Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
New kit next season (picture on Page 36)
Comments
-
What a load of shit !
I suppose the thinking is, that if we're going to be playing hoof ball, then we really should have a rugby kit :-)2 -
What a whining bunch. I like it! So it's a bit different, so what.1
-
This is the one....I think you need to send this to the club. Also I don't think the kit has to much white on it. We are the Red&White army after all.charliewright1 said:
I know it's "only" a shirt BUT that looks 100% better and a bit "classier"!!!Nug said:Be pretty easy to do this wouldn't it?
1 -
1
-
It's growing on me a bit. Much prefer the version above though1
-
Don't know if it has already been discussed, but the reason for the plain font on the front might be to do with the amount of space a sponsors logo is allowed to take up. I was reading today that if you have a rear shirt sponsor the amount of space you are allowed to use for advertising on the front is reduced. Apparently the FA have specific rules about it.
If the logo was added the font would have to be massively reduced to fit everything in.0 -
CAFC's Facebook crew answer to the font:
The choice of font and design of the logo was down to the University of Greenwich, not the club. They choose how it appears (OG)
1 -
The sad truth us that by going with Nike (or Adidas), as a small club you're stuck with a limited selection of designs. I would have much preferred that shirt with red sleeves (but keeping the white chest area) but unless you're Barca or Man U there's no scope for customisation!1
-
I don't care if the team wear plain Slazenger polo shirts (two for £9) so long as the colours are basically red and white. Oh, and we win a dozen plus home league games next season.1
-
Know it's not "proper Charlton", but the more I see it the more I like it. Wish the sponsor was as above though; the actual one is pony. Looks like an iron-on Sunday league sponsor.0
- Sponsored links:
-
I like it. It's only for a season or two and then back to a more traditional strip, no big deal.2
-
Not if they just reduced the logo size. Anyway hopefully after seeing this size font nice and clearly in our one televised defeat of the season, they'll be queuing in their droves for a place.Clem_Snide said:Don't know if it has already been discussed, but the reason for the plain font on the front might be to do with the amount of space a sponsors logo is allowed to take up. I was reading today that if you have a rear shirt sponsor the amount of space you are allowed to use for advertising on the front is reduced. Apparently the FA have specific rules about it.
If the logo was added the font would have to be massively reduced to fit everything in.1 -
Id like to think that was fairly obvious to most. If we had Apple as a sponsor we wouldn't change their logo / font for our own purposes - the same for this lot.sasquatch said:CAFC's Facebook crew answer to the font:
The choice of font and design of the logo was down to the University of Greenwich, not the club. They choose how it appears (OG)
0 -
I have a picture of the kit on my desk partition at work, must admit after first not being over keen on it, it is now starting to grow on me2
-
Sons's birthday in 2 weeks, looks like I'll be buying it, it's growing on me, I do like the kit, just would prefer red top white shorts red sock combo for Charlton, as others have said maybe it's fine to now and again mix it up a bit.0
-
It's a grower, not a shower.3
-
Keep telling the ladies that, but they never seem to careBetterCallSaul said:It's a grower, not a shower.
0 -
Same here, I don't mind it now I've seen it a few times. Shirt designs for most clubs change regularly now anyway so in two years we'll probably have something more traditional back in place.Zinedine Bagheri said:I like it. It's only for a season or two and then back to a more traditional strip, no big deal.
0 -
My first impressions weren't negative but I've grown to dislike it. All they needed was red sleeves and white shorts and they'd have mostly got away with it.Algarveaddick said:
That is because a football kit is a massive part of the identity of the football club. Charlton Athletic play in plain red shirts, and the last 30 new kits have been basically the same CLASSIC design. It's not a fashion statement, go down the high street and buy a shirt in a fashion retail outlet if you want to express your personality in what you wear. And don't be rude about old people like me either... ;-)Woodollie said:Can't believe I still look at this site. Although I kind of knew what I would be letting myself in for. Get a bloody life it's a progressive different kit! For the last 3 new kits have been basically the same boring design! At least this one has a bit of difference about it!
My other half said simply, "Doesn't look like Charlton." Nothing really more to add to that.4 - Sponsored links:
-
I like it still.0
-
Two words : red shorts1
-
Two words; hooped socks0
-
Two words: White sleeves0
-
Two words: I can't count4
-
Two words.1
-
What the whole university? or one person?MSE7 said:sasquatch said:CAFC's Facebook crew answer to the font:
The choice of font and design of the logo was down to the University of Greenwich, not the club. They choose how it appears (OG)
They asked a first year called John what he wanted to do - he chose it.
Of course it wasn't the whole university you numpty. When you're a big boy you'll understand how these things bounce around in a committee for several days before any decision is made
2 -
Two Swords1
-
Swisdom said:
They asked a first year called John what he wanted to do - he chose it.
Of course it wasn't the whole university you numpty. When you're a big boy you'll understand how these things bounce around in a committee for several days before any decision is made
0
