Charles Hawtrey
Player Valuation: £50m
Our marketing department couldn't 'release' the Kraaken on time!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hubris (or a greedy agent) so often takes a decent player shining in a good team to beingva but part bench warmer at a sky brand yo be handed a limp of metal on a ribbon.Fellaini was so good, weird that nobody ever talks about him! Grass wasn’t greener at OT.
ColourNo me, my color blind fellow toffee.
It's OK.That is horrible. Can't imagine it will be going down well with their fans getting rid of the stripes. It's a pure white back as well.
Edit. Just peeked at one of their forums and most seem to like it.
You got me there. Unfortunately I live here, so its habit now. Check out pictures of the 1986 Cup Final to see if the 'bib' is white, or your pale blue?Colour
So it looks like the logo will have the '.com' on it after all. Was kinda hoping it wouldn't, although I guess that's a pretty minor nitpick.
Its like the reverse of their iconic strip of the 80s which i liked. They reprised it a few years ago (obs not as good as it was cluttered with visual litter ads).That is horrible. Can't imagine it will be going down well with their fans getting rid of the stripes. It's a pure white back as well.
Edit. Just peeked at one of their forums and most seem to like it.
Adidas rarely do anything unpleasant - and they are also imaginative (within the confines of team colours). Nike rarely do anything that looks different from either lazy or designed by a rabid 12 year old sexually repressed arts hopeful..Your average football fan is likely to own something made by Adidas or Nike. They are significantly less likely to own something made by Hummel, Castore or even Puma.
Adidas and Nike rule the sportswear world, and it's because of their brand cachet, not their designs or quality.
Adidas kits, in particular, are hilariously formulaic - and have been for generations.
Adidas are the very definition of dull. All you see when you look at any of their shirts are the stripes on the arms. Their branding batters the club’s into submission.Adidas rarely do anything unpleasant - and they are also imaginative (within the confines of team colours). Nike rarely do anything that looks different from either lazy or designed by a rabid 12 year old sexually repressed arts hopeful..
Yeah ... but the three stripes are a classic aesthetic - although I see how it could limit their design. I like it. I get annoyed with badges on the sleeve getting in the way.Adidas are the very definition of dull. All you see when you look at any of their shirts are the stripes on the arms. Their branding batters the club’s into submission.
Nah, that was a fresh kit for the final.You got me there. Unfortunately I live here, so its habit now. Check out pictures of the 1986 Cup Final to see if the 'bib' is white, or your pale blue?
That's correct.
I personally loved the nike stuff
I can see the sponsor and me no like. Surely makes enough of a difference given it's the largest motif on the kit?Have you two got an ultra powerful telescope or something? Because I can’t see enough to say whether I like it or not.
How can you judge the looks of something you can hardly see?