Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

New kit next season (picture on Page 36)

1111214161740

Comments

  • edited June 2014
    .
  • It could look very retro come 10 years time.



    Or very sh*t
  • edited June 2014
    Not a fan, the white at the top makes it look like training wear IMO, im another in the, why have we not got the real UoG logo camp , the only thing i like is the hooped socks.

    A yellow away kit would win me round though.

    I will get used to it as it is only a kit, nothing to get actually stressed about.

    Just probably the worst season to have an unusual kit, considering so many fans are already uneasy about the changes with the new regime.
  • Absolutely fuming with this.

    As a kit it's doesn't look too bad but it's NOT A CHARLTON KIT. It's been chosen by a group of people who obviously don't know our history but think "yeah it looks cool, and it's red and white". The reason Palace call us clowns is because of those god damn socks. Wake up Roly FFS.

    I know we've had the odd kit in the past which has been more white than red but that doesn't mean it's right. I feel like we're being messed around by a micro managing, smart arsed t#at (huh) and i'm so angry right now.

    I'm waiting for the announcement of the change of badge.

    RD out!
  • matt88 said:

    It could look very retro come 10 years time.



    Or very sh*t

    Don't think you'll have to wait 10 years for it to be sh*te.
  • I like it......
  • What's with the high crotch on the shorts? Don't think NLA will be buying a pair.
  • MrLargo said:
    LOL! That just got me in hysterics in the middle of the office! Someone please explain why we are charged 40 quid for some crappy Nike template kit which anyone can pick up for a tenner just because it has our badge printed on it? I guess our kits will always look Sunday Leauge-like whilst we have Nike
  • Sponsored links:


  • Its ok.

    Looks much better with the real logo.
  • I've already said what I think of the kit - I hope and also think it will grow on a few people. I totally understand the sentiment that the kit isn't very Charlton with regards to the color combination, but it will be worn by our players, it is in our colors, but most important of all, it has got our logo on it.
  • I hated it at first look, but it has grown on me. I think it looks quite dynamic.

    The reason for the Uni of Greenwich font is presumably because their logo isn't legible from a distance. It's not as if it's a brand that people will instantly recognise from its shape alone. Having said that, they could have used a thicker serif font instead of Helvetica/Arial to maintain some consistency.
  • Isn't that an old London Broncos kit left over from their Valley days.
  • Put the university logo on it looks much better with it. Might as well buy the cheaper version and put a badge on it at least you don't have that awful font. Not keen on the stripped socks either.
  • I presume the dodgy Uni logo is about 2p a shirt cheaper to produce than Nugs mock up. All looks very non Charlton and cheap to me. I hate it.
  • I presume the dodgy Uni logo is about 2p a shirt cheaper to produce than Nugs mock up. All looks very non Charlton and cheap to me. I hate it.

    "Cheap" and "Charlton" go together these days so I'd say it looks very Charlton.

  • Awful, really awful.
  • A bit shocked when I first saw it, but I'm sure I'll get over it, especially if we win a few games.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Sweet, saved me £45.. Litterally couldnt like it less
  • shine166 said:

    Sweet, saved me £45.. Litterally couldnt like it less

    What if it was red and blue stripes ?
  • I would've preferred the majority of the shirt to be red, some white as trim etc. The shorts should be white and not a big fan of hooped/stripped socks. Anyhow I haven't brought a shirt since the centenary season so what am I moaning about.......

    I did like the 'gob of flem' Mike Salmon goalie shirt of the mid 90s though
  • It's strange really, if you look at a lot of the nike kits in the world cup they hark back to much simpler designs from the mid-century. Seems odd that we've gone the complete opposite to this with an over-designed 1990's major league soccer kit.

    I don't hate it, mainly because I never wear one, and as said previously my son will probably love it. I do hate the UofG sponsor on the front though, really naffs it up, they should have used the logo, no excuses. If the shirt went with white shorts and red socks with white tops I'd prefer it much more.
  • The kit colour etc I can forgive. The awful Greenwich University logo I can not. I guarantee that is down to cost/time implications and not down to how it would be in an ideal world.

    Pretty poor to be honest.
  • Huskaris said:

    The kit colour etc I can forgive. The awful Greenwich University logo I can not. I guarantee that is down to cost/time implications and not down to how it would be in an ideal world.

    Pretty poor to be honest.

    Yes, the Andrews logo is pretty poor as well, both are shown up by the Mitsubishi log buried on the shorts!
  • Nug said:

    Holy cow Batman! Didn't expect that.image

    Oh that really takes the st**dard L**ge.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!