I like to think I know a bit about football shirts. I write for DesignFootball.com, I keep abreast of football shirt news on FootballShirtCulture.com and even a good 20% of my working life so far has revolved around football shirts.  The genius Azmie from SwitchImageProject even recently told me he was a fan of this blog.  The highest of praise.

I also managed to set up a football team in London. Unfortunately, weeks after we played our first game I moved to Manchester so the team – Marceltipool – has since been on hiatus save for incessant tweeting about Olympique de Marseille, Celtic Football Club, Liverpool Football Club, football design and anything that gets my goat – not necessarily in that order. 

If I’m honest, a big factor in wanting to set up a football team was the desire to get back to wearing football kit again, ideally one I’ve designed myself or at least ok-ed the final design.  The taking part is great but only with a great big M, a four-leaved clover and a liver bird (even metaphorically) on my chest. I can play for a pub, but boy must I love the staff, clientele, politics and ethics of that pub. Tricky.  So I set up my own club, with ethics tied to those of the professional clubs I follow and with a view to elements of football kit design and my favourite OM, Celtic & Liverpool kits appearing on our playing wear.

Turns out, I’m an amateur.

Along came Portman Kunis United FC.  Brought to my attention by a rival site to DF (which, I hate to say, is really quite brilliant) they play in Division 11 (E-L-E-V-E-N) of an indoor league at Inwood Soccer Center in Addison, Dallas, Texas (and people say no-one plays football in America!) and have suddenly taken the internet by storm, basically by virtue of a clever name and the even cleverer – and stylishly created – symbolism on their kit.

To get this out of the way, their name is essentially a fratboy-style joke referencing a “love” scene in the film Black Swan, acted out by the two stars Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis.  Without going into too much detail – this is a family website after all – “Unite” they did, somewhat comprehensively.  So PKUFC have emerged as a tribute to the beauty of the two actresses and, probably, the beauty of lesbian sex.  I would suggest that as a combination of sporting endeavour and sapphism, Portman Kunis United are the tame yin to Ultimate Surrender’s monstrous yang (Google it AT YOUR OWN RISK).

So far, so juvenile.  But this is about the kit.  It’s incredible.  Aesthetics to rival those which God bestowed on Ms Portman and Kunis and far more pleasing on the eye than the trauma of sitting through the awkward squirm-fest that is Black Swan.  The basic template may be an adidas Predator training shirt but that acts as a mere canvas for a designer – we assume a certain Mike Miller – to let his skilfully controlled imagination create a masterpiece.

It’s here for you to see and, naturally, purchase.  My dream was to retail a Marceltipool shirt that could be carried at Le Stade Velodrome, Celtic Park and Anfield, as a display of unity with other clubs similar to the antifa Alerta network.  PKU have got there emphatically first.  That said, and bitterness aside, a personalised shirt for fifty-five “bucks” I think is great value.  I suggest you This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. first to check postage charges for wherever you are but it’s surely worth the price for the understated and classic crest (far better than anything on show in the MLS), the *nudge-nudge, wink-wink* scissor detail on the back of the collar, the wonderfully befitting and presumably independent sponsor and a name and number style, complete with swan detail, that Sporting ID would be proud of.

Therefore, Portman Kunis United, it’s 1-0 to you.  In fact, a quick Google gives us 1900 “Marceltipool” results to 1.5million results for “Portman Kunis United”.  So a ratio of 1:789.  That doesn’t really equate to 1-0 does it?  But we’re still here, have our second game in a month’s time, and our support rises every time someone designs a new Mc’ool kit.  So that just leaves us with one question: Fancy a game?

Excuse the pun but it’s been a very odd couple of days in the football design world – particularly for DesignFootball.com. To give you a quick breakdown of events from my point of view, yesterday I saw a story on our sister/parent site Football Shirt Culture which featured a possible leaked image of a Liverpool change shirt due to be released for 2011/12. Yellow with what could be described as red chalkstripes (though each crucially was made up of adidas’s signature three), the shirt unquestionably referenced the yellow Umbro aways and adidas thirds from the 80s. But this shirt looked extra-familiar. Not only did I feel I had seen shirts like it before, but also like I had seen it before.

This morning (it’s been a long day, it’s actually past midnight now, but let’s pretend it’s still Wednesday) I logged on to msn and was met with a barrage of offline messages which directed me back to the FSC story. But now the story had been edited. Now it confirmed the shirt was a fake. The shirt was proved to be a fake because a comment revealed it to be a fully manufactured article created from the designs of DF member Steevo.

Steevo, as most regular visitors to DF will agree, is one of the most talented designers we’ve got. Specialising in creating kits for his beloved Liverpool FC, I for one accused him of being a “ringer” when he suddenly starting posting these works of genius on the (fast-approaching-10000-designs-strong) Fantasy Kit Designs on FSC. And since, many a time I have bemoaned the fact that – as it transpired - he isn’t actually working under the employ of the German sportswear giant and, it seemed, his designs would never see the light of day in fabric form.

But football design’s a funny old game. And the shirt, now seen on forums and newspages worldwide, such as Caught Offside and EPL Talk, exists. It’s fake, there’s no doubt. But there’s also no doubt that this item, being sold over and over on eBay as I type, is Steevo’s design. The three-striped chalkstripes, the Shankly Gate top on the back of the neck, the unusual sleeve cuff design, it’s all there. The collar colours have been switched but it’s barely noticeable, the crest is the current bête noir rather than the simple Liver Bird that Steevo prefers but this is just an attempt at replicating dour authenticity. It’s Steevo’s shirt.

So what does this mean? Has this come about through a mistake? Did someone from the South East Asian corner of this planet (where these articles certainly originate from) see the design on a forum, assume it had been leaked from adidas, and made it up from that, hoping to see the genuine shirt released and look virtually identical? Possibly, but I doubt it. I think this shirt has been created because the positive reaction to Steevo’s design put dollar signs in someone’s eyes. Who cares what the real designs end up looking like when people will buy this version now? Football (shirt) fans have many qualities but patience is seldom one of them. We want everything new and we want it immediately.

Let’s make it very clear, this is WRONG. The likes of adidas and Nike have had all kinds of human rights-related accusations thrown at them but there’s little doubt that the counterfeit sportswear industry often cares zero about working conditions, health & safety laws (if applicable) and fair pay. As interesting as this design is, and there should also be a (dis)honourable mention for the modern Newton Heath “Nike” shirt also being apparently sold as an alternative to genuine and official designs, not myself nor DF nor - I assume - the entirely innocent Steevo would condone this practice.

That said, flattery comes in many forms and though Zoran’s fantastic designs take pride of place on the header of the Association of Irish Celtic Supporters Clubs’ website and both Middlesbrough Futsal Club and Stafford Rangers have enlisted the help of DF members on their kit designs, Steevo’s realised design unwittingly tricking such a significant proportion of the world’s football blogging community is huge. It’s not how we envisioned it but amateur kit design just went big time.

Football design to me, for the most part, means football shirts, and has done for as long as I can remember. Football Shirt Culture is not my homepage for nothing. I can occasionally have my head turned by other examples, such as a new pair of boots, but I don’t fawn over these new releases like devotees of Footy-Boots.com. No, for me the fruits of a creative labour can be found on the cut, colour, watermark (or lack thereof) on the top that’s carried by our favourite team or even, grudgingly, an opponent.

But as the years start to tell and the cut of the newer styles less flattering to the older gentleman, there’s less cause for wearing shirts. Football training is mostly a thing of my youthful past and now the only times I kick a ball in anger are in five-a-side or the occasional 11-sided game for Marceltipool (no time to explain, just Google it). In both of these endeavours, shirt selection is dictated by the requirements of a collective rather than a matter of taste. Perhaps for Mc’ool I can wear a white shirt of my choice at least until we have the green hooped-left sleeved bespoke design we crave but when wanting to express oneself this can be a restriction too far – especially after a few weeks. In the Powerleague I can have few complaints about the player issue Milan away shirt I am “forced” to wear and I at least had something of a choice of number (I plumped for a #16) but still suffer at the hands of monotony.

At waist level, however, the shackles are removed. To continue the use of Marceltipool as an example, shorts offer endless opportunity to experiment and wear one’s heart on one’s, well, backside. Do I wear Celtic 2005-07 homes with #29 in official SPL print (a gift from a past lover)? Or perhaps the 2008-09 Marseille equivalent? As long as they’re white they’re acceptable and whilst this may sound like a similar tale of woe that I referred to with the shirt it is definitely not so. With the latter, should the wardrobe offer no options which quench the thirst for individualism then a new item can cost up to £60-70 if going the whole hog with long sleeves, naming and numbering (or as I prefer, “flocage”) and league/tournament patches. But a new pair of shorts? Anything from £5 to £25 for the full – personalised – monty. Not the small fortune of its torso-covering sibling. When we add to this the fact that the in small-sided leagues a colour consistency is only a matter for shirts/bibs this opens up whole new avenues for expression.

History has provided us with a plethora of options in shorts. The image of wee Gordon Strachan so bravely attempting to surmount the advertising hoarding after scoring at Mexico ’86 is stamped on many a Scotman’s memory, as is the navy hoop that adorned Strachan’s shorts. A brave man would wear these tiny examples – assuming an adult size can be located – but all the same they will wow a co-equipper on a Thursday evening. Certainly, a friend who I managed to procure a pair of 1991-93 Spurs shorts for told me that only seconds after his arrival at training wearing these classics a teammate had offered kudos of the highest order.

One of my own personal favourite styles of shorts were the adidas variety from 2006-07, worn by Ajax and my beloved Marseille away from home (a pair of which I wear to this day) – a main colour with a curve of a secondary on one thigh. Liverpool had a similar style but I’m not sure whether I feel pride or shame in the fact that I know that was in fact a different template with less obscurance of the adidas three stripes.

The list goes on: Silver England 2002 World Cup away – owned, France 2006 home #10 (as worn by Zidane as he destroyed Brazil and, well, other things…) – still hoping, Milan 2008-09/2009-10 home, away or third #32 (Beckham) – fingers crossed they could be mine before too long. In 2007 I even created (via the now arthritic hands of my significant other of the time and a plain purchase from Toffs) a #29 carrying pair of Celtic ’67 shorts in which to run the London Marathon.

With this level of artistic licence at one’s disposal and the mixing and matching seen so regularly by clubs (Liverpool’s red shorts and grey shirts versus Arsenal two years ago being a notable example) it beggars belief that Cameroon and Puma once conspired to create a one-piece strip. That said, I do subscribe to the belief that no side should have anything more than one example of shorts in each required colour – interchangeability ftw! Umbro and England, this means you!

Of course, we find ourselves only at knee level (barely hip level in some cases, Gordon) and the socks are where individualism has even greater freedom. Hooped socks to confuse the opposition (so said Herbert Chapman), over the knee unfurling by Henry and John Terry, 70s number tags which resurfaced briefly over the last decade, I could go on and on. Unfortunately, I’m sure you’ll agree I’ve gone on long enough but for between £2 and £15 we can wear the pink-cum-orange of Barça, the (nodding to Celtic?) hooped current Republic of Ireland socks or, if you can find them, my ideal style for Marceltipool in the Liverpool 1993-95 homes by adidas (the brand with the three hoops?).

Should you ever doubt that individualism in shorts and socks is synonymous with amateurism then note that in the 1990 World Cup Diego Maradona - no less – wore Napoli socks in Argentina’s Quarter Final against Yugoslavia. And I’ll leave you with this: When it comes to socks, if what history has to offer (or indeed what the current replica market, eBay and Classic Football Shirts have available) doesn’t quite hit the spot, I found a way to just design your own.

The new England away shirt has been available for quite a while now but this afternoon the side will turn out in all red against Slovenia and the combination’s supposed talismanic qualities (1962 World Cup etc) will be put to the test.  By the time you read this you’ll probably know how they fared – dare I say it, maybe even whether or not England’s World Cup 2010 has been a success.  About time myself and fellow DesignFootball.com reviewer curswine put it through its paces…

Review 1 - Jay

So the new England away shirt.  I’ve already bleated on about how great the current home is, how important a release a red England away is and how impressive Nike and Umbro are in marketing such items, but how good really is this jewel in the British manufacturer’s crown?

First impressions, it’s simple.  We knew it would scream 1966 and it doesn’t disappoint.  It has as many World Cup failure connotations as Bobby Charlton’s head has strands of hair (ie. none) and is as red as the mist that must have surrounded Jimmy Greaves when Moore and co lifted M. Rimet’s trophy.  But - and designer Aitor Throup will remind you of this - it’s actually based on the generic Azteca design from the 60s and 70s.  Accordingly, it has, get this, white cuffs!

When you get a little closer you can see that it is something more than just a throwback (designers surely couldn’t command their salaries if that was the case).  Yes indeed, it’s made of only a few oddly shaped pieces of different fabrics stitched together to optimise flexibility, movement and body temperature when worn.  Apparently these different pieces of fabric are all slightly differently coloured but forgive me for not really detecting a change at each seam in the replica version.  Perhaps this is simply my ultra-modern geosociologically colourblind view of border controls in microcosm.  Perhaps not.  So this bit fits into that bit and then this bit goes across here and then the shirt is comple- Oh, to aid flexibility even more they had to put in two extra little bits just below the shoulder blades.  Hmmm.

As you may be getting from this, the shirt is neither one thing nor the other.  They could have made a modern kit but they chose, like with the home, to add modern touches to a classic instead.  What Umbro forgot was that whilst the 50s shirts they took inspiration from for the white strip were actually pretty cool, the ’66 shirt was solely iconic due to its historical significance and as a design piece didn’t quite have enough.  This shirt has even been created with a push towards players moving away from short sleeved versions with base layers and instead choosing this supposed hybrid in long-sleeved.  Obviously Wayne Rooney and Jermain Defoe didn’t attend that meeting before debuting the kit against Egypt.

But what is it like to wear?  Firstly, if you usually wear a Small, DO NOT get Umbro’s “equivalent” 36” chest (“Tailored” you see?).  It’ll look tight and will betray the eating habits of the dietarily-challenged.  Get a size up.  But does that explain the pointy uppy bits on the upper back reported by many and that I also experienced?  Possibly, but the shoulders not falling flat on such a hi-tech item is worrying.  Aside from this it seems to do everything you’d want from modern-day performance technology; not restrictive, not too hot, not too cold etc.

Don’t get me wrong, the crest is beautiful, the Umbro logo is thankfully understated and the shirt is no doubt wonderfully practical for the modern day footballer without looking like a Terminator costume.  But, frankly, we saw all that with the home.  Umbro, that joke isn’t funny anymore.

PS: The shorts and socks don’t warrant much mention, as basic as they are (something about longer at the front to aid knee flexing.  Whatever), but it’ll be fun to see England sporting Liverpool’s colours later.  The shorts look better in red.  On that profound note...

Review 2 – curswine

He goes on a bit doesn’t he?  The new England away shirt is a masterpiece.  The most important day in the Three Lions’ history was the day they wore the famous red shirt to defeat West Germany at Wembley.  This release is a modern interpretation of a design classic that not only pays its dues but also holds its own against other international team kits.

1966 shouldn’t be forgotten and is rightly respected here.  The red star above the crest may not stand out but does pay tribute to the heroes of 44 years ago in a way that shouldn’t put too much pressure on our current squad.  The ’66 kit IS a classic and Umbro are right to revive it.

As for the different materials used, these add depth to a kit that otherwise would come across as somewhat basic.  Umbro’s design teams have worked very hard to ensure that each carefully tested section carries out its purpose to perfection and link with each other to make a whole shirt that performs brilliantly for the stars that wear it.  The smaller sections on the shoulder blades allow freedom of movement that otherwise wouldn’t be possible in a similarly fitted design.  For the players it will mean they don’t get held back by a poorly fitting shirt and for the fans it’s a really comfy top to watch the games in.

It could be said the shirt suffers from the comparisons to the Azteca and 1966 rather than relying on them.  As much as it is retro it also has everything you’d want in a 2010 release and can be judged against any other modern shirt.  That is, if you get the right size.  It’s not Umbro’s fault if we’re not as slim as we used to be and I found none of the “pointy uppy bits” that people have supposedly mentioned.

Regarding the push towards new Umbro shirts combining the outer garment with the popular base layers, Rooney and Defoe may have worn the short-sleeved type with base-layers against Egypt but Peter Crouch and Shaun Wright-Phillips wore long sleeves and both scored.  So maybe long-sleeved shirts are going to become more popular again.

Overall Umbro have created another great kit.  If you look closely at the crest, the finer detailing is lovely and the Lions and roses have never been so beautifully defined.  The whole attention to detail means the shirt looks great on the pitch but also close up and fills you with pride when you pull it on.

Whether wearing white or red, Fabio Capello’s men will be sure their kit performs well and looks good.  This afternoon the classy red shorts with a white stripe will be worn with the red shirt and red socks.  The crest on the shorts is all white rather than fully coloured like on the shirt and this is another subtle touch that adds to how classy the look is. 

Bill Shankly famously sent out Liverpool in all red in the sixties to intimidate the opposition and they never looked back.  Hopefully this great kit will be as effective against Slovenia and England will get the victory they need whilst looking the part.  C’mon England!
 

So it’s begun. A month or so of football endeavours with the end result being the crowning of the world champions. Will it be Spain? Brazil? Italy? Dare we say it, England?!

Whatever happens, the dual endeavours of Nike and Umbro will surely triumph over the estranged siblings, Puma and adidas.

Britain’s Umbro has had a resurgence since being augmented by the immence power of the Americans Nike and the once fearsome Germans have crumbled. The World War II analogy was too obvious to ignore but that’s enough of that now.

Yes, so over the last year or so Nike and their recent acquisition Umbro have made mincemeat out of the competition. The kits have generally been far superior to anything else on the market, the first few days of this World Cup have produced a sea of Superfly II Elite’s on the feet of the players and the marketing has taken the two brands to a new level.

The thing is, Nike and Umbro employ geniuses. Perhaps evil geniuses but geniuses all the same.

If we look at rugby football for a second, adidas are incredibly proud to hold the contract for the All Blacks. So proud of this association and with such faith in the commercial rewards, adidas even allow New Zealand to veto their famous three stripes. What a coup for adidas. So what do Nike do? It’s very simple. They take their modest contract with the New Zealand association football team and dress their most burly player, Ryan Nelson, in a black away kit and call some photographers to take some pictures. In one wonderfully unsubtle chess move, Nike show the Kiwis how their rugby team would look in their own creation. But will Nike ever take over the All Blacks deal? Inevitable understates it.

Nike also have used the power of Umbro to accelerate their pursuit of dominance. When the takeover was complete most expected Nike to poach all of Umbro’s most high profile contracts. But Nike are cuter than that. Instead, they funded the new Tailored By concept and left Umbro with enough new (media) marketing ammunition to deliver in the most comprehensive and impressive way. And once Umbro proved themselves with critical and commercial successes such as the last England home and away strips they went straight to the front of Nike’s World Cup kits launch. With John Terry’s indiscretions seriously hampering his marketing value, the focus shifted away from an Umbro boot and shirt wearing icon. No, instead Wayne Rooney’s Swoosh-footed and double diamond-chested brilliance was the key to marrying the two brands in the public’s consciousness. One minute a photoshoot, the next, Nike and Umbro are writing the future.

So to that ad. If you somehow haven’t seen it, I’ve embedded it below because it deserves it, impartiality notwithstanding. It has Gael Garçia Bernal playing Ronaldo! It has a song about Cannavaro with added cabaret dancers! IT HAS HOMER SIMPSON WITH A BRILLIANT USE OF “D’OH!”

Just to note, the World Cup kits Nike and Umbro have released are generally classy and minimalist. Puma and adidas have released tight shirts which are somewhat hit and miss. It’s not one way traffic by any means as, for example, the Japan away in long-sleeved is nigh on perfection, and, back in club football, the upcoming Spurs and Milan releases look fabulous as well. This coupled with Umbro’s shamefully commercial decision to give Linfield an orange away kit (you know what I think of that kind of opportunism) means it not quite time to concede victory.

And remember, we’re all football fans first and foremost so great kits should go hand in hand with success. The manufacturers’ championship mooted is an interesting idea and we shouldn’t forget that it’s what happens on the field of play that gives a kit an edge. But right now, in the design and marketing stakes at least, Nike and Umbro are trouncing their opponents.

It’s not a new phenomenon. World Cup just around the corner, the testing starts and the whispers follow: “There’s a new ball! It’s lighter! It moves more in the air!”

But this year’s disquiet is even louder than usual. We’ve all seen the quotes but the assertions that it is “a disaster” and “an enemy of goalkeepers” sum up the most extreme opinions of the Jabulani (ironically, translating as "to celebrate"). 

The German manufacturers of the offending item, adidas, were quick to divert blame. The testing at altitude was the cause, they said. However, for a tournament that was due to be played, at least partially, well above sea level you would think Adi Dassler’s disciples would have made sure the ball created for this specific event could handle the conditions.

As it turns out, it seems like it can. This World Cup has so far (at time of going to press) been marked with woeful shooting, shoddy goalkeeping and an alarmingly high amount of Nike Superfly II Elite boots on show. The ball shows no obvious signs of not acting like a football should. A coincidence that (caution: I don’t have the stats to back up this next statement) we see more players wearing Nike boots than ever before the same year that adidas comes under the most criticism of a match ball it has ever experienced? Well, on the other side of the coin, some have scoffed that the only teams/players in support of the Jabulani are those with adidas sponsorship deals, most notably France.

As I mentioned, the last World Cup ball was criticised as well. As has every ball of every major international tournament in recent memory. But the last World Cup featured some great long range goals. I don’t remember any perverse movement of the matchball, only the swerve put on the ball by the way it is struck. Joe Cole’s fantastic strike versus Sweden a prime example of a player making the ball move at a pace and trajectory of his own choosing and getting said sphere to finish up exactly where he wanted it to.

I choose now to get these feelings off my chest as later on today we will witness Nike’s writer of the future extraordinaire, Cristiano Ronaldo, in his first action of the tournament. It is likely that by the time you read this, he has already proven me right, wrong or split opinion but I feel that Mr Ronaldo seems to have a lot more fun striking a Nike football in the English or Spanish league than he does with an adidas equivalent. So many of his goals are acclaimed but the movement of the ball after his foot makes contact often seems irregular.

For example, the Portuguese’s love of smashing the valved section of a Nike example for freekicks to produce a shot that looks to be flying yards over the bar and then feasting on the freak fruits of this labour as it suddenly dips to end in the net may not be so simple with a Jabulani. After all, adidas have tried to create the most "perfectly round" ball the world has ever seen. Accordingly, so far this much maligned product has curled right when hit with the right side of a boot, left when hit with the left and the rules of physics have prevailed. Cristiano, your move.