Here is the mock up of the new Manchester United away kit for the 2009/2010 season. It is supposed to be based on the shirt United wore when they won the FA Cup in 1909. Some dissatisfaction has been voiced by various fans on various sites as to the design. They feel the red stripe going across the chest forms an arrow which blatantly points to the advertising logo of AIG and highlights this too much. I must admit I find that highly amusing. For a start AIG are pulling out of the deal whereby they sponsor the shirts at the end of 2010 so why on earth would Manchester United go out of their way to make sure AIG get any extra coverage as they withdraw from the deal ?
I do think on some occassions United fans go looking for problems that really are not there. The paranoia with AIG getting the coverage on the shirts is madness. AIG have provided about one third of United's income for the past four years financing things such as the purchase of Nani, Anderson, Hargreaves, Tevez and Berbatov, but still they complain that AIG have a logo on the shirt. You can't have the cake AND eat it.
It became a big issue on the 50th anniversary of Munich too. When the mural of the Busby Babes was erected at Old Trafford last year.
This was a time to remember those who perished and to appreciate what United had lost. Yes, I know AIG had their logo at the bottom right hand corner of this mural but so what. Who cares, this was all about Munich, Sir Matt and the Babes. Maybe AIG wanted to have their logo there to show they too cared and wanted to be a part of the anniversary activities. Maybe they saw it as a way to sneak in and get some high profile advertising.
Maybe, just maybe, this was an occasion to forget AIG. An occassion for fans to remember what was important on the 50th anniversary instead of continuing the hunt for things to moan about.
AIG will be gone soon, to be replaced by Air Asia, Saudi Telecom or Sahara. So what next? Let's all hate India and Sahara for the way Indian children are exploited in the workplace. Maybe we should hate Air Asia because their uniforms aren't very pretty or because they paint huge pictures of Manchester United players on their aircraft to exploit the market place. If Saudi Telecom are the next unfortunate incumbents to finance Manchester United let's all jump on the bandwagon and complain how Saudi Arabia treats women and how they outlaw drinking and the carrying of the Christian Bible in their land. Or might it be a good idea to accept the sponsors, take their cash and be happy. Their logo might be on the shirt but it just might finance the arrival of Karim Benzema or dare we say it, Kaka.
I do think on some occassions United fans go looking for problems that really are not there. The paranoia with AIG getting the coverage on the shirts is madness. AIG have provided about one third of United's income for the past four years financing things such as the purchase of Nani, Anderson, Hargreaves, Tevez and Berbatov, but still they complain that AIG have a logo on the shirt. You can't have the cake AND eat it.
It became a big issue on the 50th anniversary of Munich too. When the mural of the Busby Babes was erected at Old Trafford last year.
This was a time to remember those who perished and to appreciate what United had lost. Yes, I know AIG had their logo at the bottom right hand corner of this mural but so what. Who cares, this was all about Munich, Sir Matt and the Babes. Maybe AIG wanted to have their logo there to show they too cared and wanted to be a part of the anniversary activities. Maybe they saw it as a way to sneak in and get some high profile advertising.
Maybe, just maybe, this was an occasion to forget AIG. An occassion for fans to remember what was important on the 50th anniversary instead of continuing the hunt for things to moan about.
AIG will be gone soon, to be replaced by Air Asia, Saudi Telecom or Sahara. So what next? Let's all hate India and Sahara for the way Indian children are exploited in the workplace. Maybe we should hate Air Asia because their uniforms aren't very pretty or because they paint huge pictures of Manchester United players on their aircraft to exploit the market place. If Saudi Telecom are the next unfortunate incumbents to finance Manchester United let's all jump on the bandwagon and complain how Saudi Arabia treats women and how they outlaw drinking and the carrying of the Christian Bible in their land. Or might it be a good idea to accept the sponsors, take their cash and be happy. Their logo might be on the shirt but it just might finance the arrival of Karim Benzema or dare we say it, Kaka.
3 comments:
Perhaps Manchester United should only seek Sponsorship from another Organisation whom abides by a similar code of conduct as themselves?
As for the shirt, I just think it's ugly! Don't you agree?
I work for a major soccer retailer and my boss has seen the official new United home and away kits after meeting with a Nike representative, and he said this kit isn't authentic.
My boss said that while both the home and away kits will indeed have the controversial retro "V," it will be in black on the home kit, while the away kits will not be white at all, but black. Also, the home kits won't have a retro collar, but a simple black-piped round neck. He said that this leaked photo is very similar to the one the Nike representative showed him: http://www.oleole.com/media/main/images/member_photos/group1/subgrp251/newunitedhomeshirtfo_252645.jpg
The publishers of footballshirtculture.com will be happy to know that this image is the same one that Nike forced them to take down from their website, so it probably is a photo of the actual kit, most likely taken by a factory worker in Asia, where Nike has them made.
Official leaked Nike promotional photo of new United kit: http://footballfashion.wordpress.com/2009/05/28/legitimate-manchester-united-nike-200910-home-kit-jersey-leak/#comment-1577
Post a Comment