Comments on: Clash of the Shorts

By: Suhird

Suhird — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:00:25 +0000

Hey John, so shorts do not carry a rule for clashes

By: Suhird

Suhird — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 07:36:55 +0000

Hello John, I saw that match (Stoke vs Wigan) and it was distingiushable easily. So that is why i said that a clash is not defined.

By: John Devlin

John Devlin — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:52:27 +0000

Hello Suhird, that Stoke/Wigan game was ridiculous! Orange clearly clashes with red in my book (as does claret of course).

Interesting point about Utd at Anfield but I don’t think that it would be a problem to wear white shorts for just one game though. I have heard from a very reliable source that Utd (under Gary Neville’s instructions!) always like to wear all-white at Anfield so I was surprised to see them in the black shirt to be honest.

Glad you’re enjoying the thread! Seems to have got people talking.

By: Suhird

Suhird — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:49:42 +0000

Another thing i wanted to say is that Man Utd wore white shorts and socks against liverpool with their black away shirts because they would have got a pair of white shorts made by their kit manufacturers (nike) to avoid a kit clash, supposedly against sunderland in the Stadium of light. But it would be stupid to get them made for only one match in the whole season, so they must be wearing the white shorts with their away kit whenever they play a team which has a clash with their home jersey but not with white shorts.

(THIS IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND)

By: Suhird

Suhird — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:44:35 +0000

I respect you John Devlin because this the only thread i have found abt this shorts and changing etc. which actually interests me, but a clash is not defined. The other day saw Stoke city in red and white shirts against Wigan athletic in orange shirts. It was difficult to spot the players, but a clash is not defined. It depends on the referee. RSVP

By: John Devlin

John Devlin — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:13:30 +0000

Hello Suhird, in my experience navy and black is always considered a clash in both shorts and socks (as well as shirts of course). You are right it seems to be the case that shorts is purely down to the club’s discretion and that it is just shirts and socks that there are rules about. Which makes AJ’s comment about the Birmingham/Bristol City match last season odd – it must have just been a mistake in that game.

Its weird how cup groupings can sometimes have the same colours – I remember at Euro 2008 one group just seemed to have red and white!

By: john b

john b — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:03:42 +0000

cheers aj,i was trying too forget that game!! and United wore black shorts at pompey on saturday to avoid a clash i see.

By: Suhird

Suhird — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 05:43:21 +0000

There is one interesting thing about the Champions League Group D this season. All four teams have their original shorts colour as Blue. Chelsea- Blue Shirt with Blue Shorts, Porto- Blue and White shirt with Blue Shorts, At Madrid- Red and White shirt with Blue shorts and APOEL FC- Yellow shirt with blue shorts. Quite Interesting. Although Atletico Madrid have only worn their red shorts to avoid Shorts Clashes even at home.

By: AJ

AJ — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 23:24:51 +0000

Can the outfield socks clash?

I’ve always assumed not, but I went to Birmingham-Bristol City last season and both teams wore white socks.

john b, the white/home Man United goalkeeper kit has been worn this season – in the Burnley game at Turf Moor.

But yeah, I’m not sure why they don’t seem to want to wear that one and prefer the aqua and (seemingly unofficial) yellow…

By: Suhird

Suhird — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:46:16 +0000

Your problem John Devlin is that you are even taking the shorts combination of Navy and Black to be a clash. Well, you might consider it a clash but the kit rules only require the Shirt and Socks clashes to be avoided, not the shorts. If any team changes their shorts, that means they are doing that for the convenience of the players, not because of any rules. Take care