24 years ago this week, on 13 April 1996, the international plc and money machine (with an attached football team) made a disastrous and expensive decision to play in a game in a kit designed not for football, but for its aesthetics when worn as a fashion item. Football had reached a nadir, when even the items of clothing worn by the players was designed with closer reference to the revenue it would generate than the effect it would have on the athletes wearing it.
Facing a poor Southampton side, United wore grey-and-grey shirts, with white (with red and black) shorts and white socks with a single red hoop. This contrasted quite well with the red-and-white striped Southampton shirts and black and red shorts, but not so well with the red-and-white striped socks. But it blended in too well with the background.
Sir Alex Ferguson had hired a "coach", Gail Stevenson from Liverpool University, to work specifically on sight and peripheral vision and worked with the team on a series of pre-match exercises to help the players with their ability to "pick out" team-mates in a match situation. Gail had warned Sir Alex that the grey kit - designed to look great with a pair of jeans - gave its wearers a significant disadvantage. It was harder to "see" team-mates in a dull, drab, pale-coloured kit, especially when it blended in with the black-and-white advertising hoardings around The Dell (Southampton's ground at the time) and the pale faces in the crowd, picked out by the bright sunshine that day.
Ferguson knew the kit was a problem, but had to use it, as Manchester United plc had agreements with kit suppliers Umbro and shirt sponsors Sharp. But he also travelled to Southampton with a full set of alternative (blue-and-white) kit (shirts, shorts and socks), which the players changed into at half-time, earning the club a £10,000 fine.
The first job of a kit is to enhance the performance of its wearers. The second job is to earn the club increased, profitable income. When the second job is prioritised over the first, it can be disastrous. And, in this case, it lost the club money, as well as to contributing to an embarrassing, unlikely thrashing. It's therefore the worst football kit, ever.
Unless Lifers have better choices. Over to you...
Comments
Around this time they were sponsored by Talbot and I believe had a design of a T in the top. This may well have been in brown.
Name the player and ground in picture.
Far, far worse out there.
For example:
This was said of the above kit:
“There’s been a lot of research into the science behind goalkeeper kits, which is why you see a lot of luminous colours and chevron patterns which enlarge the presence of the keeper in the goal.
"The fluorescent yellow keeper kit carries an unmissable multi-coloured kaleidoscope pattern on the front, which resembles a target to aim for – rather than the goal itself – and catches the eye with its disruptive magic-eye effect."
But what went through the designers mind when they created this? - Its the sort of design you'd expect to see a NASCAR team wearing!!
When did Johnny Jackson (second left, back row) sign for that team? Is Gareth Southgate (front row, far left) getting over-friendly with the team-mate on his left? Why have the two players in the front row on the right only got one arm each? And finally, what on earth is the goalkeeper doing to the player bent over in front of him?
https://amphibianappareluk.com/teamwear/uniforms
A lot of them are used in the Sussex/Surrey area by grass roots sides and a few by semi pro clubs.
Its Ian Wallace and I think the ground is White Hart Lane - am I right ?