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

Kit clashes and changes

I like the black and white kit but why did we not wear red at Peterborough?

And West Bromwich Albion v Leicester. How was that not a kit clash?
«1

Comments

  • alan dugdale
    alan dugdale Posts: 3,077

    I like the black and white kit but why did we not wear red at Peterborough?

    And West Bromwich Albion v Leicester. How was that not a kit clash?

    I thought exactly that when I watched the West Brom match
  • RedChaser
    RedChaser Posts: 19,885
    edited March 2018
    It's a mockery Henners and the cynic in me says its pure commercialism to sell away strips when teams change when there is no need to, like us yesterday wearing white and a lot of the away games I've been to this year when we've unnecessarily worn the blue / mauve strip.

    As for WBA v Leicester that was a joke as insufficient difference in shade of colour when looking at both blue shirts from the back. Surely it is down to the referee to insist on a change of strip if he is not happy in these circumstances after all they are quick to tell substitute players warming up to put a bib on if their tracksuit top clashes.
  • stackitsteve
    stackitsteve Posts: 12,105
    I'm sure teams that have different sponsors on home and away strips have obligations to wear them a certain number of times each season. Even if they would never admit it publicly
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,228
    I didn't think the black and white kit was for sale.

    The can't wear the red kit on Tuesday either
  • stackitsteve
    stackitsteve Posts: 12,105
    Also, we WANT the kits to clash.

    Kit clash is the wrong term to use when teams use similar colours, always bugged me that.
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,228
    edited March 2018

    Also, we WANT the kits to clash.

    Kit clash is the wrong term to use when teams use similar colours, always bugged me that.

    Don't we want the kits to contrast ie be different rather than clash ie be similar.
  • stackitsteve
    stackitsteve Posts: 12,105
    Colours that clash are different colours. That's what we want.
  • bellz2002
    bellz2002 Posts: 1,361
    Money spinning exercise.
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,228
    But the white kit isn't for sale?
  • bellz2002
    bellz2002 Posts: 1,361
    Well then that's just weird unique.
  • Sponsored links:



  • golfaddick
    golfaddick Posts: 33,630
    Even though I like the white shirt there was no reason why we couldn't have worn red. The players then might have believed they were playing "for the badge" and not for some nancy boy "can't get my lovely whit kit dirty" team.
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 69,855
    Yes, no reason to wear the white kit yesterday
  • fmaddick
    fmaddick Posts: 182
    This season’s Peterborough kit has red socks (I live locally and there was some discussion about it at the time - think the conclusion was that historically Posh wore red). Can only assume this was the basis on which it was considered a ‘clash’.

    Couldn’t believe it when I heard we were wearing white - crazy!
  • SDAddick
    SDAddick Posts: 14,467

    Also, we WANT the kits to clash.

    Kit clash is the wrong term to use when teams use similar colours, always bugged me that.

    We're calling it a "kit blend" now. That's what we want to avoid (shout out to The Football Ramble listeners).

    I really like the white kit, but I like it better with black shorts.
  • stackitsteve
    stackitsteve Posts: 12,105

    Also, we WANT the kits to clash.

    Kit clash is the wrong term to use when teams use similar colours, always bugged me that.

    Don't we want the kits to contrast ie be different rather than clash ie be similar.
    Examples of colours that clash are Red & Blue or Blue & Yellow
    Google it.

    Just one of those phases that everyone (in football) says but gets wrong.
  • se9addick
    se9addick Posts: 32,038
    RedChaser said:

    It's a mockery Henners and the cynic in me says its pure commercialism to sell away strips when teams change when there is no need to, like us yesterday wearing white and a lot of the away games I've been to this year when we've unnecessarily worn the blue / mauve strip.

    As for WBA v Leicester that was a joke as insufficient difference in shade of colour when looking at both blue shirts from the back. Surely it is down to the referee to insist on a change of strip if he is not happy in these circumstances after all they are quick to tell substitute players warming up to put a bib on if their tracksuit top clashes.

    Do we really sell more away strips by wearing that kit against Peterborough when we could have worn our home?
  • Briston_Addick
    Briston_Addick Posts: 11,677
    Instead of an all-white kit I'm sure we could have found some black and white halved shirts for them to wear ...
  • Fumbluff
    Fumbluff Posts: 10,127

    Also, we WANT the kits to clash.

    Kit clash is the wrong term to use when teams use similar colours, always bugged me that.

    Don't we want the kits to contrast ie be different rather than clash ie be similar.
    Examples of colours that clash are Red & Blue or Blue & Yellow
    Google it.

    Just one of those phases that everyone (in football) says but gets wrong.
    Like “one up front is really 3 up front and will pay dividends”
  • cblock
    cblock Posts: 1,959
    I do remember the ref making our keeper change his shirt,just before kick off at the valley, because it clashed with his.
  • rina
    rina Posts: 2,334

    I like the black and white kit but why did we not wear red at Peterborough?

    And West Bromwich Albion v Leicester. How was that not a kit clash?

    it's weird enough when chelsea and man city play each other in first choice kits but that west
    brom leicester game was utterly ridiculous
  • Sponsored links:



  • RedChaser
    RedChaser Posts: 19,885
    edited March 2018
    se9addick said:

    RedChaser said:

    It's a mockery Henners and the cynic in me says its pure commercialism to sell away strips when teams change when there is no need to, like us yesterday wearing white and a lot of the away games I've been to this year when we've unnecessarily worn the blue / mauve strip.

    As for WBA v Leicester that was a joke as insufficient difference in shade of colour when looking at both blue shirts from the back. Surely it is down to the referee to insist on a change of strip if he is not happy in these circumstances after all they are quick to tell substitute players warming up to put a bib on if their tracksuit top clashes.

    Do we really sell more away strips by wearing that kit against Peterborough when we could have worn our home?
    I haven't been in the club shop for ages and wasn't aware, as Henry mentioned, they might not be available for general sale, so that kind of answers your question I guess ftb. Maybe if they get enough enquiries as to its availability or go with it as the main change of strip next season, wearing it yesterday will have served a useful purpose in stimulating demand, only time will tell if my cynicism was justified :wink:
  • Redskin
    Redskin Posts: 3,114
    I was surprised at the West Brom v Leicester kits, but not once had any difficulty in telling the difference between the two sides.
  • DaveMehmet
    DaveMehmet Posts: 21,601
    Redskin said:

    I was surprised at the West Brom v Leicester kits, but not once had any difficulty in telling the difference between the two sides.

    Exactly, West Brom were the team who were shit.
  • Algarveaddick
    Algarveaddick Posts: 21,156
    Watching the Football League highlights yesterday, Swindon v Lincoln. Swindon's keeper had a kit on that was very similar to the one worn by Lincoln's outfield players, and Lincoln's keeper one close to that worn by Swindon's. Not an exact match I know, but if I were the ref I would have been asking both to change. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsIHZXl_9oU&feature=onebox
  • Addick Addict
    Addick Addict Posts: 39,795
    I noticed that when I watched the highlights yesterday and do find it incredible that the ref allowed it. Whatever happened to the good old "green jersey"?
  • Redskin
    Redskin Posts: 3,114

    I noticed that when I watched the highlights yesterday and do find it incredible that the ref allowed it. Whatever happened to the good old "green jersey"?

    It went the same way as black boots.
  • RedChaser
    RedChaser Posts: 19,885
    Couldn't see the point of Bournemouth changing to white shirts and blueish shorts yesterday, the reverse of Evertons' colours! And why was the club badge on their shirts not in its usual red and black format? Commercialism!
  • RedChaser
    RedChaser Posts: 19,885
    edited January 2019

    I noticed that when I watched the highlights yesterday and do find it incredible that the ref allowed it. Whatever happened to the good old "green jersey"?

    Traditions went out of the window when the yellow only jersey for home international keepers started appearing in the Leagues.
  • Stefco
    Stefco Posts: 848
    RedChaser said:

    Couldn't see the point of Bournemouth changing to white shirts and blueish shorts yesterday, the reverse of Evertons' colours! And why was the club badge on their shirts not in its usual red and black format? Commercialism!

    Like Watford wearing green shirts against Everton, last month. Bizarre!
  • Fumbluff
    Fumbluff Posts: 10,127
    edited January 2019
    Last week I was sat on the motorway when Burton kicked off at Man City so I was listening to that on talkshite.
    They said that teams have to submit what colours they’re wearing for the game (in the caraboa at least) and that Burton has submitted all-yellow and Man City had objected as it would clash with their stewards coats (we’ve all seen that clip on YouTube but I forget the team) but I was pleased the ref overruled them.
    I bet Burton were pleased to have left the Etihad with at least some form of small victory :wink: