New home shirt (confirmed)

[dario2739]

It'll be rags, dippers and arseholes voting though.

To be honest the comments left all seem to be mainly blues, but going off previous seasons - the polls seem pretty fair... our Umbro kits got great reviews - even Rags seemed to be appreciative.

 

[kenster197]

Whether you work for Nike or not doesn't really matter to me, either way it's good for debate.

The point you make about Stoke and Bolton is a good one. Plenty of teams have red away kits - but they don't get confused with United, or Liverpool, or Arsenal. That's because no one else has red shirts, white shorts, black socks, just like United. No one else has all red like Liverpool. No one else has red shirts with white sleeves and white shorts like Arsenal. All of their kits are instantly recognisable as them. Any other team wearing red doesn't get confused with them.

But because the club and Nike have made the misguided decision that City's identity is sky blue and then any old combination of white and navy, means it's completely diluted our identity. Now when you see a Stoke away kit that is sky blue shirts, shorts and socks, it can be confused with a City kit. When Bolton have sky blue stripes, that can be confused with a City kit. But it wasn't always like this.

For 70 odd years we had sky blue shirts, white shorts and navy blue socks, no other team in the world had that. It was unique to City, you couldn't confuse it with any other team. For our golden period in the 60s and 70s we had sky blue shirts, white shorts, sky blue socks with maroon turnovers, again completely unique to City. Instantly recognisable as City and only City.

I've supported City my whole life, and I've got absolutely no idea what our kit combination will be next season. No idea. I know it will have sky blue on there, but it could have white sleeves, navy sleeves, sky blue shorts, navy blue shorts, white and sky hooped socks, who the fuck knows?! Our identity is being completely diluted. If I as a lifelong fan don't know what our kit will be, how on earth can a casual fan in Asia or the US be expected to identify a City kit?

It's completely absurd, short-sighted and prioritising short term profit over long term brand building. It's time for a club consultation on the kit. The results will be overwhelming. I've already done a dummy run, 98% of fans want sky blue shirts and white shorts, that's near enough unanimous. Over 90% voted sky blue shirts, white shorts and blue socks. Why the club and Nike choose to completely ignore this data is just beyond me.

Excuse my ignorance, but do Nike have the final decision on our kit or do they put say 5 versions to the club hierarchy to make the final decision? I'm more curious because the way that the owners seem to want to direct the club, it would seem natural that they want to go back to the strips that you've spoken about from the 60's and seventies.

 

[Machiavelli]

To be honest the comments left all seem to be mainly blues, but going off previous seasons - the polls seem pretty fair... our Umbro kits got great reviews - even Rags seemed to be appreciative.

I think a lot of people disliked Nike prior to their venture into football and being shirt manufacturer for their clubs won't change their minds. Fair point about the Umbro kits, but we had a lot of good will from neutrals back then. Now it's fashionable to hate us.

 

[dario2739]

I think a lot of people disliked Nike prior to their venture into football and being shirt manufacturer for their clubs won't change their minds. Fair point about the Umbro kits, but we had a lot of good will from neutrals back then. Now it's fashionable to hate us.

Reading the posts it genuinely does seem that people don't regard the kit as "City", and not haters for the sake of it.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Excuse my ignorance, but do Nike have the final decision on our kit or do they put say 5 versions to the club hierarchy to make the final decision? I'm more curious because the way that the owners seem to want to direct the club, it would seem natural that they want to go back to the strips that you've spoken about from the 60's and seventies.

To be honest mate I don't know the terms of the deal. I don't know if the club has final say, or indeed if it has any say whatsoever, or whether for £12m a year Nike can just do whatever the hell they like with our identity.

But whatever the reality is, the buck stops with the club.

United had Nike for over 10 years and every single season they had red shirts, white shorts, black socks. Same as every year they had that same combination under Umbro and adidas twice. That club simply must insist on that. I'm sure the manufacturers would like to fuck around with their core colours as it would generate headlines, but that club won't allow it. Whether they have final say, or it's written in to the initial contract that the core colours must remain the same, somewhere down the line, someone at the club has made it clear - this is our identity and you don't fuck around with it.

Contrast that to City. The core elements of the kit changes every single season. Whether the club gets final say or whether they just forgot to put something about it in the initial contract, or whether they just don't give a fuck, is anyone's guess. But what's clear is that the club could make a stand on this if they wanted to. They could listen to the fans wishes and act upon them if they wanted to but they have chosen not to.

What's strange to me is why. I assume the club carry out their own research, but of the 1000 people I polled, 98% wanted sky blue shirts and white shorts. Why the club go against the wishes of that 98% every alternate season recently is just absolutely baffling.

 

[Bewar3them00n]

I've given up not liking it, there's bigger things in the world to hate than the colour of our socks, as long as our players play well, I don't mind.
I did actually come round to liking our glow in the dark away kit last season, must be something to do with our away performances in the CL.

 

[urban genie]

I think a lot of people disliked Nike prior to their venture into football and being shirt manufacturer for their clubs won't change their minds. Fair point about the Umbro kits, but we had a lot of good will from neutrals back then. Now it's fashionable to hate us.

I will hoenstly say I hate nike and find most of their products shite even before they supplied our kit, but I have the new polo as it is nice and have seen them produce some nice kits in south america and romas last season, but my dislike of them isn't influencing this much as the kit is just awful and un-city like. I liled last years btw

 

[HellYeah]

Honestly think it's the worst home kit we've ever had, just isn't a Manchester City kit.

And I'm really tired of Nike taking the piss and treating us as if we're some blank canvas with no tradition or heritage. Wankers.

I've seen this sort of thing said a few times and I just don't understand it. With exception to this years kit, how are the previous nike shirts any different to anything we've had before.

Can you actually justify your accusation.

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

To be honest mate I don't know the terms of the deal. I don't know if the club has final say, or indeed if it has any say whatsoever, or whether for £12m a year Nike can just do whatever the hell they like with our identity.

But whatever the reality is, the buck stops with the club.

United had Nike for over 10 years and every single season they had red shirts, white shorts, black socks. Same as every year they had that same combination under Umbro and adidas twice. That club simply must insist on that. I'm sure the manufacturers would like to fuck around with their core colours as it would generate headlines, but that club won't allow it. Whether they have final say, or it's written in to the initial contract that the core colours must remain the same, somewhere down the line, someone at the club has made it clear - this is our identity and you don't fuck around with it.

Contrast that to City. The core elements of the kit changes every single season. Whether the club gets final say or whether they just forgot to put something about it in the initial contract, or whether they just don't give a fuck, is anyone's guess. But what's clear is that the club could make a stand on this if they wanted to. They could listen to the fans wishes and act upon them if they wanted to but they have chosen not to.

What's strange to me is why. I assume the club carry out their own research, but of the 1000 people I polled, 98% wanted sky blue shirts and white shorts. Why the club go against the wishes of that 98% every alternate season recently is just absolutely baffling.

Just start by saying took part in your survey and agree with the results .
However
Think the type of person who took part us bluemooners etc for want of a better term tend to be a bit keener/obsessed with all things city ,
I think if you surveyed our more casual fans,newer fans and overseas fans you would probably get a different result ,especially if you chuck into the mix the kids who just want the new kit regardless if its sky blue or dayglo yellow what's it matter to them the money is coming out of dads pocket !
Would think it would be fair too say old school fans would would always want blue and white while the more "casual/ younger" fans arnt as bothered ?

 

[Shaelumstash]

Just start by saying took part in your survey and agree with the results .
However
Think the type of person who took part us bluemooners etc for want of a better term tend to be a bit keener/obsessed with all things city ,
I think if you surveyed our more casual fans,newer fans and overseas fans you would probably get a different result ,especially if you chuck into the mix the kids who just want the new kit regardless if its sky blue or dayglo yellow what's it matter to them the money is coming out of dads pocket !
Would think it would be fair too say old school fans would would always want blue and white while the more "casual/ younger" fans arnt as bothered ?

You may well be right mate. But personally I believe any club led consultation should not include casual fans who have only recently taken up an interest in the club. To me they shouldn't have as big a say in the identity of the club than lifelong blues such as yourself.

It's not ideal, but I think the best solution we have is to limit the consultation to Cityzen members, the same as the badge consultation.

There was debate on Bluemoon for years regarding the badge. A return to the circle badge was overwhelmingly popular. There was a bit of a split on people who wanted the 3 rivers and people who wanted the rose. These results were reflected exactly in the MEN poll. They were also reflected exactly in the official Cityzens consultation.

It's therefore reasonable to assume that the general view on Bluemoon regarding the club's identity will be reflected pretty closely in the Cityzens consultation. With 98% of people voting for sky shirts and white shorts, I'd be very surprised if white shorts weren't overwhelmingly popular on a Cityzens consultation, even allowing for the odd casual fan who doesn't mind too much.