WC of CCFC Kits (Group H) (3 Viewers)

[skybluelee]

The final group is here.

98/99
02/03
15/16
22/23
09/10

 

---

[Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon]

Gone 98/99 on pure nostalgia i think. Not even sure i like the design all that much but I associate it with great players and being young! Subaru was a great sponsor too.

 

[ajsccfc]

I'm not a fan of 98/99. It was made with the sweatiest material known to science and the back had that circle that made it look odd if you didn't get a number printed so I got Huckerby on it just in time for us to sell him.

 

[torchomatic]

22/23, although the aesthetic is ruined by having plain shorts.

 

[skybluelee]

This is the first group where I genuinely don't like any of them. Despite my dislike of stripes I might go for 15/16 as it was the kit worn when my girls were mascots for the first time. Quite liked the material on that shirt.

 

[skybluelee]

22/23, although the aesthetic is ruined by having plain shorts.

I think the crappy betting sponsor going across the tramlines takes a bit away from the shirt too. Its close to being a superb kit.

 

[rob9872]

Would've gone 22/23:but no point as it won't beat its original so gone for the 98/99

 

[PUSB-We_are_going_up]

98/99 is a quality shirt however that 22/23 shirt was another Hummel beauty its up there with this seasons and 19/20s in the modern era

 

[pusbccfc]

Most difficult group.

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

Every one of those kits is flawed and wouldn’t get out of other groups here.

The LeCoq kit was awful material (with see thru meshy bits at the side and the big circle on the back that made it look like someone bending over to tie up their shoelaces if you didn’t pay extra for a number).

The two blue shorts kits felt a bit generic (odd as we made the Subaru version ourselves). The Cassidy logo peeled off most versions of the other shirt within weeks of purchase.

The Nike kit under Mowbray looked great from the front but had a big skyblue patch on the back that again meant that you needed to buy a number on the back for it to look ok.

The tramlines revival (which I voted for) has three faults - one the central badge (never a good idea); two the shorts should have had the same pattern; three the body shaming sponsor was different according to the size of shirt, for some larger kits the Boyle sports logo disappeared into the central reservation, for smaller sizes it spilled out over the stripes.

 

[SkyBlueSoul]

98/99 for nostalgia, I was 7/8 and really starting to get into it. The others are just a big load of 'meh'

 

[fernandopartridge]

I don't understand why that 98/99 one is popular, awful at the time and looks even worse thesedays

 

[AOM]

Didn't the fans vote for 09/10 one from a choice of a few at the time?
It looks quite nice in the concept, but the final version wasn't great. Weird sizing as well, was almost square

 

[AOM]

Gone 98/99 on pure nostalgia i think. Not even sure i like the design all that much but I associate it with great players and being young! Subaru was a great sponsor too.

Same, my first ever Coventry kit

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

Same, my first ever Coventry kit

Tell me the back doesn’t look like someone bending over to tie their shoe laces….

 

[CovRes]

Tell me the back doesn’t look like someone bending over to tie their shoe laces….

View attachment 43858

I've seen it claimed it was meant to be the back of an elephant. Which would only come close to working if the shirt is tucked in to shorten the legs.