As has been pointed out

By Matt Kilcoyne among others.

It is a symbol of national pride that has endured for eight centuries, as well as 55 years of hurt. But a decision to change England’s Three Lions crest to promote diversity in football has failed to rouse roars of approval from fans.

Bosses at the Football Association announced on Thursday that the traditional Three Lions would be replaced on a brand new logo by a lion cub, a lion and a lioness.

The FA said the move would give the medieval crest a “fresh purpose” that would symbolise “inclusivity at all levels of football”.

“A cub, lion and lioness unite to form the new England Football crest with no boundaries; representing everyone at every level of football across the country,” a spokesman explained.

The three lions are in fact the Duchies of Normandy and Aquitaine plus the Kingdom of England. So, under the new dispensation who is the lion, who the babbie and who the pussy?

We can also ponder – there would be significant support in both Duchies for a war of freedom against Paris’ foul embrace….

22 thoughts on “As has been pointed out”

  1. Will we see the same level of anger aimed at this as with the ESL? Why can’t they just leave things alone?

  2. Well I, for one, wasn’t aware of the significance of the Duchies of Normandie and Aquitaine (mainly because I’m not arsed about football in the slightest).

    But it’s an interesting titbit of information and so I consider myself a tiny bit more educated than I was when I woke up this morning. Cheers!

  3. I sneeze in threes

    I do hope the Royal College of Arms will take note of this worthy development and follow the FAs lead in all maters heraldic.

  4. Bloke in North Korea (Germany province)

    What a disgusting development. This blatant heteronormativity must be cancelled immediately!

  5. Shouldn’t one of them be a panther? (Although maybe 3 unicorns would better reflect the state of the game).

  6. It is just part and parcel of the surrender of these institutions. They were considering changing their name to English FA, the whole point is that it is The FA, it was bad enough when the Football League became the “EFL” and the TCCB became the England and Wales Handbag Wielders.

    Off topic but there is it seems a fuss about putting up a memorial to Rachel Heyhoe Flint at Lords. Normally I would bristle at such wokery but I consider this a rather uncontroversial choice – I wonder what the MCC’s problem is.

  7. Obviously none of you characters were around when World Cup Willie triumphed in 1966.

  8. decnine – Medieval man sometimes used terms such as pards and lions interchangably, perhaps because big cats were the stuff of rumour and legend in interglacial Europe.

    Anyway, black tranny lioness in a wheelchair with a huge feminine cock courant.

    It’s what George Floyd would’ve wanted.

  9. “Anyway, black tranny lioness in a wheelchair with a huge feminine cock courant.”


  10. A cheap option would be to colour the bottom lion in black, and then tilt the one above it so it’s kneeling on the black one’s neck.

  11. “Pomeranian wombats”: I like that. ‘The Balkans are not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian wombat’, said Bismarck, nearly.

  12. ‘ I recall a factoid from the distant past that they aren’t lions. They are leopards.’

    Leopard was the name used back then for lion, as nobody knew the difference as nobody had seen either and it was not known there were two distinct animals.

    But anyway in the name of diversity shouldn’t one of the leopard/lion be a black leopard, so then cub could be mixed race?

  13. All to do with Richard the Lionheart, apparently, a French poof who chose to spend very little of his time in England.

  14. @Dearieme To be fair.. England at the time was a relatively minor, and “secure” posession of his, and the real beef he had was with France, since he really wanted all of it, and couldn’t get it. And passed up the Holy Roman Crown while… Thus forever nixing the chance to claim Germany down the line.

    The man may have been the embodyment of the Great Warrior-Kings of Old, but he had the political astuteness of a scuttled whelk. And lost all but his minor but secure posession because of it.

    As a King he was an utter failure.

  15. @ Grikath
    What history book have you read? Richard owned most of what is now France and he was fighting there – after he got back from the Crusade – because the French king was invading his (Richard’s) territory. Richard avoided the need to spend much time in England because he made a deal with the Scots not to fight each other.
    It wasn’t Richard but his successor John (known as “John Lackland”) who lost most of the Angevin possessions in France.

  16. @John77 Yes… after his dear hallowed brother and his supporters/mates had already pissed off the Angevin lords to the point they were already on the point of revolt anyway, and having had to levy punishing taxes for his brother several times because of his crusading hobby and the stupidity of getting himself kidnapped.

    I know UK-ians get bottlefed with the idea of the Great King, reinforced by the Robin Hood Myth and Shakespeare, and…
    But if you look at the historical data from both sides, and add them up.. Not A Pretty Picture.
    Which incidentally includes the tenuousness of the claims by Richard on a lot of “french” territory. War of the Roses levels of tenuousness… With obvious results after he repeatedly pissed off the local lords, and next to obliterated his levies in his Crusading..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *