skybluelee
Well-Known Member
The final group is here.
98/99
02/03
15/16
22/23
09/10
98/99
02/03
15/16
22/23
09/10
WC of CCFC Kits (Group H) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter skybluelee
- Start date
Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon
Well-Known Member
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.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
22/23, although the aesthetic is ruined by having plain shorts.
skybluelee
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
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.
PUSB-We_are_going_up
Well-Known Member
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
JimmyHillsbeard
Well-Known Member
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.
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
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
I don't understand why that 98/99 one is popular, awful at the time and looks even worse thesedays
AOM
Well-Known Member
Same, my first ever Coventry kit
JimmyHillsbeard
Well-Known Member
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.
skybluelee
Well-Known Member
Easy progress for both the group winner 98/99 and 2nd place 22/23. Time for an ice bath and a protein shake ahead of the 2nd round draw coming very soon!
