bonusroller
Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Utd's official photographer blokey has posted this.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Can't wait to see us play in this on Friday night!Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Utd's official photographer blokey has posted this.
He isn't an official photographer actually. In the Red Mancunian podcast he highlighted how much chaos came down from his shenanigans in following Schneiderlin even though he's not officially linked to the club in any way.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Utd's official photographer blokey has posted this.
It is stunning, I love it.The red shirt is gorgeous. Adidas has done an amazing job.
Why's he babbling shit when it's already been confirmed by Adidas themselves that the away release is on the 11th?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Utd's official photographer blokey has posted this.
Most places around the world wearing a sport jersey is considered an everyday peice or clothing. I think UK alone is where you're considered a "Wanker" for wearing a kit just to go out on a regular day. By the those photos are mintProof that women can choose the men's version if they wish, and still look fit:
This is from some photoshoot bollocks on the soccerbible website, but I gotta say these hired models make the kit look even better like an everyday piece of clothing.
http://www.soccerbible.com/design/photography/2015/08/framed-by-soccerbible-man-utd-home/
It's probably so it doesn't cause any discomfort to the player in any way with the stitching rubbing on their skin, but for everyday wear it doesn't really matter. The material is also lighter (thinner). Complete waste of money, even if you're wanting to play football in it yourself... just another way of getting a few extra quid out of us I reckon!How come the crest is different on the players jersey and the one fans can buy?
The one the players wear is 115 quid on the Adidas website
Fair point.It's probably so it doesn't cause any discomfort to the player in any way with the stitching rubbing on their skin, but for everyday wear it doesn't really matter. The material is also lighter (thinner). Complete waste of money, even if you're wanting to play football in it yourself... just another way of getting a few extra quid out of us I reckon!
It's probably because of the nationwide rivalries you get over here and the passion Brits have for their teams. The only place you'd be safe from the occasional piss take, verbal insult or possibly even violence depending on where you are and when would be that teams home city. Especially with United.Most places around the world wearing a sport jersey is considered an everyday peice or clothing. I think UK alone is where you're considered a "Wanker" for wearing a kit just to go out on a regular day. By the those photos are mint
The £60 replicas have the badge stitched on to a red sort of mount, which is stitched on to the shirt. The player spec one which is at least £40 more has the badge heat transferred on, like the sponsor is (but probably a bit more durable).Fair point.
Also, checked there, the crest is different for the players. It doesn't have the red material the crest is printed on, like the ones everyday people can buy
Looking at that picture, does anyone think it might be nicer if they slightly altered the badge by making the red in the badge as dark as the red stripes, and the yellow in the badge more gold coloured like the Chevy logo?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Utd's official photographer blokey has posted this.
First game of the season, new kit from a new brand and it was roasting!I've never seen so many people wearing our shirt at the game as I did on Saturday. I was one of the few not wearing the new shirt around where I was sat.
I'll probably pick one up or a training top eventually. The black and red top the players warmed up in looked smart.
I don't think the badge colours should be changed. I assume they have fixed rgb values. Would be interesting to see the adidas stripes matched. I'd be amazed if they didn't try that.Looking at that picture, does anyone think it might be nicer if they slightly altered the badge by making the red in the badge as dark as the red stripes, and the yellow in the badge more gold coloured like the Chevy logo?
I'm struggling to picture it, so a decent photoshop would be appreciated!
Gave it a shotLooking at that picture, does anyone think it might be nicer if they slightly altered the badge by making the red in the badge as dark as the red stripes, and the yellow in the badge more gold coloured like the Chevy logo?
I'm struggling to picture it, so a decent photoshop would be appreciated!
different cultures i suppose. I consider a jersey pretty normal looking to be worn casually. its not my style per say, as i would wear a suit to a game if i could, but i don't look on someone strange wondering why they are wearing a jersey at the mall or walking about there business in the streets. I understand the tribal warfare in Britain though. I've been to a latin american countries like Panama and for them wearing a jersey is completely normal. Its actually almost ridiculous. They will wear a jersey out to dinnerIt's probably because of the nationwide rivalries you get over here and the passion Brits have for their teams. The only place you'd be safe from the occasional piss take, verbal insult or possibly even violence depending on where you are and when would be that teams home city. Especially with United.
Besides that, it just looks daft wearing it anywhere but at home or at a football event. Why wouldn't you just wear a normal t-shirt and present yourself properly?
They changed the yellow to gold for the 2007 kit and it looked great. @Raw that looks alright I think!I don't think the badge colours should be changed. I assume they have fixed rgb values. Would be interesting to see the adidas stripes matched. I'd be amazed if they didn't try that.
Not just the UK.Most places around the world wearing a sport jersey is considered an everyday peice or clothing. I think UK alone is where you're considered a "Wanker" for wearing a kit just to go out on a regular day. By the those photos are mint
They did, and I agree. It made the crest look much less cartoony, which is my main issue with it. Given all the changes that went along with the change of sponsors, I think we missed an opportunity to update the crest this year.They changed the yellow to gold for the 2007 kit and it looked great. @Raw that looks alright I think!
Gold > yellow regardless, especially as we're stuck with Chevrolet.Changing to match an historical kit versus a much despised Chevy logo is quite a different scenario.
Well the original 50s kit that the 2006 one was based on never had a crest, it was just a thing that Nike decided to do, and it was a massive improvement. We should have kept the crest like that.Changing to match an historical kit versus a much despised Chevy logo is quite a different scenario.
Which I have just done. The new women's shirt is nothing more than a skimpy tee-shirt top, whereas the Nike one last year was well-styled for women.True!
Though having seen a few ladies wearing that shirt yesterday, it does look awful. Regardless of the (non?) issue of sexism, it looks cheap & like a fake ladies version of the actual shirt.
IF I was a lady & inclined to wear a United shirt, I'd get the normal one.
It depends of which team(s) you would support in other disciplines as well as who are the historical rivals in front. Someone who is a Montreal Canadiens fan (for example) will most likely see the first man or woman wearing anything related to the Boston Bruins as an asshole.it is odd how if you were to see somebody wearing a Boston celtics jersey, or a hardwood classics nba top, or hockey/nfl gear, you dont bat an eyelid, but you see someone wearing a chelsea shirt or some newcastle trackies, you just think wanker/scum.