Big Ol' Bob Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 "Hey there big boy, haven't seen you round here before" "Is it true then, LONG by name LONG by nature??"
Mickey O'Neil Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 Aberdeen away: God I think thats awful... Id be gutted if I was a Hammer +1 On a side note, Canterbury are in the shite, gone into admin I think.
AjcW Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 On a side note, Canterbury are in the shite, gone into admin I think. http://tvnz.co.nz/business-news/canterbury...tration-2842607 ....
AjcW Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 "However, it had terminated all sponsorship contracts with affected clubs listed as unsecured creditors in relation to any amounts they were owed. A number of high profile rugby union and league teams had deals with Canterbury Europe including the Scottish national team, London Wasps and Cardiff. The company also sponsored Portsmouth Football Club."
lildave3 Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 Samilktray will be gutted! What does that mean for Pompey?
Mickey O'Neil Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 Samilktray will be gutted! What does that mean for Pompey? JAKO!
AjcW Posted 13 July 2009 Posted 13 July 2009 JAKO! . Im guessing that clubs such as pompy will have to find a replacement kit unless a takeover is completed of canterbury EU.. However clubs who just use the kit but are not "sponsored" will keep using it. Its similar to if Nike went bust then united would have to find a new sponsor but someone like aberdeen would not as they just get sent templates and are not kit sponsored by nike.
AjcW Posted 14 July 2009 Posted 14 July 2009 I had to be the one to post these, some very interesting releases today... Yes argentina but I love it!!. Im not sure if people will agree but I think that is pure quality. Meh...
Guest Bilo Posted 14 July 2009 Posted 14 July 2009 I had to be the one to post these, some very interesting releases today... Yes argentina but I love it!!. Im not sure if people will agree but I think that is pure quality. Meh... Peterborough's kit is too similar to Argentina's. Just can't get away from how similar it is. The Stoke kit isn't too bad actually, nice and simple. Southampton's away kit is fooking rank.
AjcW Posted 14 July 2009 Posted 14 July 2009 Also all the football shirt geeks are saying that due to the badge on the right sleeve this is in fact an addidas design from wc2006
AjcW Posted 14 July 2009 Posted 14 July 2009 Sorry just one more thing.... this quote from fsc.. ""Which is more sad, that Peterborough accepted an old teamwear kit, or that they actually took the Pro Direct Teamwear photos and stuck a badge on? Shirt: http://www.prodirectsoccer.com/prodinfo.as...p;GROUP=SS1PACK Shorts: http://www.prodirectsoccer.com/prodinfo.as...1&GROUP=ADI Socks: http://www.prodirectsoccer.com/prodinfo.as...ADI"" Just reaffirms the point i was making the other day about how unless your "shirt sponsored" by the company you just get fobbed off with teamwear. Addidas from their teamwear catalogue, just .
Samilktray Posted 14 July 2009 Posted 14 July 2009 The badge is quality, I quite like the whole kit actually.
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 MTWG. You have some terrible taste in kits. What have I done to earn this? Is it the Kappa obsession, I think it's the Kappa.
MC Prussian Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 The Southampton away shirt looks more like a training kit thing or a referee shirt experiment gone horribly wrong. Apart from the badge. That design is really decent.
AjcW Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 Yes yes hot bird... now to the shirt... I think that gets the award for least matching kit in the world with the shorts and the shirt . And that is an Ancient Nike template. Coxy modeling the new cally kit... they seem to be treating him like quite the star signing. Im not on the umbro band wagon with everyone else but since they were taken over by nike they do appear to have become more inventive which is pleasing. Well its this years addidas template so yawn.... but not to bad with those colours
Libertine Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 I hate Stoke but that's a great shirt. No matter how small it is though, the label looks ridiculous.
lildave3 Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 Inverness and Birmingham shirts - shit. And what do you mean least matching shorts?
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 And what do you mean least matching shorts? I am also puzzled by this.
AjcW Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 Inverness and Birmingham shirts - shit.And what do you mean least matching shorts? Sorry i didnt clarify that I just meant that the shorts are nothing to do with the template of the shirt, they are just generics . I was doing some random research on it all for an article so I have been picking up on things like that.
lildave3 Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 Sorry i didnt clarify that I just meant that the shorts are nothing to do with the template of the shirt, they are just generics .I was doing some random research on it all for an article so I have been picking up on things like that. Ok...
AjcW Posted 15 July 2009 Posted 15 July 2009 Ok... believe me I realise how sad that sounds. All came about after the Canterbury collapse. Its picky yes.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.