Phil Hay: Leeds United's new club badge must be scrapped now

There are times when 100 Leeds supporters would see different colours in the same shade of grey but 70,000 saw enough red in the badge to sign a petition asking the club to shelve and destroy a misplaced idea.

Seventy thousand voices cannot be wrong and set against the 10,000 who Leeds say they canvassed before redesigning their crest, the disparity in numbers tells the club that they asked the wrong people or more likely the wrong questions.

Their centenary falls next year and, with plans afoot to celebrate it, United have been conducting surveys on the subject of what it means to be Leeds. That is not the same as asking 10,000 fans specifically about a change of badge or the significance of the Leeds salute.

Their controversial design fell down in the margin between a clear understanding of public opinion and vague assumptions based on the findings of broader marketing.

The irony of Twitter carpet-bombing the new badge is that there is flexibility amongst the support for a change of crest. Leeds have had plenty of them, migrating from owls to peacocks and white roses over the years, and there was little in the vitriol to suggest that anyone wants to man the barricades in defence of the existing shield.

It is a recognisable, long-standing design in which Howard Wilkinson had a hand but there is nothing sacrosanct about it.

The first reaction to the release of the new badge was for graphic designers and artistic amateurs to have a go at producing something better. Some clever and traditional mockups are out there and very few of them incorporate the badge as it is.

There is, then, no real argument with the suggestion of a rebrand per se. Leeds are attempting to modernise and there are ways in which modernisation is badly needed. The West Stand roof which United replaced last summer had long since been condemned by the council.

What was once a state-of-the-art facility at Thorp Arch now falls below the standards of top-level training grounds. Leeds are an old-school club and an old-school fanbase, naturally resistant to the threat of bland commercialism, but commerce has never been more intrinsic to the success and growth of individual teams.

On one level United wanted a badge which would help promote their brand in markets like America, where Leeds have barely made a dent.

In the Leeds salute they spotted something unique and identifiable but as the resistance to their new crest showed, they misjudged the way in which their supporters view it.

There is a mystical element to the salute, not least because no-one can pinpoint exactly where the it came from. Glynn Snodin adopted it in the 1980s and Vinnie Jones and Alan Smith took it on later but there is no clear timeline and no established starting point.

That the salute is so ambiguous is almost the point. The message yesterday was that United’s crowd want to keep it to themselves, a private way of identifying between one another. They don’t want it to serve as a gimmick or a sales pitch, or to see it reduced to a cartoon image.

These are the opinions that matter and the opinions Leeds should have sought before pushing the badge to the stage of completion. Ridicule was everywhere on Wednesday afternoon and even other professional clubs got in on the act. Aston Villa compared United’s badge to Pro Evolution Soccer.

Zenit St Petersburg, with that famous Russian reserve, adapted the design by giving it two fingers. It was unforgiving and the tweets are there for posterity but as Kinnear said on BBC Radio Leeds last night: “I don’t care what Aston Villa think. I care what Leeds United fans think.”

On that basis, the only solution to this mess is substantial consultation on the issue of the badge and the badge alone. Is there a groundswell of support for a change to the existing shield and do the potential benefits of a rebrand justify the cost of it? If so, which aspects of a suitable design are essential and which are not?

Kinnear spoke about avoiding a decision by committee and if he knows anything about Leeds then he will appreciate that consensus like he saw on this issue is almost unheard of but what became clear as the criticism mounted was that the original circle of discussions had not been wide enough or detailed enough. There is no other conclusion to draw from an image which is universally unpopular.

The fall-out creates a logistical problem for Leeds in respect of the production of their kit for next season.

The club unveiled the badge now because Kappa, Leeds’ supplier, are about to start work on the 2018-19 kit in China. As is standard with kit production, the Italian firm needs advance notice of United’s plans and Leeds wanted to unveil their badge before leaked photos of their new shirts gave the game away.

In those circumstances, it would suit the club to find a quick solution or a couple of tweaks which placate their crowd and allow them to push ahead but the reaction did not leave much room for minor negotiation.

Kinnear promised more consultation and with a milestone as important as the centenary approaching, better consultation is needed.

A badge is not quite for life at Leeds United but it exists for long enough for people to care. The condemnation says that this badge, in its current form, has to go.