Blackpool 2010-11 Kits

blackpool-h-10-11Blackpool’s first ever season in the Premier League sees the side turning out in good, solid home and away outfits. Nothing stunning – simply practical, sturdy kits that do the job. To be honest the move on from last season’s strips (which incidentally at the time were marketed as 2009-11 outfits) is very slight and I’m guessing the club decided to refresh the design when new sponsors were announced, but didn’t want to reinvent the kit for this milestone season. The home shirt is of course the traditional tangerine with a neat white neck and large Carbrini logos on each sleeve. Discrete flashes of white are disguised inbetween slight flaps of fabric on each shoulder and down the front of the shirt. A similar trim continues on the shorts.

The away kit is simply a reversal of the home (a strategy I applaud!) allowing for mix and match outfits of all tangerine or all white when necessary.

Given the lack of sides that wear orange or yellow in the top flight is a third kit really necessary? Still, everyone else is doing it so why shouldn’t Blackpool? For me the two tone blue striped kit is the pick of the bunch. The shades work well together and the tangerine trim on the shorts and socks really sets off the whole design.

blackpool-3-10-11My only criticism relates to the lack of equivalent tangerine trim on the shirt which gives the whole kit a slightly unbalanced colour scheme. Perhaps the presence of the logo in a very bold but unfamiliar and un-corporate pink was deemed to have clashed with any additional tangerine. It may have been a better solution to switch the wonga logo to Blackpool’s traditional colour. Interestingly, also from a corporate branding consistency point of view, the Carbrini logo appears in different colours on the shirt, short and socks. Odd when you consider its sits on navy blue in all three occasions.

21 Replies to “Blackpool 2010-11 Kits

  1. A bit cheap and nasty looking for me. Awful sponsors and Carbrini logos all over the place don’t help matters either. Blackpool have unique colours, it’s a shame to see them in such poor kits.

    I do like it when clubs simply reverse home kit colours for away kits though. Shame about the details.

  2. Thanks chaps – Tim, I have mixed feelings about the extra logos. I’m torn between liking the extra embellishments but then not liking that in addition to the PL sleeve patches, numbers etc the shirt begins to look crowded. I think a plain shirt can take the extra logos but not a shirt with any other trim.

    More I think about these kits though the more I think that as a “set” they are nearly perfect. Home in traditional colours, away in reversal of traditional colours and an interesting third, that provides a good alternative to the home and away, and is STILL in Blackpool traditional historical colours.

  3. Don’t like the Carbrini logos on the shoulders! Not as bad as the way Reebok have done it on the Bolton kits, but not good either!

  4. Would all-orange not have sufficed away to Stoke yesterday, as teams who play in claret often don’t change when playing teams with red and white stripes (excepting West Ham at Sunderland last week)? I suppose the fact that the back of Stoke’s kit is all red means all-orange would have been too close.

  5. The Wonga Logos ruin otherwise solid kits for me.

    I agree that the third kit would benefit from some tangerine trim or piping just to give it the feel of a Blackpool kit.

  6. As Carbrini are a new supplier, in the Premier League that is, I was wondering how many different Kit Manufacturers there have been across the 44 clubs since, Sky would have us think, football began in 92/93?

  7. #7 – Not sure on this but Chelsea i reckon have only had 2 – umbro and adidas.Man u have had umbro and nike(which you could class as one now).Liverpool 2 – (adidas and reebok – again you could class as one).

    Not sure of the rest.any excuse not to talk about these jerseys really.

  8. I like the home and away kits, as you say, they are good solid strips. The third kit, however, does nothing for me. It just looks so out of place – the sort of thing you’d expect to see a Sunday League team trotting out in…

    I’m sure most of you will disagree, but I think an all-black with orange trim in the same design as the home and away kits would have been a better choice.

    Excellent illustrations, as usual, John.

    By the way, I was watching the Tottenham-Chelsea game on TV at the weekend. Did anyone else think that Chelsea’s blue change socks weren’t the same blue as the shirts and shorts?

  9. Andrew, after spending a good amount of time working this out, I reckon I have the answer. Here’s a list of all the different kit makers who have graced the Premier League since it’s inception (listed by the season they made their debut):






    Wimbledon (own brand)
    Fox Leisure


    View From


    Le Coq Sportif




    Coventry City (own brand)
    Saints (Southampton own brand)






    The Baggies (West Brom own brand)


    Pompey Sport (Portsmouth own brand)














    Mi Fit

    Total: 45 different brands.

  10. Tim thats fantastic, I went to bed last night 3 seasons into working it out only to log on this morning to find someones done it. Much appreciated.

  11. Nice work Tim!! Thanks very much. I’m planning a series of small features on some of these smaller brands – starting with Burrda (whose kits I really like) and older brand Matchwinner who I believe (but am not 100% sure) have only ever graced the top flight with Notts County.

  12. Notts County were deffo pre Premier League, they were relegated along with West Ham and Luton in may 1992 just before the big bang!

  13. ciaran: You are right. I actually made a list of every final league table with each club’s manufacturer beside them and then made the list I posted from that. I somehow left out xtep from the last list though. So (as long as I made no other errors), that’s 46 different manufacturers so far.

    I also forgot to list Fox Leisure as Leicester City’s own brand.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *