jimharri
Moderator
You're right. Pre-dated L**ds having them by a couple of years.Think there may have been tabs ( I think they were called) in the turnover of the socks. Not 100% on this though.
You're right. Pre-dated L**ds having them by a couple of years.Think there may have been tabs ( I think they were called) in the turnover of the socks. Not 100% on this though.
Big Mal wanted this as the home kit. We wore the socks from it at home for one season. 1972?
Yes, I think so.Big Mal wanted this as the home kit. We wore the socks from it at home for one season. 1972?
Yep, I think I remember them. What I do know is I had the tie ups around my socks and had them long enough to look like Tuearts Tassles or it could've been Rodney Marsh because I think he had them hanging down from his socks too. God they were fun days, playing on the wing for my primary school, not a care in the world.Think there may have been tabs ( I think they were called) in the turnover of the socks. Not 100% on this though.
Completely agree. Never liked City in red.Bar the rose or the poppy there should never be red on a City kit, the red and black striped kits are shit.
If it is okay to have that opinion, Dickie?
I thought it looked great with the white shorts against Chelsea.The Home kit is not a grower,its fucking awful,and even looks shit (especially that neckline) on the players.
Bizarre choice.
Favourite of all time, a thing of beauty.
We wore them until the end of the 73/74 season, love them socks. So two seasons I think.Big Mal wanted this as the home kit. We wore the socks from it at home for one season. 1972?
Funny how you think that would have been great but if Puma tried to introduce a non-City blue home strip this site would implode lolBig Mal wanted this as the home kit. We wore the socks from it at home for one season. 1972?