Author Topic: New kit??? (Read 284218 times)

AlexanderKruseBerg · « **Reply #1680 on:** May 10, 2012, 01:34:58 AM »

I think this is pretty close to the real one.

J-Mc- · « **Reply #1681 on:** May 10, 2012, 01:46:27 AM »

Quote from: CentenaryBoy on May 10, 2012, 01:19:23 AM

I know there have been mock-ups where the flames have been on the back of the strip. Have the Premier League approved the '96' element? They can be very touchy about symbols or messages that can be perceived as 'political'. Although obviously for us the 96 are an emotional thing, where we pay tribute to all those who died - might the Premier League see it as a campaigning thing - part of the JFT96 campaign? And therefore they might not be happy with us having it on our shirt?

Just wondering...

The flames on the current crest have the same meaning no?

If they had anything against it then the flames wouldn't have been allowed.

Big Red Richie · « **Reply #1682 on:** May 10, 2012, 01:58:51 AM »

Quote from: J-Mc- on May 10, 2012, 01:46:27 AM

The flames on the current crest have the same meaning no?

If they had anything against it then the flames wouldn't have been allowed.

If the flame is incorporated into the club badge/crest, then surely once the badge/crest is registerd as the one to be used on the shirts, then it isn't an issue to the F.A./Premier League.

In the same veine, what about the Liverbird motif that was on the back of the neck of the 08/10 kit.

As long as it meets the rules relating to kit, by the footballing authorities, and as long as it's not inflamatory for any reason, then there's no reason for them to appose it.

Many kits in the past have had other things on, or woven into match shirts (various clubs), and again, as long as it meets all of the approved rules governing what can be on match shirts, then there's no reason for them to have any reason to stop it going on the shirts.

In the case of a 96 with flames, it can be argued that as it's already represented on the club badge, then it's an integral part of the clubs identity. If it was something going on to a shirt (any club) that was overtly political, then I think the footballing authorities would have a strong view on it, and start quoting the rule book relating to the kit.

As the flames are already part of our club badge, putting them on the back of the neck is no different from the Liverbird on the neck of the 08/10 kit, or even the Liverbirds woven into the fabric of the 96/98 kits.

If I remember rightly, somewhere on RAWK someone has already put up a link to the rules and regs of what can and can't be on a match shirt, ie: what size a sponsor can be, what size the name and numbers must be etc etc.
It might well be somewhere in this very thread, but it's more likely to be in one of the threads for new kits, over the last 2-5 years.

Edit: Here's the UEFA regs. I'll just go and look for the F.A./Prem regs.
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefa/Others/72/77/76/727776_DOWNLOAD.pdf ( 2008 version )

From the above link:

Article 56
Further restrictions
Sponsor advertising and political and/or other messages are prohibited on
special equipment used on the fi eld of play.
Member association or club identifi cation may appear.

As I said. As the flames are already part of our club badge, then there's no issues with them. The '96' though may be an issue, with UEFA kit restrictions, as it may be seen as a political statement, but I doubt it, and we can argue it's an act of remembrance, not political.

RyanBabel19 · « **Reply #1683 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:04:49 AM »

Quote from: AlexanderKruseBerg on May 10, 2012, 01:34:58 AM

I think this is pretty close to the real one.

love that

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1684 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:21:43 AM »

Quote from: AlexanderKruseBerg on May 10, 2012, 01:34:58 AM

I think this is pretty close to the real one.

This looks like a Golf shirt.

Collars on Football Kits will be the death of me.

JustDan · « **Reply #1685 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:30:02 AM »

Quote from: kLFCreds on May 10, 2012, 02:21:43 AM

This looks like a Golf shirt.

Collars on Football Kits will be the death of me.

So is it definitely going to have a collar then? Will be quite unique if so... any other clubs of note (or at all) have collars on their kit shirts?

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1686 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:31:21 AM »

Quote from: JustDan on May 10, 2012, 02:30:02 AM

So is it definitely going to have a collar then? Will be quite unique if so... any other clubs of note (or at all) have collars on their kit shirts?

Everton, AC MIlan, Inter, Napoli, to name a few.

CentenaryBoy · « **Reply #1687 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:40:02 AM »

Quote from: Big Red Richie on May 10, 2012, 01:58:51 AM

If the flame is incorporated into the club badge/crest, then surely once the badge/crest is registerd as the one to be used on the shirts, then it isn't an issue to the F.A./Premier League.

In the same veine, what about the Liverbird motif that was on the back of the neck of the 08/10 kit.

As long as it meets the rules relating to kit, by the footballing authorities, and as long as it's not inflamatory for any reason, then there's no reason for them to appose it.

Many kits in the past have had other things on, or woven into match shirts (various clubs), and again, as long as it meets all of the approved rules governing what can be on match shirts, then there's no reason for them to have any reason to stop it going on the shirts.

In the case of a 96 with flames, it can be argued that as it's already represented on the club badge, then it's an integral part of the clubs identity. If it was something going on to a shirt (any club) that was overtly political, then I think the footballing authorities would have a strong view on it, and start quoting the rule book relating to the kit.

As the flames are already part of our club badge, putting them on the back of the neck is no different from the Liverbird on the neck of the 08/10 kit, or even the Liverbirds woven into the fabric of the 96/98 kits.

If I remember rightly, somewhere on RAWK someone has already put up a link to the rules and regs of what can and can't be on a match shirt, ie: what size a sponsor can be, what size the name and numbers must be etc etc.
It might well be somewhere in this very thread, but it's more likely to be in one of the threads for new kits, over the last 2-5 years.

Edit: Here's the UEFA regs. I'll just go and look for the F.A./Prem regs.
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefa/Others/72/77/76/727776_DOWNLOAD.pdf ( 2008 version )

From the above link:

Article 56
Further restrictions
Sponsor advertising and political and/or other messages are prohibited on
special equipment used on the fi eld of play.
Member association or club identifi cation may appear.

As I said. As the flames are already part of our club badge, then there's no issues with them. The '96' though may be an issue, with UEFA kit restrictions, as it may be seen as a political statement, but I doubt it, and we can argue it's an act of remembrance, not political.

I don't claim to know the answer - I'm just posing the question.

As you say, if we insist it's a symbol of remembrance, I can't see it being a major problem. But we all know how officious and petty some of these governing bodies can be.

J-Mc- · « **Reply #1688 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:47:52 AM »

Quote from: Big Red Richie on May 10, 2012, 01:58:51 AM

If the flame is incorporated into the club badge/crest, then surely once the badge/crest is registerd as the one to be used on the shirts, then it isn't an issue to the F.A./Premier League.

In the same veine, what about the Liverbird motif that was on the back of the neck of the 08/10 kit.

As long as it meets the rules relating to kit, by the footballing authorities, and as long as it's not inflamatory for any reason, then there's no reason for them to appose it.

Many kits in the past have had other things on, or woven into match shirts (various clubs), and again, as long as it meets all of the approved rules governing what can be on match shirts, then there's no reason for them to have any reason to stop it going on the shirts.

In the case of a 96 with flames, it can be argued that as it's already represented on the club badge, then it's an integral part of the clubs identity. If it was something going on to a shirt (any club) that was overtly political, then I think the footballing authorities would have a strong view on it, and start quoting the rule book relating to the kit.

As the flames are already part of our club badge, putting them on the back of the neck is no different from the Liverbird on the neck of the 08/10 kit, or even the Liverbirds woven into the fabric of the 96/98 kits.

If I remember rightly, somewhere on RAWK someone has already put up a link to the rules and regs of what can and can't be on a match shirt, ie: what size a sponsor can be, what size the name and numbers must be etc etc.
It might well be somewhere in this very thread, but it's more likely to be in one of the threads for new kits, over the last 2-5 years.

Edit: Here's the UEFA regs. I'll just go and look for the F.A./Prem regs.
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefa/Others/72/77/76/727776_DOWNLOAD.pdf ( 2008 version )

From the above link:

Article 56
Further restrictions
Sponsor advertising and political and/or other messages are prohibited on
special equipment used on the fi eld of play.
Member association or club identifi cation may appear.

As I said. As the flames are already part of our club badge, then there's no issues with them. The '96' though may be an issue, with UEFA kit restrictions, as it may be seen as a political statement, but I doubt it, and we can argue it's an act of remembrance, not political.

Personally, I see the flame as more of a political symbol than the '96' due to it's link with the justice campaign, however the 96 is classed as a sign of rememberance.

What I mean in the first place though is because one of the flames is directly linked to Hillsborough, thus also represents the '96' then if they don't allow the use of the '96' then they also cannot allow the use of the flame. Since it's been incorporated into the crest (which will have had to been checked by the FA before even put in to be registered I think,) then it seems as though they have no problem with it.

Another note is that we've already registered the '96' with a flame either side of it, so can't see any problems with it going on the shirt.

Big Red Richie · « **Reply #1689 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:51:45 AM »

Quote from: CentenaryBoy on May 10, 2012, 02:40:02 AM

I don't claim to know the answer - I'm just posing the question.

As you say, if we insist it's a symbol of remembrance, I can't see it being a major problem. But we all know how officious and petty some of these governing bodies can be.

To be honest, none of us know the answer, as UEFA are a law unto themselves.

I can see the F.A./ Premier League having a bit of a softer stance on things, than UEFA though.

Again, from the above link (2008 version)

15
Article 14
Club emblem
The UEFA-approved club emblem may appear once on the shirt, shorts and
each sock in printed, woven or sewn form. Any other technical solution is also
possible, subject to the prior written approval of the UEFA Administration.
There are no restrictions as to the shape of the club emblem.
The size and positioning of the club emblem is authorised as follows:
a) shirt: maximum of 100 cm², front of the shirt at chest height, above any
sponsor’s horizontal lettering;
b) shorts: maximum of 50 cm², front of the left or right leg;
c) socks: maximum of 50 cm² on each brand-new (unworn) sock; free
choice of position.
The club emblem may also be incorporated at the bottom of each single
fi gure of the player’s number in accordance with paragraph 10.07.
Article 15
Club name
The UEFA-approved club name (or abbreviation thereof) may appear once
in any position on the front of the shirt and anywhere on the shorts and on
each sock.
The choice of script is free and the height of the letters must not exceed 2
cm. The provisions of paragraph 11.09 also apply.
The name must not exceed 12 cm² on the shirt, shorts and socks.
If no club emblem appears on the shirt, shorts or socks, the name of the club
may appear in the size and position stipulated in paragraph 14.03 instead.
The letters must not exceed 5 cm in height.
The club name (or abbreviation thereof) may, in addition, appear once on
the inside or outside of the collar zone defi ned in Annex C. The lettering
must not exceed 2 cm in height and the surface area must not exceed
12 cm².
The club name (or abbreviation thereof) may, in addition, appear once on
the back of the shirt, below the number. Paragraphs 11.05 to 11.09 apply
by analogy.
Article 16
Offi cial mascot
The UEFA-approved offi cial mascot of the club may appear once on the
inside or outside of the shirt collar zone as an alternative to the name of the
club or offi cial symbol, in accordance with paragraph 15.05.

Article 17
Offi cial symbol (incl. UEFA-approved nickname)
The UEFA-approved offi cial symbol of the club (incl. UEFA-approved
nickname of the club) may appear once on the inside or outside of the
collar zone as an alternative to the name of the club or offi cial mascot, in
accordance with paragraph 15.05.

Obviously in this instance, the club mascot is the Liverbird. It could be argued though that as the flames are part of the official club crest, then they may be on the collar, as described in Artical 17, as the flames are neither the name of the club, or the club official mascot.

CentenaryBoy · « **Reply #1690 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:52:50 AM »

Interestingly I notice the club charter has been changed. LFC used to have a commitment to only change the home kit every two seasons. Now the charter says: 'All replica strips have a minimum lifespan of one season'.

I think we all knew (or at least guessed) this new kit would only have a lifespan of a year - but the altered charter seems to back this up.

Apologies if this has been mentioned before.

Big Red Richie · « **Reply #1691 on:** May 10, 2012, 02:57:45 AM »

So three new kits every seaon it is then

(+ goalie kits)

I wonder if other sports outlets will undercut the official club stores like JJB have in the past, or Warrior will have a far tighter rein on their merchandise than Adidas did, and if that will conflict with the current competative selling regs within the U.K.

Samee · « **Reply #1692 on:** May 10, 2012, 04:38:47 AM »

Quote from: kLFCreds on May 10, 2012, 02:21:43 AM

This looks like a Golf shirt.

Collars on Football Kits will be the death of me.

It's beautiful, classy.

Lucas DuoFlush · « **Reply #1693 on:** May 10, 2012, 04:42:14 AM »

Presumably photoshoots, supplies etc. have all been done and dusted and yet still no leak the day before the reveal - FSG have done a good job of plugging them holes.

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1694 on:** May 10, 2012, 05:45:30 AM »

Quote from: Samee on May 10, 2012, 04:38:47 AM

It's beautiful, classy.

Yeah, for a quick 9 at the Country Club.

Gifted Right Foot · « **Reply #1695 on:** May 10, 2012, 05:58:20 AM »

it's obviously so big andy can get blind at the posh country clubs without having to take his strip off

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1696 on:** May 10, 2012, 05:59:39 AM »

Quote from: bored86 on May 10, 2012, 05:58:20 AM

it's obviously so big andy can get blind at the posh country clubs without having to take his strip off

Samee · « **Reply #1697 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:19:14 AM »

Quote from: kLFCreds on May 10, 2012, 05:45:30 AM

Yeah, for a quick 9 at the Country Club.

Ha. Don't care if it looks like a golf top, it looks good. As did England's 2010 World Cup shirt. I much prefer it to cluttered mess that is most football kits these days.

Kits like the England one you could wear out without looking an idiot.

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1698 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:20:23 AM »

Quote from: Samee on May 10, 2012, 06:19:14 AM

Ha. Don't care if it looks like a golf top, it looks good. As did England's 2010 World Cup shirt. I much prefer it to cluttered mess that is most football kits these days.

Kits like the England one you could wear out without looking an idiot.

Fair, but the one up top is not the kit.

Samee · « **Reply #1699 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:22:05 AM »

Quote from: kLFCreds on May 10, 2012, 06:20:23 AM

Fair, but the one up top is not the kit.

Fits the description pretty well, clearly shopped though. I'm hoping the real deal looks as good.

Get · « **Reply #1700 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:22:50 AM »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2142059/Manchester-Uniteds-new-kit-looks-like-tea-towel-say-horrified-fans.html

Hehehe

Get · « **Reply #1701 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:23:19 AM »

Quote from: Samee on May 10, 2012, 06:22:05 AM

Fits the description pretty well, clearly shopped though. I'm hoping the real deal looks as good.

me to, love that desgin. Goes back in time.

Samee · « **Reply #1702 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:24:13 AM »

Quote from: Get on May 10, 2012, 06:22:50 AM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2142059/Manchester-Uniteds-new-kit-looks-like-tea-towel-say-horrified-fans.html

Hehehe

To be honest, I quite like it. Have done since it was leaked.

Get · « **Reply #1703 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:24:59 AM »

Quote from: Samee on May 10, 2012, 06:24:13 AM

To be honest, I quite like it. Have done since it was leaked.

ok there must be something wrong with u or someone hacked ur account. u can't seriously like that?

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1704 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:27:04 AM »

Quote from: Get on May 10, 2012, 06:24:59 AM

ok there must be something wrong with u or someone hacked ur account. u can't seriously like that?

I've seen much worse.

Samee · « **Reply #1705 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:28:00 AM »

Quote from: Get on May 10, 2012, 06:24:59 AM

ok there must be something wrong with u or someone hacked ur account. u can't seriously like that?

Looks pretty bad in that little close up snippet of it but overall when worn it looks pretty good in my opinion:

Classic V-neck with a black trim. The 'tea-towel' pattern isn't as noticeable either. It grows on you.

Get · « **Reply #1706 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:31:02 AM »

Quote from: Samee on May 10, 2012, 06:28:00 AM

Looks pretty bad in that little close up snippet of it but overall when worn it looks pretty good in my opinion:

Classic V-neck with a black trim. The 'tea-towel' pattern isn't as noticeable either. It grows on you.

ok fair point, all tho i still have my doubts. i Think in better light in live it will look awful, I hope so

kLFCreds · « **Reply #1707 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:31:45 AM »

You guys think the Kit will leak earlier than the 0:01 release time? I wouldn't be surprised if it did.

chuckmynorris · « **Reply #1708 on:** May 10, 2012, 06:34:06 AM »

Nothing wrong with that United's shirt, looks actually pretty good imo.

This on the other hand..

Quote from: AlexanderKruseBerg on May 10, 2012, 01:34:58 AM

I think this is pretty close to the real one.

Looks fuckin' ace!

kvarmeismydad · « **Reply #1709 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:25:46 AM »

The shiny flecks on the front of this season's strip are awful.

Hope this is going to be plain and classy.

BURNA · « **Reply #1710 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:28:47 AM »

Quote from: AlexanderKruseBerg on May 10, 2012, 01:34:58 AM

I think this is pretty close to the real one.

Thats a photoshopped Umbro shirt (see the label inside) and i personally think it's fuckin rank. I hope to god it's nothing like this.

Not liking the collared one thats popping up and that purple/pink 3rd kit thing must surely be a piss take.

They're doing a bloody good job of keeping it secret for this long but i suppose it's because it's an American company and not Adidas as their kits are made in sweatshops in the far east and extremely easily leaked and copied.

It's Jimmy Corkhill · « **Reply #1711 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:29:02 AM »

A shirt with a collar is smart, fact.

No-one in our away end look shite when we've got polo shirts on. If its like the rumours say, it'll be plain red, with a gold Liverbird. What more can you want?

BRdispatch05 · « **Reply #1712 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:48:34 AM »

Quote from: It's Jimmy Corkhill on May 10, 2012, 07:29:02 AM

What more can you want?

A secret pocket. I love secret pockets

Get · « **Reply #1713 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:56:11 AM »

Quote from: BRDispatch05 on May 10, 2012, 07:48:34 AM

A secret pocket. I love secret pockets

secret pockets with no end

BURNA · « **Reply #1714 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:04:21 AM »

Quote from: It's Jimmy Corkhill on May 10, 2012, 07:29:02 AM

A shirt with a collar is smart, fact.

No-one in our away end look shite when we've got polo shirts on. If its like the rumours say, it'll be plain red, with a gold Liverbird. What more can you want?

I don't like collared football shirts, fact. I don't have to like them if I don't want to.

As for anything else, I want it to be able to dry itself like the jacket in Back to the future 2.

RedPross · « **Reply #1715 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:06:25 AM »

Im sorry but whars "Political" about the flames and 96!!!! The lmes are symbolic of never forgetting those that sied that tragic day....... And 96 is simply the number of loced ones that lost their lives!!!!

There is nothing political about it...its simply a way to remember and never forget!

Tepid water · « **Reply #1716 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:15:53 AM »

I have to say, it's just amazing that there isn't one single leaked picture of these kits anywhere.
This must be a first, god knows how they've managed it!

7777 · « **Reply #1717 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:27:25 AM »

Quote from: BRDispatch05 on May 10, 2012, 07:48:34 AM

A secret pocket. I love secret pockets

To hide a secret whistle

Gromit · « **Reply #1718 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:31:53 AM »

Quote from: Big Red Richie on May 10, 2012, 02:57:45 AM

So three new kits every seaon it is then

Always thought it was a bit strange that we were being paid large sponsorship deals with Addidas/Reebok but they were only allowed to produce 1 home kit every two years. That's got to be roughly 50% of what they could sell compared to a big team changing shirt every year say Real, Man U, Barca etc.

BURNA · « **Reply #1719 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:34:18 AM »

Quote from: Gromit on May 10, 2012, 08:31:53 AM

Always thought it was a bit strange that we were being paid large sponsorship deals with Addidas/Reebok but they were only allowed to produce 1 home kit every two years. That's got to be roughly 50% of what they could sell compared to a big team changing shirt every year say Real, Man U, Barca etc.

That never even crossed my mind to be honest but you're quite right. Money doesn't talk....it shouts.