only so much you can do with black and white. Looking at their home and away for this year, what the hell do we wear when we go to their place, and them ours?

Why the roll eyes?

Do you not think that buying merchandise will help the club? Merchandise with sponsorship on that can potentially lead to greater sponsorship deals in the future? Would greater income streams not help the club?

I went in the shop today and found the new away shirt to be a smart and quite classy looking shirt which has yet again been completely spoilt by sponsors logos which seem to have been just randomly scattered across front and back.

We all understand that we need the financial backing of sponsors but surely there must be a "middle ground" somewhere between the sponsors requirements and the fans actually wanting to represent their club by wearing their shirt!

I'm disappointed that I won't be buying a replica shirt for the third year in a row now. I will buy some casual stuff instead.

We were quite lucky with the P&O logo which fit neatly onto the irregular hoops style shirts.

I quite like the new away shirt , can anyone tell me why our colours are now Black , white and Gold . Just don't like it !. I also bought a south Sydney shirt for a Xmas present and it is head and shoulders above our shirts in quality especially our home shirts that look very poorly made.

Same reason purple appeared in 1991

Then I don't understand the point you were trying to make.

Part of the value the club offers to sponsors is 10K 'walking adverts'. Offer a replica shirt without adverts and you instantly reduce the value of the club to sponsors. And I seriously doubt you'd sell enough extra shirts to make up the shortfall.


Not sure I like either shirt enough to buy one TBH. I'll probably spend the cash on other merchandise this year. But the fact is that the folk spending £40 on a 'walking hoarding' are supporting the club twice over - once from the purchase price and once from the added value for sponsors.

I agree with the P&O ,but the KC logo's spoil the jersey for me . Even last year , the Kc logo on the back of the jersey looked way to big and a mess. We all know the need for sponsorship but it's starting to become overkill on some jerseys now.

That's why I think it would be good to have the option of a shirt without sponsor, maybe they could do a made to order service it'll probably mean paying a little bit more for a shirt but I would certainly pay extra to have a shirt without sponsors.

A big part of buying a shirt for me is how the sponsors look on it, I bought the players version last year because the sponsors didnt spoil the look of the shirt.

I'd hazard a guess that we use gold because it is on our badge....

Personally I prefer the polo shirts that we produce. They can be worn mostly anywhere, unlike rugby/football shirts, and ours these last few seasons have been well smart with just the sponsors logo and our badge.