Week 23 – Premier League Kits Round-up

Posted by John Devlin


69 Responses to “Week 23 – Premier League Kits Round-up”

  1. Martyn Ping Says:

    Still think that Swansea home is one of the best kits seen anywhere across Europe this season. Only slight on it is the lack of black change shorts and socks.

  2. Denis Hurley Says:

    They have them, Martyn – they just don’t wear them

  3. Martyn Ping Says:

    Bonkers, isn’t it? Because they could have solved a few clashes this season that the away kit didn’t adequately cover. Home shirt is still beautiful though.

  4. Martyn Ping Says:

    So the new Nike Spurs away will be navy and the third will apparently be…purple. Words fail me.

  5. Denis Hurley Says:

    Didn’t Real Madrid have something similar a few years ago?

  6. Phil Says:

    They did Denis. They had an all purple kit and an all black one in 06/07.

  7. Martyn Ping Says:

    More Nike idiocy, if it turns out to be true. Don’t know why the third can’t be yellow – that would be a great way to get the fans onside from day one.

  8. Phil Says:

    I agree there Martyn. Yellow with navy was a recognised Spurs kit at one time but that seems to be ages ago now. Its about time they had yellow again.

  9. Denis Hurley Says:

    Tbf, they do have a gold third this season and had a yellow one in 2014-15. I would prefer too if they were away kits though.

  10. Andy Rockall - Statto_74 Says:

    Why idiocy Martyn? Yellow doesn’t seem to sell in such numbers, despite it being traditional. Navy really was always our second colour, until the Football League banned it in the late Sixties.

  11. Martyn Ping Says:

    Yeah, navy should be the away colour, but yellow has always worked as a third when used. The gold one this season actually looks orange on TV!

  12. Denis Hurley Says:

    @Andrew – I think Martyn is saying it’s idiocy to have a navy change shirt and a purple one – unless it’s towards the lilac end, the third won’t solve too many clashes that the navy can’t, I fear

  13. Martyn Ping Says:

    That’s my point. The shade I’ve seen leaked is a bluey purple, so not that different from navy at all. If it was more lilac than purple, fine, but the ‘global template’ next season is a camouflage type print, so I don’t hold out any hopes. Even with say, yellow shorts (just a guess) I can’t see how it would work, especially against someone like West Brom.

  14. Martyn Ping Says:

    Bayern playing Eintracht at the Allianz today, doing a ‘red Chelsea’ by wearing the change red shorts and white socks from the third kit; Eintracht playing in this seasons Juventus-esque home with white shorts and red socks. Sensible so far, being as their away kit is red and black. What doesn’t make sense is that they have a dull yellow third kit that would’ve been sufficient.

  15. Martyn Ping Says:

    ***APOLOGIES EVERYONE!!! I was looking at the wrong picture – the above was the game in Frankfurt. Eintracht are today dressed as Newcastle, Bayern in normal colours. Phew!

  16. Denis Hurley Says:

    Eintracht’s socks in both games were black, Martyn – I wouldn’t have seen a need for Bayern to change, tbh

  17. Martyn Ping Says:

    So they were. I wish they’d make their minds up! I imagine that Bayern took their third socks expecting to need the change, and Eintracht changed expecting Bayern to be in their home pair. Lack of communication in other words. I am as you know a fan of change shorts so they were required, I would say!

  18. Jon Says:

    Though in normal circumstances, Bayern would have been turning up in Frankfurt with their white third kit because Eintracht would have been wearing their usual red and black, instead of having an identity crisis like they have this season with their choice of home colours!

    Bit like Bayern themselves 20 years ago when they suddenly went blue…

  19. Martyn Ping Says:

    Yeah, possibly, though Eintracht have a partial historical reason : the two clubs that joined together to form what is now known as Eintracht Frankfurt played in red and white and black and white; as a compromise the new club settled on red and black. Occasionally the old colours surface, red and white being worn in 1960 against Real Madrid; black and white most recently in the early 90’s before this season. As far as Bayern, the 97 change to blue is a mystery, even now. We had a pale blue home kit for the first couple of years of our life, but red came in in 1906 and has been there ever since, in one way or another.

  20. Martyn Ping Says:

    So Nike unveil a black third kit for France that is apparently NEVER going to be worn in an official game, it’s just a ‘lifestyle jersey’. The new Brazil third is apparently the same; only England and the USA are currently earmarked to actually WEAR the kits.

    As news surfaces about the new Liverpool kits, apparently being styled after early / classic shirts to celebrate 125 years, I can’t help thinking that they were always better dressed in adidas. I know Warrior / NB is a more lucrative contract, but has ANY of their strips looked anything other than cheap and / or trying too hard?

    Speaking of NB, the new Celtic third is going to be…green. Lime green, granted, but still green. What is the plan v Hibs? if the away is anything other than black I can only see massive problems there.

  21. Jon Says:

    How many times have Bootlover Headlines got it wrong on some kit leaks? I remember them trying to make out that Liverpool’s third kit was going to be some form of dark toxic green, but it turned out to be green of the glow in the dark variety. Had to laugh at their latest “leak” about Liverpool’s apparent third kit for next season, stating they were to use a never before seen colour combination of gold and navy, even though they posted a picture of the 00/01 away kit in the same article, which used those exact colours. Extremely lousy “journalism”, but then again I expect nothing less coming from a lousy Arminia supporter who has made a life of lousiness through stealing other people’s Pro Evo work and calling it his own and glossing over footballers wearing multicoloured boots.

    Nike’s third kits are purely for commercial purposes, as we all guessed, and all using that lousy (i’m on a roll today) Vapour template. I wonder what horrible contrasting socks they intend to use for the third kits that actually will get a use on the pitch?

  22. Jon Says:

    It is an odd decision for Celtic to effectively have three green kits (albeit of different shades), but it wouldn’t be the first time this has happened. In 07/08 they had the exact same issue where they retained the previous season’s green and black striped away kit as a third kit after introducing a new bottle green away kit trimmed with silver. When Celtic played at Easter Road that season they wore the stripes, which was still a kit clash in my eyes, but in previous seasons since the late 90’s, Hibs have ended up wearing their away kit at home against Celtic (such as purple on a few occasions).

    Of course many years ago both teams wore their home kits, which was very confusing. I would guess this coming season if Hibs did get promoted to the top flight, both teams would wear their away kits.

  23. Martyn Ping Says:

    I think it would be reasonable for Celtic to have a mainly yellow away with a black third. The old ‘wasp stripe’ Umbro kit (and Nike’s version of it) were for me the most effective away solutions. Any word on Hibs’ supplier next season? I know there was some talk of the Nike teamwear contract ending. For me, even adidas teamwear is preferable – take Ingolstadt’s three kits this season – all of them taken from existing templates (the third even uses the WC14 chest chevron), but with nice little touches like water marks and shadow patterns to make them unique.

    As regards to Liverpool, the aforementioned website have now changed tact and said the third is going to be orange. They do however usually get the Bayern ones right, so it depends on the team!

  24. Jason Bignall Says:

    Umbro are improving their kits vastly which is great. Wouldn’t want to see such a historic brand be left behind

  25. Martyn Ping Says:

    No, I think they are getting their confidence back after flirting with closure a few years back; I expect 2017/18 to be another strong year. The only thing that has counted against them this year IMO is the number of templates – two or three collar / cuff / trim combos when, if they raised it to five or six (as in the mid 90s), there would be real variety across their contracts.

  26. Davidr1986 Says:

    Martyn – thankfully the Hibs &I Just Sport/ Nike deal is up at the end of season, nothing confirmed for replacement however there has been a lot of rumours circulating about Macron which I’d be delighted with after 4 years of catalogue kits from ‘Nike’

    Adidas would be my first choice for Hibs harking back to the iconic kits they gave us in the late 80’s & early 90’s

    Talking of Adidas, I see the Scotland team in their photo calls have been donning new polo-shirts that are the style released for the Euro’s last year, Scotland must have really upset someone at Adidas given that we went from totally bespoke kits and training wear colours in 2013-15 to basic team wear in 2015-17, even the players kits are Climacool and not Adizero like the previous ones

  27. Martyn Ping Says:

    Yeah, bit of a strange one, isn’t it? I can only assume it must be something the SFA have at least partially agreed on, as Scotland seem to now be a ‘tier 2′ adidas team. Both kits are teamwear designs, which given, like you said, that the first ones were ‘tier 1′, seems an unusual downgrade. How long was the deal signed for? It has all the looks of the deal being ‘wound down’. Perhaps the aforementioned Macron for Scotland instead? They have done some solid kits for the rugby union team.

  28. Davidr1986 Says:

    I suspect it may have something to do with JD Sports being involved, we appeared to have a direct deal with Adidas and then just as the 2013-15 kit (a ‘tier 1’kit) was released JD were announced as the sole retailer for all Scotland merchandise, they seemed to have shifted us from a tier 1 to tier 2 which is in line with their deals with Welsh and Northern Irish.

    A shame really, the tier 2 kits aren’t bad by any means they just are let down by the missing touches of things such as a long sleeve option and ‘Alba’ on the front of the socks

    The training wear is pretty poor, bog standard team wear with quite literally a Scotland emblem sticker on them, not even good enough to warrant an embroidered badge on training wear!

    Contrast that with the rather sublime red, navy and silver training wear of 2013-15 makes it even worse

    Curiously one thing that was released with the away kit was change pink shorts which have never been used by any SFA team at any level by what I can see, however the change pink socks which have been used by almost all SFA teams at one point or another haven’t been released for retail sale!

  29. Jon Says:

    I heard Arsenal are set to sign a big sponsorship deal with Adidas from 2018 onwards. What you reckon about that one Denis?

  30. Denis Hurley Says:

    Hadn’t heard, Jon – in my head, Arsenal should always be with adidas, as that’s what they had when I started supporting them!

  31. Jon Says:

    Even the boot loving website is reporting the Arsenal-adidas tie up… well it will be interesting to see what the second coming of adidas will serve up for Arsenal.

    On the subject of Arsenal I couldn’t help but notice Man City changed their kit for the fixture at the Emirates for no reason whatsoever.

  32. Denis Hurley Says:

    They did that last season too, silly stuff.

    Are you sure the Arsenal-adidas stuff wasn’t an April Fool?

  33. Martyn Ping Says:

    Yes, confirmed yesterday – FH idea of a joke!

  34. Tony Spike Says:

    i wouldnt mind some notes on that subject guys (possibly an article) since i really dont get the differences between them other than one is a matchworn kit and the other isnt or one is a tier of kit above the other

    but what the hell are Climalite, Climacool, Formotion, Techfit, and i think Nike has Dri-Fit and Puma has Puma-Cell

    i have researched the topic but i cant find any info on them anywhere

    when did they start being used, when did one replace the other as the top tier of kit ect ect

    do other companies have these besides Nike puma and adidas

    these are questions i wouldnt mind an answer to

  35. Martyn Ping Says:

    Hi Tony,
    OK, I could be corrected, but I THINK that Climacool is the replica version and the Tier 2; Climalite is the players (ie match) version, available in (very expensive) replicas, for Tier 1 teams; Formotion is training wear, and Techfit is a players shirt again, but with extra support and in some cases breathable panels – around 2010 you could tell the techfit ones by a more fitted look and a faint ‘X’ shape on front and back. Check out Schweinsteiger or Ozil in the black Germany away in 2010, or Robben for Bayern in 2010/11. The Techfit replicas are about 3 times the price!

  36. Tony Spike Says:

    so let me see if i got this right, climalite is a tier 2 player kit? climacool is a tier 2 replica formotion is tier 1 training wear and techfit is tier 1 player kit …..so whats tier two training?

    btw i wanna take this opportunity to say

    i like the new England third, i didn’t dislike the red away kit in the first place (its the home that boggles my mind) but at least the third has dropped the stupid socks

    and it now gives us at least a pair of blue shorts and socks to wear with the home

    yes i know the away socks are blue but without the shorts we had no purpose to wear them (although we did have the red socks to replace them on the away)

    although its a sad state of affairs that we should have to do this to tell you the truth

  37. Martyn Ping Says:

    Hi Tony,
    Probably didn’t word it properly – here goes :

    Tier 1 playing – Climalite / Tier 1 replica – Climacool

    Tier 1 special – Techfit

    Tier 2 playing – Climacool

    Training – Formotion*

    *Not sure what tier 2 training wear teams get, but I would imagine it’ll be standard Climacool; ie will look like training tops but without the extra breathable panels etc that Formotion carries.

    At least I think that’s right! To muddy the waters further, adidas’ rain jackets and jogging stuff is often billed as Climalite too!

    With regards to England, I suspect the white/white/red home will remain til the tail end of this year, when the new kits will be out. Don’t expect that third kit (which I have to admit is better than either of the other two) to lend its shorts to the home. That would mean Nike actually listening to the fans!

  38. Tony Spike Says:

    actually i would consider that the choice of the England kit man, if Nike ever tried to interfere in that process then i would say its time to let go …..if it wasn’t already

    actually with the quality Umbro are producing recently i wouldn’t mind returning to them so i want them out anyway

    and thanks for that Martyn i think i get it now

    but when Climalite came in in the 90s was that ever a tier one shirt ….im pretty sure the Newcastle home from 2000 was a climalite kit?

  39. Tony Spike Says:

    sorry …i meant to say would climalite have been a REPLICA too in the 2000s …like i say im pretty sure the Newcastle home replica was a climalite when it came in ….i havent found any replicas in climacool

  40. Jon Says:

    Whilst it’s not a clash in my eyes, to a few people on here it is… an “overall clash”… but Everton v Leicester this afternoon… Everton in their usual blue-white-white, whilst Leicester are wearing their white third shirt with blue shorts and socks.

    The issue? Leicester have got an all-red away kit, have they consigned the kit to the dustbin or just thought they’d save looking like Liverpool at Goodison Park?

  41. Denis Hurley Says:

    Only worn once, as far as I know. I think today was just the third time this season they haven’t worn their home kit in the league this season.

  42. Al Says:

    ^ @ Chelsea, but will probably wear it against WBA this month

  43. Martyn Ping Says:

    You can buy Climalite replicas, they tend to be about three times more expensive and usually come in a presentation box. As far as I know all srtandard replicas are Climacool.

  44. Tony Spike Says:

    Martyn thats not what im asking, im asking if this has been the case since 2000

    because i haven’t found any climacool ones from that time period in picture form

    im asking because i know someone (my dad) that owns a Newcastle Home shirt from 2000-2001 (NTL sponsored),

    i messaged him and he says that he bought his from the club shop during a home game that year and his didn’t come in a box nor did it cost more than any standard replica shirt

    it says Climalite on it

  45. Martyn Ping Says:

    Hi Tony,
    I think it may be a recent trend; The most recent time I can remember noticing a definite difference between the replica and matchday shirts was in 2005; The Confed Cup games featuring the newly released red Germany away. The replica versions had stitched adidas stripes whereas the matchday versions had printed. I think the undershirt webbing was different too. So I would hazard a guess that this was the point where Climalite came in and Climacool became matchday. The whole thing is very confusing!

  46. Martyn Ping Says:

    *Meant to say Climacool became replica – like I said, confusing! That NTL shirt was class though.

  47. Tony Spike Says:

    Well thats just it martyn …according to my research (true colours vol 1 of all places) climalite was the brand new material …used on that 1999-02 Newcastle home

    Climacool isnt mentioned till 2004 when its used on their Northern Rock blue and black away kit and introduced as adidas new lightweight material

    Im assuming that cool replaced lite around that time as the tier 2 fabric ….unless it can be proven that Newcastle were a tier 1 club at that time (unlikely

  48. Martyn Ping Says:

    Hi Tony,
    I believe Newcastle were Tier 1 all the way through the adidas contract; collar and trim aside the stripes and other details were very often unique to them.

  49. Tony Spike Says:

    so that means that cool replaced lite as a tier 1 fabric then

  50. Davidr1986 Says:

    I seem to remember climacool being the players version of shirts from around 2002 during the fad for dual layer shirts, replicas were climalite I think and it wasn’t until 2006 that replicas became climacool with players shirts being Formotion?!

  51. Martyn Ping Says:

    I think that sounds right; Formotion was the one with the big ‘X’ across it and extra panels; kind of a bit like a rugby shirt. Climalite I think replaced THAT as player issue; though it was a brand used earlier. Basically, to clear up confusion I believe that prior to 2006 the replicas across all contracts were pretty close to the player issue, regardless of the name used, and what we would call ‘teamwear’ today was less commonplace. In the late 90’s I remember adidas supplying Crewe, Burnley, Stockport, Palace and others, sometimes using older designs, but with authentic details like embossed sponsor logos and things like that; that has now changed and Tier 2 teams are using designs that are a good 4 years old in some cases, and the replicas match the player issue.

  52. Davidr1986 Says:

    The big ‘X’ across the back was Techfit which was available alongside Formotion, I have the 2012 Scotland away shirt in both Formotion and Techfit. Formotion was pretty similar to the replica which was Climacool, only noticeable difference was the plastic transfer stripes and the adidas logo was plastic on Formotion and on Climacool the adidas logo was embroidered and the stripes stitched fabric. The Techfit one was very tight fitting with the plastic ‘powerweb’ on the back, the hem of the shirt was also a weird rubber material presumably to hold it in place when worn, the Techfit version also did not have cuffs on the L/S like the Climacool and Formotion versions, the Techfit version of the shirt also has plastic stripes and adidas logo like Formotion

  53. Tony Spike Says:

    So to sum up

    Bloody confusing

    Especially for kit designers like me

  54. Martyn Ping Says:

    Yep! Very confusing. I would like to try and nail it down, as the different iterations are varied and inconsistent. I have a Bayern training T-shirt branded as Adizero!

  55. Davidr1986 Says:

    Adizero is player issue shirts from 2014 on tier 1 kits, tier 2 kits are Climacool. I have a couple of Adizero player issue shirts and to be honest the difference between them and climacool replica ones is pretty negligible to the lay person, the badges and logos are printed rather than embroidered, the material is a bit lighter and the fit is a bit slimmer. It’s the Adizero shorts that are a completely different material to the replica climacool ones.

    Since 2014 all training shirts for tier 1 and tier 2 are the same only difference is that tier 1 clubs get bespoke colours, the Adizero training tops are a similar material to Adizero playing shirts except the fit isn’t as slim and the badges are usually embroidered (however there are some exceptions such as MUFC training shirts 15-16 that had a rubber feeling logo and badge)

  56. Andy Rockall - Statto_74 Says:

    Did anyone else have an issue with Bournemouth wearing black shorts & socks at WHL on Saturday?

  57. Denis Hurley Says:

    Yeah, it was very poor form.

  58. Phil Says:

    Yes, I thought the Bournemouth choice was very strange. A similar thing happened at the Amex over Easter with Wigan wearing an all greeny blue strip at Brighton which made the shorts and socks almost the same colour.

  59. Tony Spike Says:

    i didn’t have a problem, because i have never seen Bournemouth wear anything BUT black shorts and socks

    i can see why it could cause a slight problem with spurs also wearing dark shorts but to be honest spurs white shirts and socks would have provided AMPLE colour differentiation, ….nothing to get into a tizz over

    as for our little adidas issue i think im going to start by getting definitive dates when each fabric tech came into existence

    that might be a good way of starting the process of sorting out things

  60. Denis Hurley Says:

    Not Spurs’ problem though Tony, they changed socks away to Bournemouth, shouldn’t have to do so at home.

    Finding a red set of socks wouldn’t have been difficult for Bournemouth.

  61. Denis Hurley Says:

    Red socks were their first choice in 2014-15: http://historicalkits.co.uk/English_Football_League/season/2014-2015/championship.html

  62. Tony Spike Says:

    well thats just the point i am trying to make Denis

    this isn’t a case of it being ANYONES problem, they changed it worked, and their has to be a point where you have to draw the line and say and say “sod it for sanity’s sake” or we will all go mad from discussing an apparent stupidity that isn’t their

    the main point is they didn’t clash (witch is actually the wrong word so i dont know why we use the term …clashing colours are colours that dont go together from a design perspective …and by essence two shades of the same colour compliment each other) and thats all that matters in the grand scheme of things

    you might not like spurs wearing white socks at home but they have as much of a history of doing so

    and Bournemouth’s main pair of socks has been black since the early 90’s (except for the odd occasion witch like i say above …i dont remember off the top of my head)

    if this had been a world where Bournemouth didn’t have a red pair of change socks this year (and i am not sure that they do tbh ..cos again i dont remember seeing any …though im sure someone will prove otherwise) then you would be bemoaning something else entirely

    and i dont see the point …..Bournemouth shouldn’t have to scrape together a pair of red socks from a few seasons ago (carbini not JD might i add) just to satisfy some archaic idea that only the away team should change when it has always been a staple that BOTH teams are obliged to

    i mean …we are human mistakes happen, its easy to forget that sometimes the kit man is an idiot and forgets to pack the other pair

    i mean you are forgetting that its only a few years back that someone forgot to tell Oxford United that Barnet had switched their registered colours 2 days before the league season started


    (excellent site that btw i wish all teams had this)

    so like i say, you might not like the idea but since it did the job ..i personally do not care

    witch is what the original question was

  63. Denis Hurley Says:

    Illustrating that Oxford example is going against literally everything else you’ve said – following that logic, Bournemouth would have had to wear Spurs’ white change socks.

    Which would have been better than the two teams in socks which were almost the same colour.

  64. Martyn Ping Says:

    I’m against short and sock clashes full stop, to be honest. In the case you mentioned, surely Bournemouth wearing their pink third would’ve solved the problem? OK, no shirt clash, but no clash elsewhere, either. We had a similar problem in the Champions League; Real refuse to wear change home shorts these days, and Bayern’s first choice is white this season, so Real wore their black third at the Allianz. No problem, IMO. No clash, no fuss. For the return leg Bayern wore all red. The logical process is simple – why should a team change at home if they don’t want to? My preference in an ideal world would be Real v Bayern, all white v all red in both legs (as it has been before), but like I said, Bayern have white home shorts this season. And back to the original point, Spurs v Bournemouth, navy v black IS a clash, and it is down to the away team to change to prevent it.

  65. Tony Spike Says:

    actually Denis since i haven’t disputed that their would have been a clash if spurs had worn blue socks (read what i said carefully and tell me where i do dispute it), i think it it illustrates my point PERFECTLY,

    it just so happens that you think i am trying to dispute the issue of colour choice, so you are looking at the part of the example that pertains to that issue

    now i will go on record as saying yes ..wearing spurs gold away kit would solve all problems, but since it has nothing to do with my point it dosnt matter at this juncture

    because my point isn’t that that Bournemouth should have done an Oxford and wore the oppositions kit, my point is that mistakes sometimes happen for various reasons that we do not know about, the Oxford United example was used to illustrate THAT particular part of my point not my entire point if you catch my drift

    in this case it was that no one had told Oxford that the home team had changed their home colours to black at the last minute ..leaving Oxfords black away kit useless

    but if you want a better example of “unforeseen circumstances” (the official statement given by the club) than look no further than Mansfield Town wearing Bristol Rovers old away shirt with their yellow shorts and socks back in 2013-14


    their would have been no clash their as far as i can see if Mansfield had brought their home shirt, i am assuming the kit man forgot to pack it

    you see Denis my actual point is that the kit man is a human being and we sometimes forget this, i mean if we are going to do this properly, lets look at all his options shall we?

    now since you haven’t answered my question as to weather Bournemouth actually have a red pair to bring with them this season … im going to assume that they dont and form a logical argument based on that

    now their away pair is blue and their third is black so they are both out of the question for sure against a team wearing royal blue or dark blue or whatever colour it is Spurs use

    and in that situation i would always pack the black pair too given that spurs can always change if needs be or knowing i can borrow a white pair from them at the referees discretion

    now this is sound, since we have NO IDEA (and this is aimed at Martyn) if the pink kit is even still available as a choice …..its 3 games till the end of the season for Christ sake it wouldn’t surprise me if they were not around any more

    and their are other potential variables that you are forgetting

    1) its up to the referee on the day …for all you know it was his decision for spurs to change instead of simply borrowing a pair to Bournemouth

    2) we have no idea if the refs are under orders from the F.A. to NOT match a pair of differently branded Under Armour socks with a JD sports kit (yes it is sad but those are the times we live in im afraid …and i have heard of it happening before in other sports)

    after all this is the the Premier League we are talking about here ….appearances matter and sponsors might get mad at that kind of brand integrity foul up, to the point the F.A. might want to avoid it and issue an executive order to its officials

    now since we cannot speculate if this is even the case or not so im not going to even try to …all i will say is that it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest

    so you see my point is ….its easy to sit here and criticise the choice because it dosnt meet our lofty ideals and that is all well and good but since their was no clash on the day and it all worked out fine ….i honestly dont have a problem with what happened

    sure …on a good day the away team should change i have said this before (i think on the what constitutes a clash page) and i will not go back on this statement …….nor am i saying that blue vs black isn’t a problem Martyn…..because it is

    that is not my issue here AT ALL

    my issue is that we were asked if anyone had a problem with what happened and i say no because spurs sorted the issue out, and i say this because im not going to complain about an issue as petty as who should change their fecking socks

    its petty given the circumstances that the issue was sorted out

    now …. Martyn this inst the Champions League my son, this is England our rules state that BOTH teams are obliged to change

    i dont know what UEFAs rules are (and i do sometimes wish you would stop using other European countries as examples when they dont often fit the same mould of system we use here) but in the PL and EFL it dosnt matter who is at away, its been a rule since the 1800s that neither team is solely responsible for changing

    just because it is your personal preference (as it is mine and i share your opinion …and Denis’s) that the away team should change dosnt make it wrong

    especially when it comes to an issue as insignificant as a pair of bloody socks

    NOW have i explained myself sufficiently this time?

    lets not forget that these are my personal reasons why i dont have a problem here, i dont expect you to agree but it is petty to go all “this will not stand” over the fact that spurs changed when the more important issue should be what happens on the day between the two sides

    and the two teams didn’t clash on the day

  66. Denis Hurley Says:

    Tony, regarding this:

    “my issue is that we were asked if anyone had a problem with what happened and i say no because spurs sorted the issue out, and i say this because im not going to complain about an issue as petty as who should change their fecking socks”

    What happened was that nobody changed. Spurs wore navy socks and Bournemouth wore black socks.

    Also, I wasn’t saying that Bournemouth should wear socks made a different manufacturer, I brought up 2014-15 because you said this:

    “i didn’t have a problem, because i have never seen Bournemouth wear anything BUT black shorts and socks”

  67. Tony Spike Says:

    as for Tottenham, thats my bad

    i did a quick image search to have a look and all i found were Tottenham wearing white socks vs Bournemouth, i can only conclude that this was the Vitality game and i got mixed up ….sorry

    but what i say STILL stands regardless

    Bournemouth (and again you haven’t answered if they have a red pair this season that they can call upon or or not so im assuming no) dont have a light pair to switch into,

    thus the impetus falls SQUARELY ON THE REFEREE to either loan Bournemouth a pair of Tottenham’s socks or force Tottenham to change

    something i do not have a problem with since Tottenham have a history of wearing white socks at home as standard ….as i have already stated

    i have already said that their was a clash on the day so i dont need to say anything more on that

  68. Tony Spike Says:

    and yes …i know why you said that and i had already replied to your comment saying i had forgotten

    that comment was about something else entirely, i dont guess about what people mean, nor do i find hidden meanings behind other peoples words

    i ask you offer me the same courtesy, i usually mean exactly what i am saying no more no less, and their i was giving a reason why Bournemouth might not have been offered a pair of Spurs white ones

    no more no less

  69. Denis Hurley Says:

    - I’ve no idea if Bournemouth have red socks, I’m guessing not as they weren’t worn. They do have lighter socks in that their away and third sets are blue and pink

    – To absolve Bournemouth of blame because they don’t have a lighter pair is wrong, IMO. It’s clearly laid out that the away team must change when a clash arises, and teams’ colours are listed in the PL handbook – https://www.premierleague.com/publications. Otherwise, every team could claim not to have alternative socks.

    – I do agree though that the referee should have sorted out the issue and on the day, yes, asking Spurs to wear white socks would have been preferable than a socks clash. Man U have changed to white socks at home to solve clashes in the past.

Leave a Reply

one + = 7