di·vest   [dih-vest, dahy-] 
verb (used with object)
Commerce .
a. to sell off: to divest holdings.
b.to rid of through sale: The corporation divested itself of its subsidiaries.

Me neither.  Put simply, Nike are going to try to sell Umbro as they're losing money.

Now, I'm about to argue pretty convincingly that I saw this coming, quoting myself seemingly spotting warning signs and melodramatically prophecising.

Don't believe a word of it.  It came as as much as a shock to me as it did anyone.  What I actually predicted, wrongly, was that Nike (the brand) would take the England contract from Umbro - something that the FA may or may not have vetoed - and whilst I was somewhat vindicated by Manchester City going down that route, along with some Brazilian sides, and did question "whether or not Nike have had enough of allowing Umbro to continue..." it was solely in reference to the Three Lions.

My main worry was not business-related.  My fear that Umbro had "jumped the shark" was from looking at the company from a design standpoint, particularly in light of the recent England Home kit release, which disappointed.

And, we have to assume, the sales of that shirt have been disappointing too.  Umbro, and particularly the Tailored By direction, have been unfortunate in presiding over a period which has seen their England poster boy, John Terry, tear up his own image - repeatedly - and the team perform at best underwhelmingly and at worst shambolically.  The recession wouldn't have helped much either.  Nontheless, if you'll forgive the CJ-ism, Nike haven't got to where they are today by shirking ruthlessness.  Perhaps the England release in the lead up to Euro 2012 was the last chance.  With JBB and Sports Direct currently selling the dilophosaurus-styled shirt for around £25, it seems Umbro didn't take it.

There couldn't be a worse time to lose direction in design and, particularly, marketing.  The current England Away kit release focused on the David Haye launch - a brash approach which seemed at odds with the thoughtful design process which was brilliantly based on the England cap.  The shirt currently retails, with Euro 2012 only a few days away, at £15.  In the Home shirt, to take one of the most heartening elements Tailored By gave us, the beautifully embroidered and coloured England crest, and replace it with monotone red smacks of one temporary campaign making way for another.  Maybe people saw through it.

With Under Armour rumoured to be a contender for the place in the Nike family which Umbro will vacate, it could also be that Nike are shifting away from the timeless and traditional and towards the scientific and technological.  (The irony would be that, whilst not a specialist like UA, Umbro actually produce excellent baselayers which, almost uniquely, are made with pale badges and gaping necks so as not to interfere excessively with the external look of the playing shirt.)

Whatever the reasoning, here's hoping there is light at the end of the tunnel.  The industry and football shirt-buying public should forever be indebted to the shift Umbro created across the board via Tailored By and, with their 2011-12 Athletic Bilbao Away shirt bettered by no one, some of their releases remain on a par with the best of adidas and Nike.  If they can restore that direction to design and marketing they'll surely live on, thrive, and raise the bar again.

Since I started writing this blog some four years ago a common theme has been recurring.  That is the desire to see football fans involved in the design process, either by way of consultation, kit votes or simply allowing the fans to design the kits themselves in competitions.

Well now I'm done.  We've got the input, we've had our say, the manufacturers and clubs have moved on the information we've given them and we've been greatly rewarded.  Now it's time to allow designers to design.

This about-face is is purely due to the kits we're seeing now being, on average, by far the superior of those of any period in the past.  Seriously.  I used to comment on the irony of being such a football shirt obsessive when I only really liked about 10-15% of the new releases I saw when I visited Football Shirt Culture.  Now that percentage is closer to 40; maybe even half the new shirts actually impress me.

We have one company to thank for this: Umbro.  They took a look at kit design when they were bought out by Nike - probably taking advantage of the enhanced resources - and decided it needed stripping back and reassembling.  They embraced social media, not simply as a way of getting their message across but also inviting (design) fans to give opinions on past and future kits.  They checked what people were saying on FSC and were happy to meet with the commentators.  The result was the 2009-10 England Home kit and their rapidly improving Tailored By range.

The parent company, who had admittedly shifted somewhat to a more understated, classic style in 2006, followed suit, immedately adapting the cut and effect of their kits which, season on season, became more akin to the Umbro approach.  They, similarly, have become more popular.

What we have now is a new stage in the evolution of kit design. The manufacturers are not listening to us anymore. Not through arrogance or disregard, but simply because they have learnt what we want. There's no need to consult fan groups anymore, even if they still do, because there is a mutual understanding born of consistently well-received kits.  It now seems so finely-tuned that it must be almost a visceral sensation to judge the mood so efficiently.

All of which is great for us.  To take the example of the teams I support, Celtic have just launched Home and Away kits which demonstrate an understanding of the desires of the fans whilst also, crucially, giving us finished designs which we would have been hard-pressed to come up with ourselves.  Faithfulness and originality are often awkward bedfellows.  Nike nailed it.

Likewise the new Olympique de Marseille kits.  adidas took a while to get up to speed but the last couple of years have shown they've reined in their approach and are back to doing what they do best: classic, timeless designs which make the most out of their prevailing three stripes.  In the case of l'OM, they've attempted to engage the supporters groups by including the colour orange and, whilst controversial, the Home kit will grow on most.  The Third shirt is simply one of the most innovative football design pieces in history - even allowing for the inclusion of a minor grammatical error (via adidas incorrectly editing the words of IAM rapper Akhenaton) - and despite it being yet another nod to the South Winners, it will be popular through respecting and revisiting traditions but not sacrificing creativity.

This is where the manufacturers can fall down.  Pay too much attention to what the fans want and creativity will be compromised.

The new Liverpool kit is fine.  It has brought back the simple Liver Bird crest - by popular demand; it has a collar, ugly shame notwithstanding - by popular demand; the overall look is uncluttered - like the fans had demanded; the Hillsborough flames have been augmented with the number 96 and relocated to just below the collar on the back - via consultation with the family group which the club are prepared to deal with.  It's very nice but very safe.  Warrior didn't want to rock the boat with their first Home kit, and they've done ok.  But they've bottled it.  They didn't create a kit, they engineered by commitee.

(Incidentally, the goalkeeper kit doesn't get off so lightly.  It's retro to the point of being unacceptable as a 2012 product and will leave Pepe Reina looking like an out of shape Ray Clemence after an extreme trip to the barbers.)

Saleability will always influence the design process.  Anything too extreme will be jettisoned if it alienates the buying public, but the more out-there designs can often bring in revenue from the neutral or more fairweather fan markets.  It's a difficult balance and Cardiff City found that if news of a drastic change to a (especially home-) shirt is communicated in a clumsy and poorly managed way then there will be a backlash.

In the case of the Welsh club, the thinking was that if they had changed their home colours from blue to red then they would have increased merchandising revenue, via the Far East, to such an extent that they would have easily assembled a squad capable of winning The Championship at a canter.  Perhaps the change should have been accepted.  Cardiff have failed to become a worldwide recognised brand in their blue shirts - which would surely have remained in the guise of an away kit anyway, possibly even worn in a percentage of home games - and with even the popular template of this season returning average figures it seemed many were bemoaning the loss of a basic tradition which they didn't even purchase.

We live in a time when we can trust the club, manufacturers, designers and marketeers to provide something that will both please the fans and generate revenue.  If we like something then we should put our money where our mouths are.  If we don't then someone else might.

Follow Jay29ers on twitter

Dave Woods paused for effect immediately after delivering the dramatic news. With Channel 5 having hit the jackpot with their serendipitous adoption of Athletic Bilbao's Uefa Cup campaign - and reclaiming the formerly mocking "Thursday Nights on Channel 5" chant with all stigma banished - the commentator now had the opportunity to consolidate this success with a surefire winner. News had come through that Atletico Madrid were through to the Final and should Bilbao get past Sporting Lisbon to meet them then they would be nominally the away team and, wait for it, be required to wear their green away shirt.

When a football shirt has even got the commentators onboard you can say with some confidence that the design's hit the spot. In the case of Athletic Bilbao, the shirt benefits from being coupled with a successful side playing football regarded in a similar bracket to Barcelona and Swansea City and with a ruthless attacking flair akin to that displayed by Tottenham Hotspur in the first half of the season.

So the connotations of the shirt are sound, what about the aesthetics?  When the kit was first released the admiration was resounding and as time has gone on it has grown on even those who were unmoved.  If you look for a purpose in a shirt's makeup then the lifting of the Basque Country's Ikurrin's (flag) colours, a local company's classy logo as sponsor and the standard inclusion of the local coucil's oak leaf logo on the sleeve should suffice; its obvious resemblance to the Basque national team's shirt (combined with the club's status as a national team by proxy) was always going to catch the eye as a handy bonus.  Throw in a touch of fraternité with Irish/Celtic fans sympathetic to the separatist region's cause - and always on the lookout for new and exciting ways to contribute to their own seas of green - and popularity is almost guaranteed.

But there is one key element included that has translated across (and in spite of?) teams, colours and connotations and been the standout design feature of the 2011-12 season.  The chest bar/stripe has appeared on some of the best releases of the season and its effect is demonstrated perfectly on the Bilbao shirt, where its continuation onto the sleeves makes for an instantly recognisible kit and the perfect interpretation of a club's most treasured flag.  The same approach (for that read "template") was used on the Rangers Away shirt and, although the Union Jack is not as obvious, the block colours are equally striking.

The feature also tasted victory on Wednesday night when, adorning the white kits of Chelsea in their formidable defeat of Barcelona, it may have shoehorned its way into the London club's folklore - not least through being carried by Fernando Torres when he executed and celebrated one of his few goals for the side.  This beautiful Third shirt has been criminally underused this season - which is especially confusing when we consider that their Away kit is black and Birmingham City binned their own similarly coloured second strip because it failed to provide an adequately non-clashing alternative when playing against teams in darker shades of blue.

So the feature could almost be regarded as synonymous with European competition success and its appeal spreads far and wide.  If we go back to Euro 2008, Germany wore a back chest bar with gold and red trim which included their player numbers in white - in contrast to the numbers on the back of the shirt in black - and this was one of the shirts of that tournament.  Go back even further and we come across thinner stripes horizontally on France shirts in the Eighties and one of the most iconic England shirt designs made so by a coloured bar across the chest/shoulders.

There are variations - Spurs' popular Puma shirt of 2010-11 featured a shoulder/chest bar at an angle - but as a general component it usually seems to work however it is applied.  Brazil's "loading bar" shirts didn't last long and may have pushed the concept to its limit in demonstrating a lack of unity between the bar and the rest of the design but it could well be the exception that proves the rule.

Personally, I think the feature has made 2012 its own, which is why I chose kits including a chest stripes to represent DF on the League of Blogs Wallchart.  With the possibility of the aspect contributing to the winning of both European club trophies this season, Poland - who with the Ukraine host this summer's European Championships - or Italy, via their away kits, could even give it a hattrick.
 

The geniuses at Nike have done it again. If you are not aware, they were responsible for the recent debacle of releasing a pair of trainers for St Patrick's Day, which were described in the clumsiest of Guinness-referencing adjectives, and named, I kid you not, after the moniker given to the horrendously vicious British paramilitary unit which tortured and murdered Irish people in the early 1920s, the Black and Tans.

The only explanation for this PR disaster must be that a little word association popped into the mind of a marketeer and a quick Google of "Ireland black tans" gave enough - unchecked - results to apparently vindicate the now full-steam-ahead development of this project. Despite the obvious offence caused, the notion of this campaign being discussed in passing at an office water cooler in Portland, Oregon, leading any employee with a modicum of knowledge of Irish history to feel the blood drain from their face, offers a comical subtext to the farce.

And, as I say, they've done it again. This time the consequences are far less offensive and far less perversely misguided but they do again concern a lax grasp of details relating to history, in this case that of Liverpool Football Club.

LeBron James, the American basketball player, has had a pair of signature shoes made in his honour and these are decorated with graphics relating to Liverpool's history - via Nike's peculiar twisting of the facts.

I like Mr James. It's fun to see his enthusiasm for his business concern in the North West of England - he is a partner of Liverpool's owners Fenway Sports Group - and his carrying of non-adidas-branded club shop tat that would otherwise go unsold but for his contractual eschewing of Nike's rivals. The smile is wiped from our faces, however, when we see Nike produce trainers in his name, in a questionable colourway, which carry depictions of 18 Premier League trophies - denoting the club's English league titles, all won before the inception of the Premier League - and a heel detail "inspired by" the Liver Bird but looking more like a griffin defecating.

Despite the Liver Bird not being trademarked it would obviously be beyond audacious - and bound to provoke legal action nonetheless - if Nike had used an intrinsic part of the Liverpool crest on a pair of shoes which references the club, but for me this is easily resolved. Just don't make the trainers. And had Nike run the designs past fans of the club then they would never have been put into development.

Nike have had a welcome impact on football design and are now, with a little help from their subsidiary Umbro, receiving regular plaudits for their drawing board approach and for their ethics. In fairness, the indiscretions outlined - and the latter is not the first involving LeBron James - are unrelated to the Nike Football section of the company, which has again boosted its own reputation with its Euro 2012 releases and the new Celtic kit, but a brand is a brand and when you begin to risk the sales of Ireland shirts (Umbro) and, for similar reasons, the aforementioned Celtic shirts, not to mention your entire sportswear range in Ireland and in the sportswear-loving East End of Glasgow and Merseyside, it may be time to put a little more R into your R&D.
 

As I have mentioned before, somewhat unconvincingly, the "football" in "football design" doesn't have to refer to association football.  There are several other codes which fall under that umbrella term.

I've already covered rugby and there is of course plenty to write about in Australian Rules football and American Football, but this time I'll focus on the Gaelic Athletic Association's version of the sport and its virtually synonymous primary kit manufacturer, O'Neills.

O'Neills Sportswear was established in 1918 and has produced playing wear for Ireland's top teams - whatever the pursuit - ever since.  In addition, O'Neills has been the supplier of choice for much of the world's Gaelic sport teams - and there are plenty - and currently even provides FC United of Manchester with their strip.

In fact, O'Neills has hit the kit design headlines recently due to a shirt made for a Gaelic football (and hurling) club based in London - St Mary's University College.  It's a beautiful piece of work, and destined to become a cult classic due to being sponsored by Buckfast - a tonic wine particularly beloved by the Scots and Irish, but it does have two flaws.

The first issue I take with the shirt is a general concern regarding the sleeves.  O'Neill's has constantly been the subject of rumour surrounding its use of the three stripes on its items, but these - or certainly two of the three - are missing from the St Mary's shirt.  Aesthetically it matters little - it arguably would be an unnecessary addition, but it is an omission brought by limitation rather than choice.

The fantastic GAA kit blog Pride In The Jersey by Denis Hurley puts this far better than I ever could, but the omission is as a result of court proceedings whereby the German sportswear giant adidas attempted to block O'Neills from using the three stripes.  The Irish company prevailed in their own land, meaning anything designed to be worn and sold on the island of Ireland could carry the distinctive markings, but for everything sent overseas at least one stripe should be removed - even to the extent of O'Neills producing foreign versions of their domestic range, which inevitably leads to many people ordering the original version and having it delivered to an Irish address and then asking a kind soul to foward it on.

In this world of common markets, intercontinental trade and the internet, it seems staggering that adidas do not go further and try to get a European decision to overrule the Irish courts, especially with O'Neills apparently being particularly brazen in some of their adidas-lite designs over the years.

The truth may be more complicated.  adidas has a significant history in Ireland - not least through the A-list designs it bestowed upon Cork City via the nearby factory (available for your perusal thanks to, again, Denis Hurley) and it wouldn't surprise me if there was regular liaison between adidas and O'Neills' marketing and design teams and perhaps even licensing of outdated templates with slight variations.

Where the similarity ends, certainly in recent years, also provides the second problem I have with the St Mary's shirt.  Sublimation is a cheap printing technique now generally only used - in anything other than watermarks or patterns - by downmarket teamwear brands.  Unfortunately, and despite a range including some glorously embroidered crests, sublimation is the most common approach in most of O'Neills kits, for badges and sponsors.  This is a real pity as so many details would look far superior if even heat transfers were applied rather than one piece of material containing all the features of the shirt.

But on the whole this is a minor gripe.  The shirt has a cult standing to compare with many from the association football world and the conundrum of O'Neills/adidas continues to entertain me far more than it should.  The only thing left is to decide who in Ireland I can get to send me O'Neills' version of the 1993-95 Liverpool home socks.

Follow Jay29ers on twitter

Something I touched on recently in The Second Best Titled Blog Article Ever™ (I'm, naturally, also responsible for the best) that deserves expanding on is the yin to the rise of the baselayer's glorious yang - the demise of long-sleeved football shirts.

As wrapped up as I've been in celebrating the - as yet not entirely tapped - possibilities of undergarments, I've perhaps negected to pay true tribute to the mainstay of football through the ages, which is now seriously under threat.

The long-sleeved shirt was, in what we'll call 'my day', the standard form of football shirt in every level below professional.  Coupled with a size label with at least one X, it meant cuffs to grip onto on a wet Sunday morning and, due to its roomy shielding of puny forearms, one less complex to deal with on the pitch.  As well as the only option in early nineties l'Olympique de Marseille shirts, it also provided the most sought after replica for Liverpool and Celtic - a thirst that was rarely quenched.

Things have changed.  Continental (please forgive the retro phraseology) long-sleeved shirts are as tricky to locate as their UK cousins and teamwear is now regularly available and acquired in short-sleeved variations.  In the Premier League, where once players would be the envy of the fan by having options when it came to sleeve length, it now appears that less is more (it's what one does with it that counts) and relative dinosaurs such as the finally declining David Beckham represent the luddites wearing their hearts below the elbow.

This seems more calculated than simple organic progress.  I asserted that fans do wear baselayers but perhaps I'm playing directly into the hands of the club(shop)s and manufacturers by feeling this way.  If the club-specific baselayers being alluded to by Everton and Hull City are the way forward then the sums are quite simple; if a short-sleeved shirt retails at £50 and a baselayer at £25 then this combined purchase - markup allowing - trumps a long-sleeved shirt's potential £60 - especially if the club shop consistently 'runs out' of the last item.

But what cannot be replaced is the satisfying - often, literally, seamless - continuity of a full length sleeve.  Which may be why that appears to be consigned to the dustbin of history.  adidas stripes have long been broken on the sleeve (elaborating on the reasons for that decision may be an article for the future) and this season's Manchester City away shirt, in long-sleeved form, is little more than the short-sleeved version with black extensions tacked on beneath the hem.  Yes, the upper part actually flaps over the lower section.  Remind anyone of anything?

The new France away kit was unveiled almost inferring a necessity for it to be worn with a baselayer, despite the exaggerated cuffs which once signaled the break between fabric and skin.  Its Gaultier-inspired predecessor was so seldom obtainable in long-sleeved that it provided a cruel false dawn for Gallic onion, baguette and bicycle sellers heralding a seemingly inevitable boost in revenue; perhaps its use of hoops sitting uneasily with a plain undershirt signed its death warrant.  Equally it seems improbable that the next Arsenal shirt, if leaked images are to be believed, will relocate its substantial cuffs between the versions.  The future seems to be a world of long-sleeved shirts, should they survive, being almost indistinguishable from a short-sleeve/baselayer combination.

I'm still to be challenged on the theory that Manchester United do not have long-sleeved Home and Away shirts this season - certainly in player issue form - and what the big boys do the rest generally follow.  I have no problem with myths about long-sleeved shirts keeping us warm being exploded and the cliché of scoffing at a footballer combining gloves with short sleeves is ignorant in the extreme, but, as much as I love the baselayer and relish its future, the long-sleeved football shirt and the timeless design it encompasses will undoubtedly be missed, should it indeed prove to be doomed.

Follow Jay29ers on twitter