was a clear year and a half between the Hibernians' last game and Hibernian's first IIRC, but I have in mind it was between 1889-1891 they didn't exist at all.

“Folded” sounds emphatic enough! Hibs had been made homeless having lost their ground, Hibernian Park.

 Re the “in-between” years, I thought it was between 1891-93 as I remember reading Hibs arranged a friendly match against Hearts as part of opening their new Easter Road ground in 1893.

It didn’t go well, however…

 

DFC3EB71-4EE3-457B-A4CB-5C189D66D64E.jpeg

Edited by PortyBeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PortyBeach said:

“Folded” sounds emphatic enough! Hibs had been made homeless having lost their ground, Hibernian Park.

 Re the “in-between” years, I thought it was between 1891-93 as I remember reading Hibs arranged a friendly match against Hearts as part of opening their new Easter Road ground in 1893.

It didn’t go well, however…

 

DFC3EB71-4EE3-457B-A4CB-5C189D66D64E.jpeg

 

God I love Easter Road! 😁 

 

I'd really love to have this all nailed down, there was certainly a clear period of inaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PortyBeach said:

And a welcome addition! Interesting point about Hibs having “died and started again”. I haven’t found anything definitive on that and one view is the club formed in 1875 merely ceased playing football matches for a couple of years before picking up where it left off and resuming in 1893.

If so, then the 1887 Scottish Cup win is quite rightly counted among the current club’s honours. 
But…if it could be established that the resumption of football in 1893 was by a new Hibs football club and not the original entity, then the 2016 Cup win represents only the current club’s second success in that competition.

 

It's always funny hearing Hibs fans dance around this.

If a club is formed with the express purpose of playing football and then gives up the football in what way do they continue to exist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst
8 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

It's always funny hearing Hibs fans dance around this.

If a club is formed with the express purpose of playing football and then gives up the football in what way do they continue to exist?

There is more info on this thread

 

http://www.scottishleague.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=452

 

by the hibLOG » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:12 am

Mackay quotes the following article from The Scotsman, which makes it clear that the Hibs of 1892 were, if not exactly a direct continuation, then at least a very deliberate 'resuscitation' of the previous club. Leith Hibs was a new club which played its first game before the old Hibernian's final desperate benefit game against Leith Athletic on 14 Feb 1891. Leith Hibs was formed to try and keep the Hibernian idea going, but it was obviously not the same club.

From Mackay 'The Hibees' 1986 edition, p.51:
Although Hibs had not been represented at all on the field during 1891-92, not all of the friends had found watching Leith Athletic an acceptable alternative, and by March 1892 the Leith Burghs Pilot was able to report that 'Strenuous efforts are at present being made to resuscitate the old Hibernian FC. It is stated that £100 has already been collected to this end and that steps are being taken to secure suitable ground'.

 

The perhaps more cosmopolitan readership of The Scotsman had to wait till October 22nd to read the following. It seemed that the fund-raising had slowed up a bit.
 

'RESUSCITATION OF THE HIBERNIAN CLUB.

A meeting to consider the advisableness of resuscitating the Hibernian Football Club was held last night in St. Mary's Street Upper Hall. There was a crowded attendance and Mr. C. Sandilands was called to the chair.

 

In his opening remarks, the CHAIRMAN said the gentlemen interested in the promotion of the club wished it to be distinctly understood that it would be promoted on somewhat different lines from the old club. They desired it should be non-sectarian. They desired also to keep clear of the old committee and up to the present time had had nothing to do with them.

 

He then proceeded to give a statement of what they had already done towards reviving the club, mentioning that the promoters had their eye on a field which they had hopes of securing. Up to that time they had guarantees of £115 which however was nothing like sufficient to start the club. He intimated that they desired to open with a first class team and a first class ground.

 

He concluded by inviting suggestions; and after several questions had been put and answered, MR. FLOOD moved a resolution declaring that the formation of the Hibernian Football Club had now become an urgent necessity, and empowering those willing to join to proceed to make any preliminary arrangements they might
think fit. This was seconded by Mr. Mitchell and unanimously adopted.

 

On the motion of Mr. Galwin it was agreed to accept five shillings from anyone present towards the guarantee fund, that sum afterwards to go towards their first membership ticket. The CHAIRMAN intimated before the meeting ended that the guarantee fund had risen to £130 and names were then taken of persons desirous of guaranteeing with a view to membership, a good number going forward.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

There is more info on this thread

 

http://www.scottishleague.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=452

 

by the hibLOG » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:12 am

Mackay quotes the following article from The Scotsman, which makes it clear that the Hibs of 1892 were, if not exactly a direct continuation, then at least a very deliberate 'resuscitation' of the previous club. Leith Hibs was a new club which played its first game before the old Hibernian's final desperate benefit game against Leith Athletic on 14 Feb 1891. Leith Hibs was formed to try and keep the Hibernian idea going, but it was obviously not the same club.

From Mackay 'The Hibees' 1986 edition, p.51:
Although Hibs had not been represented at all on the field during 1891-92, not all of the friends had found watching Leith Athletic an acceptable alternative, and by March 1892 the Leith Burghs Pilot was able to report that 'Strenuous efforts are at present being made to resuscitate the old Hibernian FC. It is stated that £100 has already been collected to this end and that steps are being taken to secure suitable ground'.

 

The perhaps more cosmopolitan readership of The Scotsman had to wait till October 22nd to read the following. It seemed that the fund-raising had slowed up a bit.
 

'RESUSCITATION OF THE HIBERNIAN CLUB.

A meeting to consider the advisableness of resuscitating the Hibernian Football Club was held last night in St. Mary's Street Upper Hall. There was a crowded attendance and Mr. C. Sandilands was called to the chair.

 

In his opening remarks, the CHAIRMAN said the gentlemen interested in the promotion of the club wished it to be distinctly understood that it would be promoted on somewhat different lines from the old club. They desired it should be non-sectarian. They desired also to keep clear of the old committee and up to the present time had had nothing to do with them.

 

He then proceeded to give a statement of what they had already done towards reviving the club, mentioning that the promoters had their eye on a field which they had hopes of securing. Up to that time they had guarantees of £115 which however was nothing like sufficient to start the club. He intimated that they desired to open with a first class team and a first class ground.

 

He concluded by inviting suggestions; and after several questions had been put and answered, MR. FLOOD moved a resolution declaring that the formation of the Hibernian Football Club had now become an urgent necessity, and empowering those willing to join to proceed to make any preliminary arrangements they might
think fit. This was seconded by Mr. Mitchell and unanimously adopted.

 

On the motion of Mr. Galwin it was agreed to accept five shillings from anyone present towards the guarantee fund, that sum afterwards to go towards their first membership ticket. The CHAIRMAN intimated before the meeting ended that the guarantee fund had risen to £130 and names were then taken of persons desirous of guaranteeing with a view to membership, a good number going forward.'

Thanks for the research👍

It’s a bit confusing: “resuscitation” implies a revival of an existing entity, whereas “formation” suggests a new entity. 
But overall, it does seem to point to the 1875 club having folded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst
1 hour ago, PortyBeach said:

Thanks for the research👍

It’s a bit confusing: “resuscitation” implies a revival of an existing entity, whereas “formation” suggests a new entity. 
But overall, it does seem to point to the 1875 club having folded.

My way of looking at it was that the club didn't so much fold, but went into abeyance.  It wasn't incorporated so there there was no company to become insolvent or be liquidated.

 

"Abeyance" is equivalent to being dormant. It has been used in football for many years, particularly in junior circles as clubs take a year or more out of the leagues. A football club in those days was simply an association of like minded people, run by a committee.  When the club reached a point when there were insufficient players, committee members, funds, or other resources to enable it to fulfil its fixtures then it stops functioning.

 

If, at some point in the future, a new group of people wants to restart, or resurrect, the club, find a ground, new players and form a new committee with a new constitution, all they are really doing is looking to register to use the name. It may well be that you already have a ground or other resources that make the restart easier.  It is then up to the league whether or not to accept the club into the league once again.

 

In Hibs case, they were allowed to enter the "new" second division, which they won, but were not allowed promotion in their first year back.

 

Among clubs within the  pyramid that are currently in "abeyance" are Eyemouth United (EoS), Annbank United (WoS) and Heston Rovers (SoS).  Eyemouth is in its second year out, but the other two are in their first season out. 

 

Rangers/Sevco is a different model where a Newco purchased certain assets from the Oldco, so in business terms it is fair to call it a new club, but personally I am comfortable with the concept of sporting continuity.  If it looks like a duck (same colours), talks like a duck (same odious fans), lives in the same pond (ground) then I'm ok with it being treated as the original, despite the interruption.  The problem comes when the duck insists that there was no interruption to its existence. 

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brick Tamland
On 13/01/2022 at 18:25, Percival King said:

So, for almost 50 years I've believed that there's no greater football club name than Heart of Midlothian. Then I pick up the latest issue of When Saturday Comes, there's an article on the American Soccer League in season 1926-27 and there's teams called:

 

Springfield Babes

Fall River Marksmen

Boston Wonder Workers

Providence Clamdiggers  

Newark Skeeters

Indiana Flooring

 

None as good as Heart of Midlothian but all better than Motherwell or Dundee or Kilmarnock or Cowdenbeath........

 

 

 

:oohmatron:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

My way of looking at it was that the club didn't so much fold, but went into abeyance.  It wasn't incorporated so there there was no company to become insolvent or be liquidated.

 

"Abeyance" is equivalent to being dormant. It has been used in football for many years, particularly in junior circles as clubs take a year or more out of the leagues. A football club in those days was simply an association of like minded people, run by a committee.  When the club reached a point when there were insufficient players, committee members, funds, or other resources to enable it to fulfil its fixtures then it stops functioning.

 

If, at some point in the future, a new group of people wants to restart, or resurrect, the club, find a ground, new players and form a new committee with a new constitution, all they are really doing is looking to register to use the name. It may well be that you already have a ground or other resources that make the restart easier.  It is then up to the league whether or not to accept the club into the league once again.

 

In Hibs case, they were allowed to enter the "new" second division, which they won, but were not allowed promotion in their first year back.

 

Among clubs within the  pyramid that are currently in "abeyance" are Eyemouth United (EoS), Annbank United (WoS) and Heston Rovers (SoS).  Eyemouth is in its second year out, but the other two are in their first season out. 

 

Rangers/Sevco is a different model where a Newco purchased certain assets from the Oldco, so in business terms it is fair to call it a new club, but personally I am comfortable with the concept of sporting continuity.  If it looks like a duck (same colours), talks like a duck (same odious fans), lives in the same pond (ground) then I'm ok with it being treated as the original, despite the interruption.  The problem comes when the duck insists that there was no interruption to its existence. 

 

The way I see it, the old club shut down with no expectation of starting again, or of starting a related entity.

 

A different group of people came along later and started a club at a different ground. 

Here's the thing though, could this club that's collecting members and funds claim that it had won the Scottish cup in 1887? Hibs do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst
4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

The way I see it, the old club shut down with no expectation of starting again, or of starting a related entity.

 

A different group of people came along later and started a club at a different ground. 

Here's the thing though, could this club that's collecting members and funds claim that it had won the Scottish cup in 1887? Hibs do.

Some Hibs fans would view Hearts restructuring in 1905, to a newco, in a similar light, with the same question over historical cup wins.

 

Of course, I have an alternative view that Hearts was allowed to do what it did in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act applicable at the time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Footballfirst said:

Some Hibs fans would view Hearts restructuring in 1905, to a newco, in a similar light, with the same question over historical cup wins.

 

Of course, I have an alternative view that Hearts was allowed to do what it did in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act applicable at the time.  

 

I'm sure, but we didn't stop playing fixtures for over a year until some new guys got bored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind it’s a question of time-lapse.

I’ve always felt Hibs’ claim to continuation might arguably be plausible given the nature of football clubs in that era but also because the 1875 club ceased operations for “only” two years when memories of the original entity were fresh and many of the people  originally involved with the club would still be around.

That’s my view, but I expect others will have a different perspective.

But what if there had been no attempt to “restart or resuscitate” the club formed in 1875 until, say, ten years after that club ceased operations? 
In that situation, could such a club reasonably claim to be the “resuscitated” continuation of the 1875 club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, PortyBeach said:

To my mind it’s a question of time-lapse.

I’ve always felt Hibs’ claim to continuation might arguably be plausible given the nature of football clubs in that era but also because the 1875 club ceased operations for “only” two years when memories of the original entity were fresh and many of the people  originally involved with the club would still be around.

That’s my view, but I expect others will have a different perspective.

But what if there had been no attempt to “restart or resuscitate” the club formed in 1875 until, say, ten years after that club ceased operations? 
In that situation, could such a club reasonably claim to be the “resuscitated” continuation of the 1875 club?

 

It's an interesting point, what exactly gives a new entity the right to claim it's the same as an old entity?

 

Take Accrington Stanley, they went out of business in the 60s and a new club with the same name was formed a couple of years later.

Their formation date is the new date though, 1968 IIRC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, PortyBeach said:

To my mind it’s a question of time-lapse.

I’ve always felt Hibs’ claim to continuation might arguably be plausible given the nature of football clubs in that era but also because the 1875 club ceased operations for “only” two years when memories of the original entity were fresh and many of the people  originally involved with the club would still be around.

That’s my view, but I expect others will have a different perspective.

But what if there had been no attempt to “restart or resuscitate” the club formed in 1875 until, say, ten years after that club ceased operations? 
In that situation, could such a club reasonably claim to be the “resuscitated” continuation of the 1875 club?

There would probably still be memories of the old club and original members 10 years down the line.

It is an interesting question as to how long a break means the original ceases to exist at all.

Personally I'm happy to accept the 1875 argument. 

The Rangers situation is a bit more complicated but I'm also in favour of sporting continuity.

As FF says if someone attended Ibrox 15 years ago then again next week what difference would they see?

(Other than the ground being more dilapidated. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks both. Although I’ve said I think a claim for continuity is arguably plausible, it’s also worthwhile considering the case against.

in FF’s extract, it quotes “The Scotsman” making it clear that “…the Hibs of 1892 were, if not exactly a direct continuation, then at least a very deliberate “resuscitation” of the previous club” .

So, not a direct continuation, then.

Also, at the meeting quoted, the Chairman “wished it understood (the club) would be promoted…on different lines from the old club.” So, the notes from this meeting imply the Chairman regarded the new Hibernian as a different entity.

In “The Making of Hibernian” (Vol. 1) Alan Lugton unsurprisingly claims “the club had never died” and that the decision to cease operations at the end of season 1890-91 was merely to give the club “a breather”.(Hibs had no home ground at the time).

When the club re-formed it was though, as Smithee states, by different people.

So, Is it all just a matter of choosing what you want to believe?
One obvious reason for seeing things Lugton’s way is that continuity means being able to claim the 1887 Scottish Cup win.

However, I think that what was “dormant” in 1892 wasn’t a football club but an ideal: the ideal being there should be a sporting memorial to Edinburgh’s Irish community and its descendants (albeit something that wasn’t exclusive to that community).

I take the point that in the 19th Century football clubs were different and that not playing football for almost two seasons might not in itself mean the club was defunct.
But the need in 1892 for new members, new funding, and new office-bearers suggests to me the 1875 club only existed in theory - as an ideal. I think it could be reasonably argued that what was “resuscitated” was the ideal of Hibernian.

Open to other views on this!!
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Kiwidoug said:

Wasn't there a club called ormiston primrose?

Yes.  They merged with amateur side Pencaitland to form Ormiston FC in the late 90s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/01/2022 at 10:18, PortyBeach said:

To my mind it’s a question of time-lapse.

I’ve always felt Hibs’ claim to continuation might arguably be plausible given the nature of football clubs in that era but also because the 1875 club ceased operations for “only” two years when memories of the original entity were fresh and many of the people  originally involved with the club would still be around.

That’s my view, but I expect others will have a different perspective.

But what if there had been no attempt to “restart or resuscitate” the club formed in 1875 until, say, ten years after that club ceased operations? 
In that situation, could such a club reasonably claim to be the “resuscitated” continuation of the 1875 club?

Hearts defeated the then Hibernias on Christmas Day 1875, the match took place in the Meadows area. First game the newly formed vermin side had played, first defeat in the oldest derby in football. Without Us they would never of been allowed to exist.

 

Edited by Factuer Moi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PortyBeach
On 16/01/2022 at 10:48, Smithee said:

 

It's an interesting point, what exactly gives a new entity the right to claim it's the same as an old entity?

 

Take Accrington Stanley, they went out of business in the 60s and a new club with the same name was formed a couple of years later.

Their formation date is the new date though, 1968 IIRC

That name is classic North of England, is it not? 
Accrington for whippets, black pudding, and all the other caricatures 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PortyBeach
On 16/01/2022 at 10:57, Hmfc1965 said:

There would probably still be memories of the old club and original members 10 years down the line.

It is an interesting question as to how long a break means the original ceases to exist at all.

Personally I'm happy to accept the 1875 argument. 

The Rangers situation is a bit more complicated but I'm also in favour of sporting continuity.

As FF says if someone attended Ibrox 15 years ago then again next week what difference would they see?

(Other than the ground being more dilapidated. )

Meant to ask - what do you mean by the “1875 argument”?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PortyBeach said:

Meant to ask - what do you mean by the “1875 argument”?

Just the argument they can trace their history back to 1875.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...