Darth Paul Posted December 28, 2008 Share Posted December 28, 2008 Having watched Match of the Day for the 1st time this season following the Sunderland game, (alienated viewer, both our fault and the programmes!) I happened to notice that Boro had changed their club badge, and in particular the date of the club's formation, back to 1876, from the date of 1986, which was linked with their liquidation. I was confused by this and checked Wikipedia, which offered some kind of explanation that in '07, Boro decided to changed back to their original date on the badge, to "reflect the clubs long (fruitless) history and not just their post-liquidation status". Now I am no expert on the subject, but this just seems wrong. Can a club do this, or when they were liquidated, did they cease to exist, and are the Boro we now know only 22/23 years old? Like Boro, Rovers and many other clubs struggled financially over the years, but unlike Boro, to successfully keep the club afloat we and the others made sacrifices, sold players to survive, as well as doing all the things that are now stuff of legend down at Ewood, such as reusing the tea bags etc etc, which is obviously in stark contrast to the game we know today. I am proud of our clubs long history and status, despite it being under threat over the years due to struggling finances. My question is, should clubs like Boro be allowed to simply erase history and claim that they are only one year younger than the mighty Rovers, despite their liquidation, or do I have a point? I don't really have an anti-Boro agenda, but this just doesn't sit right with me. can any of the financial experts on this board shed any light on the subject for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.