It would be wonderful if Whitehawk make it through to next Monday's FA Cup third round draw.
They have already done remarkably well to set up the biggest game in the club's history away to the Football League's current third-worst team, Dagenham and Redbridge, on Sunday.
If Whitehawk have their way, there would be the possibility of a third round tie between Brighton and Hove Albion and Brighton City.
This is where praise for Hawks' achievements diverts, for me, to incredulity. Their campaign for a name change is flawed on so many levels.
Placing it back on the agenda during their FA Cup adventure, rather than being the perfect moment, is in fact crass timing.
Their bid to be known as Brighton City has already been rejected once by the FA Council.
Hawks chairman John Summers revealed prior to the thrilling FA Cup first round victory over Lincoln that they are pressing ahead with their plans.
This is a massive own goal. They should have done the reverse, exploited the national exposure their Cup run has prompted by declaring, loud and proud, that they are Whitehawk and have binned the name change.
The East Brighton estate the club represents has a bleak reputation as a crime and poverty hotspot.
This forms part of the reason for the club's stance and yet they have given its inhabitants something to shout about, something that portrays the area in a positive light for once.
Surely the perfect time then to stick by their history, represent the local community with chests puffed, not try to abandon it.
Whitehawk's proposed rebranding continues to be strongly opposed by Albion, for good reasons.
Some may sympathise with Hawks, seeing Albion's opposition as corporate might stamping on a minnow next door, but they are simply protecting their own interests.
Albion have invested in their name for over a century. It is hard to think of any other industry in which an established organisation with a different name would be allowed to hijack the name of another in the manner Whitehawk are proposing. Why do they expect football to be different?
Albion's sponsors fork out large sums of money for an exclusive link to an established name and brand. They do not pay to be confused with an association with a smaller local club.
Another of the main thrusts of Summers' argument is that Whitehawk need the city's name to keep building and progressing the club towards the dream of playing in the Football League in a new stadium.
The likes of Everton and Aston Villa have not done too badly without any mention of Liverpool or Birmingham.
In non-League circles, clubs such as Forest Green Rovers and Marine have managed to thrive at a higher level than Whitehawk without city identification.
Summers told The Argus earlier this month Whitehawk "have no interest in treading on Brighton and Hove Albion's toes. They are a different kind of club, they are much more corporate."
Spot the irony in that dig. A reason for wanting to change their name is to encourage corporate sponsors to invest in their future.
The flaws are not confined to naming rights and commercial overlap. Their is another potentially life-threatening confusion factor to take into consideration - a call to the emergency services to attend an incident at 'Brighton FC'.
Albion, after several meetings with Whitehawk, have withdrawn from any further talks due to the dialogue being so slanted.
It is a shame Hawks are investing so much time and effort on a crusade doomed to fail at the very moment we should only be applauding them for their extraordinary efforts on the pitch.
Original article
They have already done remarkably well to set up the biggest game in the club's history away to the Football League's current third-worst team, Dagenham and Redbridge, on Sunday.
If Whitehawk have their way, there would be the possibility of a third round tie between Brighton and Hove Albion and Brighton City.
This is where praise for Hawks' achievements diverts, for me, to incredulity. Their campaign for a name change is flawed on so many levels.
Placing it back on the agenda during their FA Cup adventure, rather than being the perfect moment, is in fact crass timing.
Their bid to be known as Brighton City has already been rejected once by the FA Council.
Hawks chairman John Summers revealed prior to the thrilling FA Cup first round victory over Lincoln that they are pressing ahead with their plans.
This is a massive own goal. They should have done the reverse, exploited the national exposure their Cup run has prompted by declaring, loud and proud, that they are Whitehawk and have binned the name change.
The East Brighton estate the club represents has a bleak reputation as a crime and poverty hotspot.
This forms part of the reason for the club's stance and yet they have given its inhabitants something to shout about, something that portrays the area in a positive light for once.
Surely the perfect time then to stick by their history, represent the local community with chests puffed, not try to abandon it.
Whitehawk's proposed rebranding continues to be strongly opposed by Albion, for good reasons.
Some may sympathise with Hawks, seeing Albion's opposition as corporate might stamping on a minnow next door, but they are simply protecting their own interests.
Albion have invested in their name for over a century. It is hard to think of any other industry in which an established organisation with a different name would be allowed to hijack the name of another in the manner Whitehawk are proposing. Why do they expect football to be different?
Albion's sponsors fork out large sums of money for an exclusive link to an established name and brand. They do not pay to be confused with an association with a smaller local club.
Another of the main thrusts of Summers' argument is that Whitehawk need the city's name to keep building and progressing the club towards the dream of playing in the Football League in a new stadium.
The likes of Everton and Aston Villa have not done too badly without any mention of Liverpool or Birmingham.
In non-League circles, clubs such as Forest Green Rovers and Marine have managed to thrive at a higher level than Whitehawk without city identification.
Summers told The Argus earlier this month Whitehawk "have no interest in treading on Brighton and Hove Albion's toes. They are a different kind of club, they are much more corporate."
Spot the irony in that dig. A reason for wanting to change their name is to encourage corporate sponsors to invest in their future.
The flaws are not confined to naming rights and commercial overlap. Their is another potentially life-threatening confusion factor to take into consideration - a call to the emergency services to attend an incident at 'Brighton FC'.
Albion, after several meetings with Whitehawk, have withdrawn from any further talks due to the dialogue being so slanted.
It is a shame Hawks are investing so much time and effort on a crusade doomed to fail at the very moment we should only be applauding them for their extraordinary efforts on the pitch.
Original article