Talk:HNK Rijeka

Club history
According to the club's official website, NK Rijeka was founded in 1946 as NK Kvarner. It seems that their official viewpoint is that the club has nothing to do with earlier Italian Rijeka-based clubs Gloria, Olympia and Fiumana (which was dissolved in 1945 following the end of World War II). Therefore the pre-Kvarner period described in the History section should be moved to the U.S. Fiumana namespace (which is currently a redirect), so that the article resembling something like the Italian Wikipedia article on Fiumana could be created. These two were obviously separate clubs with separate histories and claiming that today's NK Rijeka is a successor of Fiumana is simply misleading. '' Timbouctou 08:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Not true, according to the official website the club was founded in 1906 (which is wrong of course).


 * 1906 is correct though: the official site states that much as well. The idea that in 1946 a new side is formed is part of a wider well-documented propaganda effort by the communist regime to break any ideological connection to the previous Italian state in Istria and Rijeka, which occurred in the late '50s and throughout the '60s, during the period of max Yugoslav-Italian tensions and due to the KPJ's geopolitical needs, before relaxation of Italian-Yugoslav relations came with the Treaty of Osimo in 1970. But by then the legend of the city of Rijeka itself (sic! not only the club) being somehow created in 1945 was too consolidated and nobody was allowed to question the official position in any ideologically charged field until the real democratization of the Croatian public discourse during the late '90s and early 2000s. The simple truth is that only four publications studying the club's history exist and we're ever written (published respectively in 2004, in 2006, 2008 and 2020, the last one a very omnicomprehensive acedemic work that took 3 years of research by 5 well accredited researchers, one of which is a HNS historian, son to one of the 4 individuals that first came up with the idea of Quarnero as a brand, which was needed at the time for the city to take part in the first Yugoslav championship, to which it was to be an invited external guest). All four books claim the same thing: that there is real continuity between Fiumana (a fascist brand) and Quarnero (a communist brand) and thus the current club is a clear successor to Fiumana and its predecessor Olympia, as much as it is a clear successor to Quarnero. If you think in strictly legal terms on the other hand, then all clubs in Eastern and Central Europe, as well as all clubs in Germany, Alsasse-Loraine and Japan got formally and legally disbanded by the allies after WW2. And thousands of clubs in the West (for very different reasons to war and regime changes, most often financial) are not legal successors to their original entities, but nobody questions their continuity. Even if you look at Jugoslavia itself, all football clubs got formally disbanded in 1945 and in their place general sport associations (fizkulturna društva) got established in the subsequent years, and all but a handful of them (the few that were ideologically near to the communist party, like Hajduk and Velez) had to take new proletarian-sounding or ideologically neutral geography-based names. NK Rijeka only went through what thousands of other clubs in Europe went, and all these clubs keep their original founding date without any issue. Some in Croatia and former Yugoslavia even returned (decades later or recently) the most ancient name of the club. Marintu (talk) 07:43, 21 October 2021‎
 * Thank you for your information, but I would like to give necessary sources, like the documents of communist regime as you said. Also name the publications studying club history as well as academic work with a source to the place where it can be read. About continuity the question is did really players and the members of club participated in the new club following exodus of Italians and City of Rijeka also changed the whole country. When you talk about clubs in other countries, yes the clubs were disbanded, but there members have founded them again and here we are not even sure that the members of Fiumana were still in the city at end of the war and the whole population has changed from only Italian to Croatian(Yugoslavian). Opatijac97 (talk) 13:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * This is exactly what happened between Fiumana and Quarnero: many managers (Mazzieri, Tich, Spadavecchia, Radetti) and 11 out of 16 players (notice that various died or went missing in the war, like the legendary Fiumana captain, fighting for the partisans). It's wrong that the population of Rijeka was different after the war. The exodus in Rijeka happened over a very prolonged period of time and in quite slow stages, that lasted until the end of the '50s. In 1946 the overwhelming majority of the population was the same as it was in 1943 when Fiumana was there.
 * Coming back to the only 4 existing publications I mentioned above, each stating Quarnero being factually the successor to US Fiumana, are the following ones:
 * 1- "El balon fiuman" from 2004 (accredited by the official library of the FIGC http://biblioteca.figc.it/6766/),
 * 2- "Rijeka nogometa" from 2006 (accredited by the Croatian Olympic Commitee https://www.hoo.hr/hr/olimp?filterclanaktag=Zlatko%20Moranjak),
 * 3- "Kantrida bijelih snova" from 2008 (accredited as a scientifically valuable work by the Croatian Ministro of Science via its CROSBI here https://www.bib.irb.hr/495264 ),
 * 4- "Rijeka bijelih snova" from 2020 (a 3 year long research by an international historian of sport history, a university professor, a founder of the Croatian Literary Society). This last one is the most relevant in my opinion for this article, for the simple fact that it's the most thorough and most deeply researched of all these very well and very officially accredited books. The part concerning the Fiumana-Quarnero passage is written by Igor Kramarsic, who is currently a member of the presidency of the Croatian Association for the History of Sports, for 20 years a respected member of the IFFHS in Zurich, and works thoroughly with both the HNS and HOO. He happens, curiously enough, to be also a son to Boris Kramarsic, one of Quarnero's original "founders". I truly think the guy knows what he is talking about. I read that also the regional and city government's approved the points point of view in the book (if that means something at all, of course).
 * Unfortunately these are books sold commercially and you can consult them in the local library if you happen to live in the area, and thus not available freely or to be freely linked here. I can provide pages and even take some pictures because I have them at home, if it's somehow possible to upload them here on Wikipedia (and if it's legal, of course).
 * At the opposite side of the argument we have, AFAIK, only 3 type of entities that have so far expressed a discontent with 1906 as the founding date of NK Rijeka:
 * 1 - the most right wing of the Armada organization (the current FB page owners for example, but by no means the only point of view within that very heterogenous association), a group that is well documented to have become nowadays a neonazi organization https://net.hr/danas/hrvatska/zestoki-navijaci-grubo-uvrijedeni-armada-tuzi-sdp-ovog-politicara-jer-je-protiv-zds-dosta-je-ovog-anemicnog-ulizivanja-krajnjoj-desnici-3b6003ec-b1c6-11eb-bb9c-0242ac13003d The right-wingers do not like being associated to Austro-Hungarian and Italian times...
 * 2- A journalist that had no association to Football commentary/articles previously, one has to wonder if he is possibly politically motivated.
 * 3- Torcida, another well-documented extreme right-wing supporter group https://www.index.hr/sport/clanak/hajduk-glavna-prica-na-naslovnici-bilda-kakav-lud-i-nevjerojatan-klub/2216485.aspx and Hajduk's main supporter organization, famous in Croatia for its enmity with Rijeka because of the Adriatic derby, and attached to the idea of Hajduk being the only always active major club in all of Croatia (which is a wrong claim, Hajduk got completely dissolved in 1941, and a new club was founded in 1944 in a non-legal entity [there was war in the country and that act was not passed by the then's official government] by only some of its old players and only some of its old members of the management, exactly the same logical situation that happened to Quarnero in '46 but legally even weaker because made within an unrecognized legal entity and in a different city [Vis, not Split] - and then the club became something new once again legally in 1945 because it was also forced into becoming a new all-Sports association, exactly like all other clubs in Jugoslavia in 1945).
 * Whose point of view should Wikipedia valorise over this topic, the one by academically (ministry of science-) accredited researchers whose works are officially recognized by the HOO, HNS and FIGC, or the one by hooligans and neonazis? Because these are the only two sides of the debate currently. --Marintu (talk) 11:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if I understand the first sentence where you talk about managers who get killed during the war. Are you talking about Ettore Mazzieri, Renato Tich and Edo Radetti, because they are listed as founders of NK Kvarner by the official page of HNK Rijeka(https://nk-rijeka.hr/klub/vremeplov/). Regarding source you have mentioned, number 1 cannot be accessed and numbers 2 to 4 I will try to access in next several days. Talking about opposite side, first of all Torcida is acting as any other ultras group so there is nothing surprising about that. Second, for a journalist you should said directly who is he (name, surname and media), because I cannot conclude who is that man by your explanation above. Third, if Armada doesn't like to be associated with Austro-Hungarian and Italian times because of they are right wingers why would they support communist takeover in 1946. That just doesn't have any sense.
 * One other thing I found out is that HNK Rijeka doesn't have list of their presidents and coaches on their page (https://nk-rijeka.hr/klub/predsjednici-i-treneri/). On the other hand Wikipedia article about HNK Rijeka contain names of presidents and coaches from 1946 and as source has been taken HNK Rijeka official page dated on 28 May 2020. I would say that the HNK Rijeka exaggerated with the story of 1906, which they cannot cover with evidence, so they were forced to take certain measures, such as removing the data from that page. Also on their page you can find one sentence that says "HNK Rijeka follows the tradition of Olimpija, Gloria and Fiumana.", but they don't explain how is that done. Sentence before is about Fiumana being champion of Serie C, and next one is how communist shut down the club (https://nk-rijeka.hr/klub/povijest/). Also their page says that "At the suggestion of Ettore Mazzieri, on July 29, 1946, a club called Kvarner was founded."
 * After all of this I suggest next:
 * History before 1946 should be moved to article U.S. Fiumana and properly quoted.
 * Article HNK Rijeka can keep story about connections between U.S. Fiumana and HNK Rijeka in short, but needs to be objective and include opposite stance of people (from Rijeka).
 * Info box must contain the date of establishment of the club in continuity, ie from 1946, while the date of Olympia can stay until different decision is made.
 * Opatijac97 (talk) 14:37, 24 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I disagree with Opatijac97’s proposals. Accepting them would be like stating we should take a personal opinion over any academic or historical work done on this subject so far. I will first answer Opatijac’s new points and then point out where he ignored my previous points:
 * 1. Mazzieri and Tych were Fiumana managers before being Kvarner managers, Radetti was also active in the club at lower levels. Also the first two goals under the Kvarner rebranding were scored by Petronio and Nori, both Fiumana players. 11 out of 16 Kvarner line-uppers were Fiumana players, 8 out of the most regular first 11 in the whole first Yugoslav season were all Fiumana players. And again, if many wouldn't have died or went missing during the war, we may assume they would also be part of Kvarner's main line up, because all that were still in the city were playing in it. This is simular to the % of Kvarner players that were inherited by NK Rijeka in 1954, and we do not question that rebranding. Notably this is more than the % of pre-war players passed from HSK Gradjanski to the new club NK Dinamo, or pre-war players passed from HSK Hajduk to the new club SD Hajduk-Jusoslavenska Armija after the war. Or the % of Željezničar players that passed to Lokomotiva, or the % of Cibalia players that passed to Dinamo Vinkovci. Nobody is even dreaming of questioning the continuity between these clubs, and to question it up until today. There is no need for double standards due to ethnical sympathies.
 * 2. The journalist I’m talking about is Gerovac, who seems to be a controversial and ideologically committed political commentator, who more often than not writes about conspiracy theories and doesn’t have any connection to the study of sport or its history.
 * 3. Armada is a nationalist organisation, as documented above, and it's general knowledge that in Rijeka being nationalist means being anti-Italian or anti-Hungarian topics. It is also general knowledge the Yugoslav (id est, communist) regime acted in Rijeka and Istria specifically as a Croatian nationalist force, which was able to bring Rijeka under Croatian rule in 1945 after much nationalist strife between Croats, Hungarians and Italians over the city's ownership in the previous 100 years. So it makes a lot of political sense that Neonazis within Armada prefer the 1946 date to the 1906 due to nationalism, they state that much themselves, because it makes the club a Hungary-founded club with an original Italian-sounding name, insted of an ethnically pure Croatian club.
 * 4. In your comment above phrases from the official website get taken out of context and nitpicked to prove a personal bias. The club does not enter into details about any specific year in history, so why would it specifically do so for 1946, when anybody can read long political details of its history in each one and all HNK Rijeka history books written to this date. Not one single HNK Rijeka history book written so far claims 1946 to be the real initial founding date of the club. No need for the club to go into details because suddenly an extremist niche of the fan base claims something contrarian, imho it would be like legitimising them, and you are now asking us to do that on Wikipedia. Moreover, “founded by Mazzieri” is obviously used figuratively on the website (exactly like I used the expression myself in a previous comment as well!), as only few lines above that phrase, and in various other places on the site, the 1906 date is clearly stated as the founding date. Plus it is used on the official kits, in the blog news and in several posts of the various official social profiles.
 * 5.I completely disagree to this tentative to insert in the article statements of the most neonazi wing of the fanbase and equate their politically/ethnically biased opinions to that of academics and accredited researchers, the club itself and the city and regional authorities about this topic. All facts put forward by these are ignored because they don’t fit a personal superficial hunch.
 * Coming to my previous points you didn't answer, don’t you think you are being a bit intellectually dishonest toward our discussion?
 * All my links are well accessible, not sure why you would claim the contrary and it’s very unfair to claim half of them are broken (check your browser or firewall settings before claiming this in written form). For somebody that kickstarted this whole discussion by inviting us to research the topic more seriously, you sure jumped to conclusions pretty quickly and by ignoring all data provided to you. Your final assumption is ultimately based solely on your personal hunch and the single finding that there is no information about the club’s presidents before 1954 on the official website of the club, but you conveniently dismiss the fact the official website says 1906 is the founding date of the current club in at least 4 other places. Moreover, this being a newly launched website, that sub-(sub-)section about former presidents is obviously still being worked upon and there are various other half-empty sub-sections on the site.
 * You completely brushed off all my thoroughly explained and solidly documented points and from your words it seems you didn’t even give a thought to a single phrase I wrote: It’s impossible you were able to check the 4 books I cited above (each containing between 600 and 1000 pages of HNK Rijeka history) in a timespan of little more than 24 hours, on a Sunday, while libraries are closed in the Rijeka region (provided you live there), when it’s very clear you didn’t know even 1 of these books existed few hours before. I have offered 4 works of scientific-historic literature, all stating the very same thing: that Quarnero is US Fiumana restructured by the communist regime for their new political needs and propaganda season, as well as that Quarnero is Fiumana’s direct successor. Thus in my opinion the final triplice proposal is driven by an urge to hastily reverse well-sourced information that is not aligned with a personal point of view. The 4 cited books/sources were written over the span of 20 years of meticulous research by 10 different researchers of 3 different nationalities, analysing the national archives of 5 different countries (Croatia, Italy, Serbia, Hungary and Austria), and they are published by 4 different well-established and respected editors in 2 different countries. And the books are all accredited by either the local Football Association of Croatia or the Italian football federation, or the Croatian Olympic Committee. They all agree on the continuity between Fiumana and Quarnero.
 * I thus propose:
 * We keep the 1906 date, because it is more than properly sourced, but we should, of course, be further improving the history section with more information without making it too cumbersome and with interesting materials like better written football clubs articles have. 1906 is clearly the founding date if we do not want to bend facts or push personal or political (nationalist) agendas.
 * We keep the Quarnero and HNK Rijeka articles as they are now, id est complementary to each other, to be able to provide more information about players, seasons and history of the Quarnero period. HNK as a general high-level overview of the 115 years of the club’s performances and history; the 4 different historical brands under which the club played as more detailed articles specific to each period (and some of those articles will have to be improved further from where they stand now). I think this makes particular sense for HNK Rijeka due to its very specific peculiarity of being possibly the only club in the world that took part in tournaments and championships of 5 different nations (6, if we count the short historical German window and its tournament played in the ’43-’44 season) and being forced to change brand image 4 times to please ruling regimes across the whole political spectrum, in a town that changed 7 countries in the past 100 years.
 * We do not give any space to the most extremist wings of 2 nationalist organizations, as that is not what Wikipedia is for. We already saw what happens when such groups are given space here on Wikipedia: https://therecord.media/wikimedia-bans-admin-of-wikipedia-croatia-for-pushing-radical-right-agendas/ Marintu (talk) 22:04, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not my personal opinion it is just what have I read, a that is what I'm talking about. I'm not trying to make up something unreal, everything is cited as it should be.
 * Things you mentioned on start were strangely shaped sentences and it sounded like those people were killed, so that is what I was asking you about. Talking about other clubs you mentioned is not appropriate because cities they come from didn't changed the whole country they were playing. Also Hajduk Split is know as only club not being dissolved because of Tito's love to them.
 * Journalist Gerovac is not so important. Only think he said is that clubs should't change their history if they want to become more famous.
 * Armada is like any other Ultras group and that is local patriotic, which means they put interest of their club in front of their country. That is the reason why a lot of club Ultras doesn't attend national team games but they are at every club game. When we are talking about history of city you should first read something about that, because you are now telling me that Yugoslav Partisans liberate Rijeka, because of Croatian nationalism, in the same time fighting Germany forces (they were holding the city through Operational Zone of the Adriatic Littoral) that were allies to Ustaše(Croatian nationalist in WW2). So now I'm interested where are you from, for showing a basic ignorance of the history of Croatia and Rijeka. And I one thing thing I remember from Rijeka games is Armada chants that says Forza Fiume which means Come on Rijeka. If they are really anti-Italian why are they using chant on Italian. Also if they want pure Croatian club they wouldn't praise players and coaches of Serbian, Montenegrin and Slovenian origin.
 * Maybe you mistakenly open wrong link so I will repeat link where is history year by year and where 1946 is specified by above mentioned citation: (https://nk-rijeka.hr/klub/vremeplov/). Also the year 1946 doesn't come from the fans it is the year that was also mentioned in archived copy of HNK Rijeka official page in 2015(https://web.archive.org/web/20150215213353/http://nk-rijeka.hr/povijest) and in 2020 archived copy of the same page stated that club was founded in 1926(https://web.archive.org/web/20200726152300/http://www.nk-rijeka.hr/hnk-rijeka/). So how did leadership of HNK Rijeka became suddenly self aware.
 * I cannot believe that I need to cite my own comment so you can understand what have I said: Regarding source you have mentioned, number 1 cannot be accessed(it is open only for admins) and numbers 2 to 4 I will try to access in next several days. Of course I cannot read because I didn't even reach the sources you set up and when I do, I will posted my findings and until then I will not comment them. Usage of the year 1906 has started this year as the kit was introduced on 17 August of this very year.
 * Year 1906 can also be linked with specific stance of view especially when that gives advantage like bragging that club has played in Italian football leagues and cups, and also that is the oldest Croatian football club. That can be take as club propaganda. Also referring to Armada as Nazi is personal opinion as nobody else call them like that, not even the club management who they oppose in question of founding date. Speaking of new materials Fiumana I wish you a good luck as there is literally no other sources that club paid monographs.
 * We are not talking about Quarnero(ie NK Kvarner) right know but as I'm concerned that article about Rijeka until 1954 and includes the same data as this article so this is just unnecessary duplication of data.
 * I'm not going to talk anymore about your obsession with Armada and Torcida(totally irrelevant for this article), but about objective view and dissatisfaction of HNK Rijeka fans(not only Armada) with the moves of the management regarding the past and tradition of the club. That opposition must be included in the article in order to gain a realistic view given that the club has aged 40 years since 2015.
 * My suggestions are stil the same:
 * History before 1946 should be moved to article U.S. Fiumana and properly quoted.
 * Article HNK Rijeka can keep story about connections between U.S. Fiumana and HNK Rijeka in short, but needs to be objective and include opposite stance of people (from Rijeka).
 * Info box must contain the date of establishment of the club in continuity, ie from 1946, while the date of Olympia can stay until different decision is made.
 * Opatijac97 (talk) 17:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * There is definitely no much doubt that the club was founded in 1906 (or perhaps even 1904, the historians are still researching that 2 year period). User Opatijac97 seems biased and indeed driven by a personal goal to shorten the club's history to a favourite historical period, like the extremely small section of local hooligans that a few months ago had briefly showed disapproval out of political considerations and that seem to have been soon convinced by the overwhelming majority of the club's fans to simply accept what is a historical fact.
 * It is true that all academic sources in existence to this date state the club was founded before World War I and that in 1946 Fiumana got simply restructured by the Jugoslav occupational authorities to become a communist trade union's football section, exactly like all other existing clubs in Jugoslavia at the time, and in fact like all clubs in communist Eastern Europe in the same years. If Rijeka would have been created in 1946, so would be Slavia Prague, Ferencvarosi, Hertha Berlin, BFC Germania, Backa Subotica, FK Sveikata Kybartaietc, Tatran Presov, etc. In fact in 1945 all sport clubs in Jugoslavia got dissolved by the new communist authorities. But what is extremely significant to this discussion is that, contrary to all other Jugoslav clubs, Fiumana didn't even get dissolved by the communists. This was not possible because between 1945 and 1947 the city of Rijeka was under military occupation and administered by the Jugoslav army military administration on behalf of the allied powers: thus Jugoslav laws and decrees could not be applied in Rijeka until September 1947 (when the city got annexed to Jugoslavia in the aftermath of the Paris Peace Conference), and legally-wise only Italian Law could be applied in the city city until that date. So, what the communists really did was first transform Fiumana from a Sport Union (Unione Sportiva Fiumana) into a Trade Sport Union (Rappresentativa Sindacale Fiumana) in 1945, and let the club play under this slightly different name until the end of 1945. Then in 1946, seeing that the annexation of Rijeka to Jugoslavia was becoming more probable and within reach, the communists decided to more boldly rebrand the club with a new name, a more ideologically-friendly one (as you see, it was a gradual process and change). All old Fiumana players (16 out of 23 - 7 got either killed in action as partisans or interned into concentration camps), all the remaining staff, all supporters (in 1946 it was exclusively Fiuman-Italians that supported Quarnero, all supporters of the club under its previous name Fiumana), the official stadium, all club assets and its HQ, stayed completely the same.
 * This didn't happen only to Fiumana in the occupational zone B of the Julian March, it actually happened to all clubs in this area, and all these clubs are (like NK Rijeka) recognized by the HNS as older than 1945-47 despite changing country from Italy to Jugoslavia and going through the same legal and institutional changes NK Rijeka went through: your club NK Opatija, but also NK Klana, NK Rovinj, NK Arbanasi, NK Rasa, NK Vodnjan, NK Štinjan, FC Koper, NK Primorje, NK Tabor, NK Izola, NK Dekani, Nk Tolmin, and many many more.
 * The academic sources provided by user martinu above are in my opinion exhaustive and I agree they are the best quality of source currently available about this topic, and should be enough to deny the 3 proposals put forward by Opatijac97. But if we now have to show sources of lower quality coming from the terrible Croatian press, well, there are plenty of press sources and official institutional sources to confirm that the correct founding year is 1906:
 * Official celebration of the 115 years of the club -
 * Official sport section of the City of Rijeka pages -
 * The main club's fans website -
 * An interview of the main local news channel with the two main researchers of the club's history explaining why the founding date cannot be 1946 by any means, and how that date is debunked by historiography
 * The most read Croatian sport news site explains clearly on why there was a misunderstanding about the real foundation year before the club and researchers released more precise data (id est - communist propaganda from the '60s was prohibiting the public to discuss all history of the city before 1947)
 * Here there is an interview with the Mayor of Rijeka and the Governor of the Rijeka region, both confirming the exactness of 1906
 * Finally, apart from all Historians, the club itself, all the institutions (even HNS, the Croatian football fed that confirmed Rijeka is 115 old, I will have to find the article though), also Croatian-Yugoslav Law researchers confirmed that the founding date 1906 is correct and fine legally-wise
 * I would finally like to put forward a different proposal myself: Can we research and provide sources that will help to clarify if the correct founding date of the football section of NK Rijeka was in 1906 or in fact in 1904? Some sources state that the club was originally founded as dedicated to Foot-ball and Foot-ball was played from the very beginning within its premises, some other sources state the first meeting of the football section was held 1906, but none provided definitive evidence that would dissipate this particular doubt in my opinion.
 * TzPGZ (talk) 18:38, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on HNK Rijeka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150215213353/http://nk-rijeka.hr/povijest to http://nk-rijeka.hr/povijest
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nk-rijeka.hr/hnk-rijeka/povijest/predsjednici-i-treneri/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Club history
I would like everyone who have time and information to participate in this discussion. In last few years, there are constantly news from HNK Rijeka that they are founded in 1904, which makes her for 2 years older than Segesta Sisak(right now the oldest Croatian club). The major reason for this is that their are some fans of this club, especially Armada, who denies the history before 1946 which makes Rijeka prewar history questionable. Our job is to be transparent and from objective stance of view, judge is this the correct or is just club propaganda. Please be polite and talk with arguments that have sources. Until the end of this discussion please do not edit sections that contains history before 1945. Opatijac97 (talk) 11:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * According to Croatian federation the club was founded in 1946. Moreover, the club website is actually reviewing the history of football in Rijeka, so mentioning all the clubs in the XX century; it writes that in 1945 US Fiumana was disbanded by the new regime and one year later a new club (NK Kvarner) was founded. As also Opatijac97 wrote, this decision from HNK Rijeka to claim 1906 as founding year has created lots of claims even within the club's fans, so that it's clear that there are no clear evidences on that. The other way around I would expect independent and solid sources claiming that NHK Rijeka was founded in 1906; so far, the Croatian federation is reporting 1946 and, liked or not, it should be our reference. --GC85 (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Hello to everyone, there has been proposed merger of S.C.F. Quarnero into HNK Rijeka. As there was no discussion created at that moment, I decided to create one on talk page of destination article. By that I propose merger of S.C.F. Quarnero into HNK Rijeka and the reason for that is S.C.F. Quarnero (Croatian: SD Kvarner) is a name of HNK Rijeka used from 1946 to 1954. The reason of changing name are explained in both articles. Opatijac97 (talk) 15:58, 24 October 2021 (UTC)


 * It sounds reasonable to me to merge two articles on a single club. Was it just a name change?--Tomobe03 (talk) 00:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 11:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)