FANS of Manchester United and Manchester City are in revolt over a “crazy” campaign to make them ditch their historic club badges.
The crests feature a ship — which Left-wing critics say symbolises the slave trade.
Local experts say it actually represents the city’s proud free trade history.
Local MP Graham Stringer said: “Manchester had nothing to do with the slave trade.”
The campaign was denounced as “woke nonsense” yesterday.
Fans, politicians and historians insisted the three-masted vessel was a proud symbol of the city’s global free trade links and must stay on shirts.
READ MORE FOOTBALL NEWS
Left-wing critics have called for its removal — despite slavery being abolished in this country long before United or City were formed.
Both clubs refused to comment but last night sources stressed they had no plans to modify their crests, which branding experts said would cost millions.
Local Labour MP Graham Stringer said the “crazy” claim tarnished the northern city’s proud history of anti-discrimination.
He added: “Manchester had nothing to do with the slave trade.
Most read in Football
“People from the city at the time of the US Civil War in 1861 protested against slavery.
“This is one of the craziest campaigns I have ever seen.”
Guardian commentator Simon Hattenstone yesterday questioned whether the ship was a symbol of a “crime against humanity”.
He said the area’s cotton mills thrived as a result of the crop picked by US slaves.
The newspaper has recently apologised for what it considers to be its own links to the slave trade.
He wrote: “The ship has nothing to do with football and everything to do with the business from which Manchester made its money.
“The product of slavery became so subtly embedded in our culture that we celebrated it in our club badges even without realising it.”
However local experts said Lancashire mill workers at the time refused on principle to deal with cotton picked by slaves.
United historian JP O’Neill, who authored Red Rebels: United and the FC Revolution, said of Hattenstone: “His ‘logic’ is as ridiculous as it is contradictory.
“Not only did the club badges long post-date the abolition of slavery, the clubs themselves were only founded decades after slavery was ended.
“The first ship to arrive in Manchester came in 1894 with the opening of the Ship Canal.
“In Manchester, cotton workers during the American Civil War refused to work with slave-picked cotton, putting their livelihoods at risk.”
Tory MP Katherine Fletcher, who is from Wythenshawe and a United season-ticket holder, added: “I’ve always seen the ship logo as a symbol of our industrial trading heritage.
“Manchester people are some of the most even-handed and welcoming in the world.”
Historian Jonathan Schofield added: “It’s a symbol of free trade.
“The idea is we will have equality throughout the world because people will have the same rights to do business with each other.”
It is claimed the ships derive from Manchester’s coat of arms, adopted in 1842.
That was 35 years after the slave trade had been outlawed in the British Empire.
Manchester City was not established in its current form until 1894 while United switched from Newton Heath in 1902.
Fans at the stadiums yesterday advised campaigners to steer clear of their club’s badges.
Pilot Mike Goldstein, 57, who has been going to City games since he was eight, said: “It’s just woke nonsense.
“You can’t keep on going back.
“It’d be like being mad at the Italians for the Roman Empire.”
Sitting on a bench outside Old Trafford, Man United fan Peter Shaw, 34, said: “It’s ridiculous to remove it.
“It’s celebrating the Ship Canal and nothing to do with the slave trade.”
Pallet fitter Joe Burazin, 21, added: “It’s part of the club’s heritage.
“These people should keep their hands off.”
Chef and United fan Jamie Parkhouse, 37, said: “People are rightly asking questions about the slave trade but this shouldn’t be one of them.
“The badge is about the Manchester Ship Canal and not slaves.
“To link the badge and the slave trade is so over-the-top.”
Fans also vented online.
One tweeted: “It’s a picture of a ship not a ‘slave’ ship.
“Why do you lot continually try and find offence when none is there? Pathetic.”
James Delaney added: “So not really a symbol of slavery at all.
“More like a symbol of early global commerce and Britain’s dominance of it.”
A branding expert warned modifying the badges would cost millions.
It comes after other sports teams including the NFL’s Washington Redskins have changed their name after criticism from indigenous groups.
Nigel Currie said: “It would be a huge and expensive operation to change the United and City club crests.
“They have been around for decades and every replica shirt ever sold has them — literally millions of shirts which can’t be changed.
“The link with slavery is not nearly as strong or as clear as other potentially damaging historical links for sports teams.
“The cost to the clubs would be extremely high and the rationale for changing doesn’t sound strong and indeed there is debate over what the actual ships represent.
“While that debate remains, a change would seem unlikely.”
Last month The Guardian revealed that its founder John Edward Taylor was partners with companies which imported cotton picked by slaves.
At least nine of his 11 financial backers also had links to slavery.
Last night, Luthfur Rahman, the deputy leader of Manchester City Council, said: “We’re an industrious, international, multicultural city and have long been so.”
Work is under way to explore its past.
Read More on The Sun
He added: “We’re in the middle of a long-term project that began in 2020 to highlight and reflect on aspects of the city’s past, including the city’s black history and connections to the slave trade.”
Source: Soccer - thesun.co.uk
