The New 2004 Kit Review!!! (Smiting Ugliness and Tackiness since 2002)

Discussion in 'Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, & the former Soviet Repu' started by Shurik, Nov 16, 2004.

  1. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Okay, boys and girsl, it's that time of the year again! Let's see what you all have and whether your deadbeat parents gave you any help with your costumes.

    Please to come one by one, no pushing, no talking, to look straight in Aunt Tamara eyes or to be punished severely.

    And remember the rules:

    1) The team receives the minimum of 1 and the maximum of 10 points for the overall look of the uniform.
    2) A maximum of 3 points can be taken off if the team's uniform is straying away from traditional colours or desings. A maximum of 3 points can be added on if the team is straying away from a bad trend of the past years.
    3) Max. of 3 points will be added if this year's kit is an improvement. Max. of 3 points will be subtracted if it's worse than last year's.
    4) At least 1 point will be taken off for each sponsor logo on the kit (2 or 3 if they are especially ugly).
    5) Other points may be added or subtracted based on miscellaneous accounts, maximum of 1 per.

    Who will win the coveted Best-Dressed Award? (A lovely leopard-skin carry-all, to go with your latest Moscow fashion craze: man-pumps!)
    I can tell you right now that last year's Champion, Torpedo Moscow, will do well not to get relegated this time. You have to see to believe what they've done to their kit.
    Will the Cultural Beacons show us the true sense of good taste?
    Will Amkar Perm unveil the new football lapti and onuchi?
    Will Spartak's message of the superiority of Lukoil gasoline reach the masses from underneath the horizontal chest stripe?

    Find out this and much more in the newest edition of the Kit Review!
     
  2. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Of course, we will start with the 2004 League Champions (and last year's fashion pushovers) Lokomotiv Moscow.

    Has the Steam Train repaired its tarnished image left from the dreadful gradiated shirt of 2003? Well, you be the judge:

    The primary red:
    [​IMG]
    The secondary white:
    [​IMG]

    On second thought, let me be the judge.

    * Well, it seems to be the well-established fact that red and green generally do not look good together. But the poor Steamers somehow needed to be different from Spartak and "red and brown" was already claimed by General Makashov's political party. Considering the inherent incompatibility of the two colors, this doesn't seem completely repugnant. Overall, a 6.5
    * Nevertheless, Loko's traditional threads are red and white. There is nothing wrong with adopting red and green as the club colours, but green should be kept off the kit. There seems to be no stopping it now, but until it itself becomes a tradition, I will mark them down. 1 point off.
    * Compared to last year's train wreck (cha-ching!) anything would be an improvement, but kudos to the Lokos nevertheless. Add 1.5 points for a step in the right direction.
    * Alas, 1.5 points come right off for the sponsor logos. The one in the front (Russian Railroads) is related to club history and not especially ugly, but the decision to spell the whole thing out is just plain wrong. The seemeingly endless text completely obscures everything else. The small TransCreditBank logo on the back would've been a disaster in front. As it is, it merits a half-point deduction.
    * Subtract another half-point for not knowing what they like. The red shirt was alternately worn with white (the traditionalist's choice) and red shorts. In addition, when they wore white shorts, either red or white socks could be used. There is nothing wrong with some variety, but not to the point of confusion.

    Final grade: 5

    Unmatched on the pitch, the Golden Boys of Public Transportation are still very mediocre on the catwalk. A few more years as part of Russia's elite should do them good. However, if green manages to entrench itself, making any kit look good will be more of a challenge than keeping Russian trains running on time.
     
  3. gaijin

    gaijin New Member

    Aug 1, 2004
    Malaysia
    Thank god when we switched to Nike. I wasn't a fan of those Puma kits. As for this season's its nice to see the inclusion of the more traditional green element to the kit, especially on the collar. And for the sponsor logo. Why the hell don't they simply abbreviate it. I'm sure its so people outside of the capital can read it properly. It practically covers the kit with dull writing. But we must lose points for sticking with that crappy 3rd kit. Green and black? Oh dear!

    I can't wait for Shinnik Yaroslavl and their rip off of the Chelski away kit from last year. Its like Roman's hand me downs..... :rolleyes:

    Don't worry Shurik, its like the Luzhniki when Spartak play in here mate... :rolleyes:

    So if I took 5 as my base figure and added another 3 for style (collar, colour and better than last years). But took off 2 for the sponspor idiocies and another point for that stupid lettering (both in and out of the CL.) I would get 5. I would add another one for having the white kit though. A nice touch from the home shirt in all honesty.

    6......imho
     
  4. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Green is not a Loko tradition. Their original shirt was red with a white vertical stripe and their classic 1950s garb is an Arsenal rip-off.
    Green has only become an official club color recently and has seen very little action on the kits.

    They used to come out with just an RZD acronym splashed across the chest, but the railroad brass thought it was too ambiguous.

    It's gone already. They only used them in the early spring Cup ties, before the RPL season started. Horrible stuff.

    The Horses are up next!
     
  5. gaijin

    gaijin New Member

    Aug 1, 2004
    Malaysia
    Oh yeah......... :rolleyes: I mean in the new post-modern traditional sense...lol. mmmm. Still remember when it was red/black and white.....yuck! The green was I believe only added as way of defining the club. Green and red isn't used by any of the big teams. But still we need it, so as not to look like Spartak muppets.

    Tis' true and begs the question, since when the hell did ambiguity concern railroad workers and football teams?

    Yes, but we wore it nonetheless. So in essence we actually wore it as of 2004....Still remained the third kit though didn't it?
     
  6. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    It was used in three pre-RPL road matches: a CL loss at Monaco and two Cup ties. In the only pre-RPL home fixture (vs. Monaco) they wore last year's gradiated nightmare.
    Once the League kicked off, the new shirts were unveiled and the old junk was ditched.

    Red and black was indeed quite bad, but not nearly as bad as mid-Nineties yellow threads with complicated white and blue patterns. Or the spotted shirts of 1994. Even clowns would've been ashamed to put those on.
     
  7. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    And here are the Horses on parade!

    CSKA Moscow, if you remember did well last year, both in the standings and on the fashion scene.
    Was a letdown inevitable? Well, voila:

    The primary red:
    [​IMG]
    The secondary white:
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    And the alternate navy, which frankly looks black to me:
    [​IMG]

    Well, well, well...

    * No. No, no, no, no, NO! That's NOT how you are supposed to dress, boys and girls! I've kept it out for decency's sake, but the white shorts actually have a blue horizontal stripe ON THE ARSE!!! That thing alone deserves a minus-10 rating. And the red jersey with stripes on the back? What the hell is this fascination with the backside, pray tell? The shade of red is unbearable, the blue is way too dark and the stripes look like they were just stuck on somewhere because Umbro had too much blue nylon to know what to do with. Shame on you, Horses, shame on you big time! Only the undestated alternate shirt (which wasn't used much, though) pulls you to a very shaky 3.
    * The red shirt defies the tradition of the past years of wearing red-blue stripes (a striped shirt was actually worn in the firts RPL match of the season and abandonned immediately). However, a red shirt with blue shorts is a much older tradition, so I can't knock the Horses there. They did not return to the traditional red socks, though. Which may have given a birth to a red socks curse American baseball fans can only dream about. The Army guys came out wearing red socks in Week 28 at Zenit and won 3-0, propelling themselves to the No. 1 spot. They thought the red socks were lucky and wore them in Week 29 against Dinamo. And that's when the socks got their revenge for the years of neglect. The 0-0 draw denied the Horses a gold medal.
    Well, this story out of the way, let me subtract a half-point for the dark-blue/black kit, since it's clearly against the Army lore.
    * The kit is obvioulsy a step in the wrong direction, as the Horses were always known for simple and elegant outfits. This is too busy, too avant garde and with a sponsor logo to boot! 1 point off.
    * The Sibneft logo could've been uglier, so only a half-point deduction there.
    * I will give them 1 point for sticking with the red shirt and not experimenting too much with socks-shorts combos (the above story notwithstanding) and also for having the good sence to ditch the ugly Konti sponsor logo they sported in preseason.

    The total grade is a solid 2

    See, boys, you mess with traditions, you hurt your socks' feelings, you model your secondary kit after Romo's team and you get SPANKED!
    Don't make aunt Tamara angry, aunt Tamara have hangover now. Please to stand in corner and make no sound. You punished now!
     
  9. gaijin

    gaijin New Member

    Aug 1, 2004
    Malaysia
    Looks like I'm going to challenge you here Shurik (not for the first time)

    * Okay, they have left out the traditional red and blue stripes (the Crystal Palace in the 1980's look.) Although the idea of the Bright and Wright combo playing for the Horses send shivers down my spine. Ironicaly they too have done a Palace and decided for a season to ditch the stipes. At which point the fans wanted it back. Minus 3 points for lack of traditional sense. But two more for the change - I quite like it.

    * HOWEVER - I think it was time for a change and i guess, you can't make the perfect omlete without breaking a few eggs. Okay, they've ruined the element of stripy kits - but I think this was a bold and daring step. Plus 1 point.

    * Believe or not, my mate Misha told me that the club altered the kit to accomadate the new Abramovich sponsporship. So incomes the lovely new Sibneft logo along with the power and corruption that comes with it. ( :rolleyes: ) The logo is nice, but the away shirt looks stupid without it.

    * Norway, Norway, and erm.......NORWAY. I've bloddy seen this before. Norway wore it like four years ago! Minus 1 point for attempting to look like some Scandanavian retards from Murmansk.

    * Both away kits are a nice change on the generic Umbro churnouts. Sadly they look a bit like Chelski's last year though (read Shinnik.) I will add one point for the improvent over the away shirts last year. If I wasn't obligated to hate the horse parade, I would happily wear this.

    5

    BTW: does this go in order of final positions in the RPL? So next is......[thinks]....Wings!
     
  10. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    The traditional (Bobrov-era) Army kit is red shirts and light blue shors, so this new one is actually not much of an affront to the ancestors. However, the stripes were worn since 1998 and they themselves have also become a tradition.
    And besides, the navy blue has no place on a Horse! Never!

    I am stickin' with my 2.

    And yeeeesssss, the Wings... Oh, the stupid, stupid Wings. Just you wait *evil chuckle*
     
  11. gaijin

    gaijin New Member

    Aug 1, 2004
    Malaysia
    Well, its your opinon. But quite frankly, I know jack about fashion (hence my current job as a Russian kit designer!)

    Yeah, the stripes are cool. But I just can't help think - Crystal Palace. And trust me - that ain't a good thing when you've been stuffed midweek by the Eagles in the windy couldron of open stands at Selhurst. (oh how we loved that in the early 90's!)
     
  12. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    And so, it comes to this...

    Krylya Sovetov Samara

    Let's see now. The club colors are blue, white and green. The traditional kit colors are blue and white. The classic 1950s kit is blue and black. So... naturally... the tradition-consciensous Wings... wore THIS!

    Primary gray:
    [​IMG]
    Secondary navy:
    [​IMG]
     
  13. savan

    savan New Member

    May 16, 2004
    Norway
    That's right..Our old jersey's looked EXACTLY like that (and not 4 years ago...try 4 months!!!)!!!!!!
    And...erm...retards? :rolleyes: ;)
    I was freakin' sure that was a picture of a norwegian international...until I saw those skinny legs! :D
     
  14. gaijin

    gaijin New Member

    Aug 1, 2004
    Malaysia
    Calm down savan it was a joke. And at the horses expense if you read it right.....

    Sorry if I uspet you..jeez. :rolleyes:
     
  15. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    And this wasn't ALL!
    The above was the "preferred kit", but the Wings also has two "alternates"

    The first alternate (white):
    [​IMG]

    The second alternate (blue) had the colors reversed.

    But that's not all!
    Especially for the Cup final the Wings wore this:

    [​IMG]

    * Welly-welly-welly... Where do you start? Well, let's work our way up. The ugliest of the quintet is obviously the grey monstrocity. They did wear grey as an alternate last year, but it did not have the navy side panels or those crooked splotches on the shorts. White and blue are also quite bad, especially when you consider the contrasting armpits. Navy is GORGEOUS (the best kit in RPL hands down). Sky blue is a good kit spoiled (navy stripes, horizontal Arse Stripe, sponsor logo). So... With grey at about 4, white and blue at 5, navy at 10 and sky blue at 5, the weighted average is somewhere around 5.5
    * Tradition is screwed right in the arse with that grey kit. If navy were primary, this would've been just right. However, 1 point off for the belated attempt to comply to the latest 2001 European craze.
    * Definitely a step down from last year, when blue and white were primary kits. Another point off.
    * No sponsor logos (except for sky blue). Good for them.
    * Half a point off for having 2 different sets of kits, but a full point added for not mixing and matching shorts and socks the way Rostov like to do it. Add 2 points for the navy kit (MAN, IT'S GOOD!), with a pretty please to use it as a primary next year.

    Overall, a 5

    The Wings seem to be on the right path, only they keep taking stupid detours. Just like last year, they have a perfect kit, yet grossly underutilize it in favor of a piece of crap.
     
  16. savan

    savan New Member

    May 16, 2004
    Norway
    Erm..Did I seem upset? Hehe.. :D Kind of laughing instead, though! ;)
     
  17. gaijin

    gaijin New Member

    Aug 1, 2004
    Malaysia
    okay then, I just thought I did offend you.

    Righto......

    Wings....

    * Well firstly they have obviously gotten rid of traditional colours and have sacrifised the green/blue/white trio for grey. Or maybe silver if you read it right.
    I would go for minus 2 points for radical chage of the colour scheme.

    * Their away kit is one of the most beautiful in the league. A lovely shade of dark navy blue - 3 points.

    * I really do prefer the Umbro kits, they market solely for football and you can see this. An always sharp looking affair.

    * Sponsporship? What sponsporship? I quite like the Barcelona-esque shirt. It gives it a sort of pure feel to it. I really do think a sponspor would spoil the shirt. Plus one point.

    * wtf? Two away kits! The white one is more traditional (next years home shirt me thinks.) And the blue one is the same I guess....lol...But the cup one! wtf was going on there? Two points for each kit but a two point loss for that cup final disaster. The colours don't work for me somehow.

    EDIT:

    * Don't agree with the website address on the back. A big no no....


    7

    I think the overall huge number of kits is stupid. Sans sponspors = good. Blue/grey/white/navy? Stop playing around with combinations and choose a kit!
     
  18. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Disappointed with the quality so far? Find yourself yearning for more? Feeling your fashion buds tingling?

    FEAR NOT!

    For here come the Beacons of Culture, obligated by the Supreme Being to show the Way to the great unwashed masses.

    Behold, Zenit St.Petersburg!!! (15th place in the fashion standings last year)

    The primary sky blue:
    [​IMG]
    The secondary white (as modelled to the great unwashed masses of the city of Bronnitsy, where the Zenit reserves played their Saturn couterparts):
    [​IMG]
     
  19. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Of course you didn't really think that the Kul'turnye Mal'chiki would only have two sets of garment! No-no-no-no. What would they wear to the opera, pray tell?
    Here is the alternate royal blue, used sparingly early in the year:
    [​IMG]

    So, it finally came to this. After years and years, and years, and years, and ages, and years, and years, and eons, and more years, and another week of having to listen to that "Sine-Belo-Golubye-hey-hey-hey" chant (apparently, something extremely cultural), Zenit FINALLY wear all three of their colors in the same year.
    Of course, the royal blue kit is from last year and was only used in a handful of matches, but still... It's a start.

    * The two primary kits look nice and simple, despite being generic Umbro crap. Sky blue suits Zenit, though I am afraid they may ditch it now due to bad luck (the last time they wore it they finished 10th and now this) and go back to that oh-so-original blue-and-white look. The royal blue kit would've looked a lot better without the splotches on the shorts. Of course, it too is a generic Umbro crap, and a year old to boot. Still, it's not repugnant, so an overall 6 will be fine.
    * Okay, I will overlook the navy splotches and give them 2 additional points for wearing all of their colors. Yeah, yeah, yeah, shoot me.
    * Ah, but 2 popitns off for two sponsor logos, one of them (of course) on the arse!
    * The kit, however, is a substantial step up from last year's (when it was Umbro splotches galore) and deserves a point up.
    * Not much else to say, really. Oh well, another half a point for knowing exactly what they like (none of that, "Oh, let's wear white at home today" crud).

    So, the Culturals actually avoid being a laughing stock this year with a very respectable 7.5

    Now, just think about this: if they had whiped their arses and stopped telling everyone already what a swell little mom'n'pop shop Gazprom is, they would be this year's fashion champs! Oh well, at least there is still some culture to fall back on.
     
  20. Zenit

    Zenit Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 3, 2000
    Above the Tear Line
    Club:
    Zenit St Petersburg
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The return of the sky-blue kits was most welcome. And as dull as the Umbro kits are, they are a huge step up from the gawd-awful Diadora kits a few years back.

    Spot on, re: Wings. Easily the ugliest kits of the year, no one else even close.
     
  21. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Ah, aunt Tamara's been waiting for you, naughty boy. Please to pull pants down and no screaming, da! Aunt Tamara go get her husband's army belt now.

    Torpedo Moscow. Oh, the Torps... Oh, in Streltsov's name... Here we go.

    The primary white (to lessen the impact, a good view of the Wings' navy shirt is provided as an antidote):
    [​IMG]

    I shall spare you the view of the secondary black. It simply had the colors reversed, but trust me - it was no help.

    Look at the white one again, if you dare. See how it looks without the mitigating effect of a good shirt next to it:
    [​IMG]

    * Wow... See, I know the French are supposed to be fashion gurus and this is probably what the Torps' brass thought when siging up with Le Coque Sportif, but man... Stupid, stupid, stupid coquesuckers! All I've gotta say. Easily a 1.
    * Ah... the tradition! Oh, the swallow-tail T, ah, the memories of Streltsov. Too bad it had to be put next to a HUGE FREAKING COQUE! Minus three. Go suck on that.
    * Another minus three for about as big a step in the wrong direction as one can take. Putting the swallow-tail T on last year's Diadora shirt (I don't think it's been on any Torp kit since the 60s) would've probably earned them a repeat of the title, but disgracing the memory of a classic logo with this... Despicable.
    * I have no desire or inclination to discuss this garbage any more in any further detail. Let it burn.

    Final grade: minus-5

    The Torps wanted to be a bit retro, but by putting a swallow-tail on a coque they've created a zombie of the 1960 Denver Broncos. Go and hit yourself on your heads in shame, Torps fans. All 10 of you.
     
  22. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Aunt Tamara no forget ganu request. Aunt Tamara do the Shinnik now. Let all do the Shinnik. Aunt Tamara say "yeah!"

    Shinnik Yaroslavl. The most premier tiremakers in all the land trot out in their new duds and... oh me, oh my... how far does Romo's influence reach???!!

    Primary black/blue:
    [​IMG]
     
  23. Shurik

    Shurik New Member

    Nov 2, 1999
    Baltimore, MD
    Oops... sorry about that... Did we just get a wrong slide put in? Oh, millions, millions of apologies to the loyal Yaroslavl fans *chuchkle-chuckle-chuckle*

    Okay, here they are

    The primary black/blue:
    [​IMG]
    The secondary white that scream "Look at us, Mr. Abramovich sir! We can be bought too!":
    [​IMG]

    In a word... eh.

    * Is that a gradiating effect on those striped shirts or are my eyes getting a bit weak? Should I give them the benefit of the doubt?.. And the white kit... On on hand, it's just like Romo-wear. On the other, it's also just like Horse-R-Us, only without an Arse Stripe. What do we do? Overall, a 7, thanks to the stripes.
    * Yes, their old-established, traditional, eternal and omnipresent colors are blue and black. As of 2001, at least. But why is the logo blue and sky blue? What the hell is that, a trick? All right, that's fine, I've already mentioned that. No traditions broken. Go free now.
    * Wait a second! Is that a sponsor logo I spy? The Yaroslavl Tire Factory? Why is it not on the early-season shirt, you basitds? Oh, well, it relates to the team name, so it's only half a point off.
    * Is this better than last year? Eh...
    * Ah, but here come The Hammer! The Tiremakers spent the second half of the season steadfastly avoiding their primary shirt. They only wore it when they were forced to and ended up sporting the ugly white thing about 70% of the time. Why???? Trying to get noticed by Romo? Well, you get noticed by aunt Tamara. 2 points off!

    Overall, 5.5

    Go home and think about these words, wontcha: "PRIMARY COLORS".
    Now aunt Tamara need drink.
     
  24. atlheel

    atlheel New Member

    Nov 19, 2004
    Atlanta/Chapel Hill
    Ha! This thread cracked me up.
     
  25. Montréal United

    Montréal United New Member

    Apr 11, 2001
    Montréal,Qc
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Guess they had a volume rebate on Chelsea shirt. Great way to save cost :)

    Once, you've done the rest of the team, I'll chip in with my top 3 / bottom 3.

    KUTGW!!!
     

Share This Page