New York City FC incorporates navy & orange into their kit because of the flag of New York City (see below) It has nothing to do with CFG trying to change things...
Next seasons home shirt (allegedly)
- Thread starter g180aj
- Start date
- Status
New York City FC incorporates navy & orange into their kit because of the flag of New York City (see below) It has nothing to do with CFG trying to change things...
Still not sure on this kit, I get why it's the Nike design. Most are doing it now with all the adidas ones looking the same too!I think the picture of the kit below makes the kit look better than the earlier leaked pictures that looked like they were taken in someone's garage.
The colours don't look as dull.
Agree that it would look better with white shorts though.
My biggest issue, unless I'm going blind, is the main section isn't sky blue!!! That's like a bluey grey or something. Doesn't look City to me
I think a lot of this can be down to the emotional attachment of when you first started watching City.
For a lot of fans who grew up watching City in the 60s, they consider the sky blue socks with maroon turnover's as the "proper" City kit.
The reality is though, during our 122 year history of being called Manchester City and playing in blue, we've only worn those socks for 6 years. 1967-72 and in 2011.
They might well be your preferred colour, your favourite, but it's a bit harder to argue that it's the "proper" City kit.
I've got a huge amount of respect for @Gary James , I wouldn't dare question his knowledge on the subject. When I have seen him post on this issue, he's said in some of the earliest seasons (early 1900s) it's hard to tell with any clarity exactly what kit was worn and why.
But what we can say with absolute certainty that City have worn navy blue socks for more seasons than they have worn sky blue with a maroon turnover.
The best evidence we have shows that City wore sky blue shirts, white shorts and navy blue socks pretty much solidly from inception until the 1950s. And again for periods in the 80s, 90s and 00s.
People suggesting navy blue is a new gimmick brought through by Nike or the current owners are actually very much mistaken.
Earliest Picture I can find 1898
First FA Cup win 1904
First League title win in 1936/37
1980s and 90s
So, going back to my original point, I grew up watching City in the 80s, so to me the "proper" City kit is sky blue shirts, white shorts and navy blue socks.
Looking back through history, this is also the combination we have worn most. It is the colours we wore in our first season, the colours we won our first trophy in, and they colours we won our first league title in.
It is also a combination that is completely unique to Manchester City. No other team in the world wears that combination as far as I'm aware.
For me the kit should represent our identity. If we can have an identity that represents our past, and is completely unique to us and makes us stand apart from every other club in the world, that sounds like the perfect solution to me.
If people don't like navy blue sock due to personal taste, that's of course entirely up to them. But people saying it's not a "City colour" are misinformed.
(Oh - but I'd be happy with sky blue with maroon turnovers too, that would be my second choice ;-)
100% this all day long.
Shaelumstash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 8,254
New York City FC incorporates navy & orange into their kit because of the flag of New York City (see below) It has nothing to do with CFG trying to change things...
Sorry to rain on your parade mate, but Manchester City have worn navy blue as part of our kit for over 100 years. Sky blue, white and navy blue have been Manchester City's colours since 1894. Some City fans get mysty eyed and nostalgic for the 60s when navy blue wasn't a regular feature, but over our 120 year plus history, navy blue has been a big part of our colour scheme. That's why NYCFC and Melbourne City have it as part of their kits, nothing to do with the New York flag.
I'm sure the orange trim on the away kit is a nod to the New York flag though, a nice touch.
warpig
Well-Known Member
I thought Melbourne played in red and white?
mrtwiceaseason
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 7,673
They used to but they play in the old city white ,light blue ,blue stripe third kit now
Shaelumstash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 8,254
The did until we bought them.
We applied to change their colours to sky blue and white (and navy trim ;-) but Sydney complained to the league because they play in sky blue, and the league agreed with Sydney.
Nike then essentially gave Melbourne our away kit from a few years ago - all white with one sky blue stripe and one navy blue stripe.
The still plsy in red and white stripes away from home.
Apparently they are still in discussions with the league about switching to sky blue shirts in the future.
warpig
Well-Known Member
So is the white (blue stripe) shirt the home one and the red and white the away one?
Shaelumstash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 8,254
Yeh as I understand it mate.
You're right about the navy being part of our kit from the outset - however it only ever appeared as the sock colour (not shirt trim) until 1989 when the collars were navy for the first time – and in total only 10 (including next seasons) kits have had navy trim out of 61. Personally I think the shirts should only ever have white trim, and navy socks would be a great nod to our history.
In regard to NYCFC - their home kit is skyblue and white, no navy... the away kit is navy and orange, and the badge contains navy and orange which is because of the City flag.
- Status