cant be arsed to list them all but there systematic changes to the club badge in the 70s (for some this happened twice and three times) then in the 80s and more still in the 90s and in recent times. I imagine its a very short list to find badges that havent changed you cant count on your hand how many ties some clubs change their badge . As for colours / shirts , again clubs have made a radical change from their original kit design , some more subtle some on a regular basis (Hull City) and why chose to pick a cut off point of (50years) to prove a point ? Seems to you in this point that History is only about the bits that suit Wasnt the time before that relevant ? most clubs at that point would already be 60yrs old and much more.
Arsenal Donny and Palace to name a few - but i never set the Date limit to the last 50 years , i was looking at a Clubs HISTORY - which incidently is what was the reason for not wanting to accept such changes . Nor does it stop the fact that almost every club has changed the badge more than once in the last 30 years
it was a different colour a few years ago and if i remember right Man City darkened their Blue shirts As for Donny , you can use the power of google and the power of research - Macca are you really a trainee Journo ? u at the HDM ???
Is the different colour you refer to by any chance the Highbury kit which was a one off? Bar one season, since 1885 Doncaster have worn red and white in some form. The one season they didn't, they wore red and black. You never said a certain variation, you said they had changed colours.
You said that they changed them all the time so there should be examples in the last 50 years if that was the case. What you should have said was a lot of clubs used to. Change their kits a long, long, time ago but no longer do and haven't done for a long time. I just said 50 years as that was more or less when I started going to City. Go back further if you want but your statement they change colours all the time is wrong if hardly anyone in the last 50 years has changed colours. In the last 60 years I can think of Leeds, Crystal Palace and Watford. Which hardly supports your statement. And the same would apply if you went back 80 years.
Changing colour is changing colour - change is change , if you dont agree with change then going from a light blue to a dark blue is change , adding a swathe of yellow is change removing the black stripes is change , No ? Yeah its called being factually accurate it wasnt a trick answer i said " As for colours / shirts , again clubs have made a radical change from their original kit design ," Also im sure by now you have wasted your time doing some ground work and discovered that , yes clubs flip their colours add and remove colour and radically alter the design all the time .
And those are the same as going from blue and white to red and black... how? They are completely different. How is it the same as adding a bit of yellow or red?
Shrewsbury Look at the Notts County kit , thats had extra splashes of colour added to the sacred Black and white stripes , hell nobody at Juventus would recognise their current and recent kits I still dont get why you put a cut off date in a clubs History - does it help hide where my statement was totally accurate ?
http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Notts_County/Notts_County.htm Yes, i see what you mean, definite colour change going on there...
Man City was a slightly different shade of blue for about 3 seasons. The rest of the time they have worn sky blue since 1894. Arsenal have worn red shirts since the second season they started as Dial Square except for a season 1913 when they wore a plum coloured shirt.They introduced white sleeves in 1933 as the famous Herbert Chapman wanted them to look different. Since then they have had two seasons with all red shirts and one with plum one to mark the 90th anniversary of first wearing it. Your idea of changing kits all the time is different to that of other people. Incidentally Arsenal play in red because they were presented with a kit when they first formed as Dial Square by Nottingham Forest. Forest were the first club to adopt red as their colours. They did that to honour Garibaldi, who unified Italy, and whose followers were known as the redshirts.
You were on about changing colours. City having amber shirts and black sorts then having black and amber striped shirts and black shorts is not changing colours. Most clubs have not changed their co,ours since they became league clubs. A slight change in shade and back again or a splash of colour here and there is not changing co.ours. You are clutching at straws to try and back up your statement. Try showing how many teams are now playing in different colours as to when they first came into the league.
Leeds changed theirs completely in the 60's(to look like Madrid) and Palace changed theirs completely in the 70's(because their old one was the same as West Ham), I can't think of any others that actually changed kit colours completely, though there probably are some.
Watford used to play in a shade of shirt very similar to City, as did Oxford but went to yellow. More a change of shade.
Yes, I season since 1898 where they didn't play in black and white. Enough to make you dizzy, isn't it?
It wasn't even a season - if you read the underneath it says 'September 1934', so they only changed colours for a month.
Notts County were playing in black and white stripes in 1898. Juventus altered their shirts to copy them in 1900 or thereabouts. This season Notts County are playing in black and white. As are Juventus. Whittling is really making himself look a bit silly with this talk of clubs are constantly changing colours. He could have said over a hundred years ago quite a few clubs changed their colours a few times but stopped doing so once established in the league. Since then virtually any have and in the last 80 years you can count on your fingers, probably of one hand, the number of clubs who have changed their colours. His waffle about splashes of colour etc are a whiff of desperation from someone who can't bring himself to admit he is wrong.
