D-Day England release new kit! (Needs it's very own thread)

[FearTheVee]

50 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Design covers everything on the shirt. 

People hated the George Cross. 

People hate a blue v. 

It's almost as though nothing would please people. 

It's not though it it, because Chrispmartha's version has been warmly received and I would have parted with cash to buy it immediately.

We've had some terrible England shirts and only a couple of decent ones.  This one sits in the upper third in my opinion but could have been much better and I do think the lack of red is a shame given it's been a strong feature of pretty much all England RL shirts to date.

[Dave T]

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

Would you be happy With Warrington wearing a Blue and Green kit next year?

I mean you can see the badge, right?

There would be no reason to do so. 

Blue is a prominent England colour on possibly the majority of England sport kits. 

[Dave T]

Just now, FearTheVee said:

It's not though it it, because Chrispmartha's version has been warmly received and I would have parted with cash to buy it immediately.

We've had some terrible England shirts and only a couple of decent ones.  This one sits in the upper third in my opinion but could have been much better and I do think the lack of red is a shame given it's been a strong feature of pretty much all England RL shirts to date.

Surveys, particularly loaded ones can be very funny things. 

Had that kit just been released, there would have been loads of criticism of it being a GB kit and not England, complaints that the chevrons are too small and weirdly placed, and the website branding would still have been as bad. It's a nice kit, but it wouldn't be without its critics, who will always be loudest. 

People clearly feel very strongly about these minor things. 

[Chrispmartha]

11 minutes ago, Dave T said:

There would be no reason to do so. 

Blue is a prominent England colour on possibly the majority of England sport kits. 

There was no need to do this though, none at all.

Ive given multiple reasons why it is an incorrect decision (IMO) Ive not seen anything to show why this has been done, because other sports have done it isn't a good reason at all!

All the marketing for the WC that has been done, including the actual RLWC website has Englands playing colours as White and Red, that alone is good enough reason to keep the playing colours the same as they always have been.

 

In your opinion and with your Branding and Marketing experience what is the reason for changing the playing colours 3 months before the tournament (which has already had a marketing push because its been delayed).

 

Im open to change Im open to new ideas, that's literally what I do for a job, but we do not do anything without a good reason.

Edited July 27, 2022 by Chrispmartha

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

42 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The point about it not looking like an England shirt is where I'm an outlier. That doesbt bother me one jot. Because ultimately, it will. We'll see England RL walk out in that kit on BBC and we'll see them play in that kit that has the England RL badge. 

This is a valid point. England have only played 1 full international in the last 4 years. For me, it really doesn't matter what us hardcore RL fans think - it's about creating an identity that is recognisable to the wider viewing public, and hopefully more armchair viewers will start to recognise what RL is. 

The comparisons with other sports such as football, RU and cricket aren't massively relevant, because all of those sports are regularly playing internationals all year round, and consequently their 'brands' are on display constantly. In our case - having playing only 1 full international in 4 years - we're essentially starting from scratch on the branding front, because we don't have a 'brand' that anyone outside of the existing RL community would recognise.

[Dave T]

15 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

There was no need to do this though, none at all.

Ive given multiple reasons why it is an incorrect decision (IMO) Ive not seen anything to show why this has been done, because other sports have done it isn't a good reason at all!

All the marketing for the WC that has been done, including the actual RLWC website has Englands playing colours as White and Red, that alone is good enough reason to keep the playing colours the same as they always have been.

 

In your opinion and with your Branding and Marketing experience what is the reason for changing the playing colours 3 months before the tournament (which has already had a marketing push because its been delayed).

 

Im open to change Im open to new ideas, that's literally what I do for a job, but we do not do anything without a good reason.

I think you are seeing it as a more profound change than it is. And maybe it's right that changes like this should be given more consideration, but I think ultimately this is a simple kit launch. 

We havent really done something too radical - most England teams in any sport are combinations of white, red, blue - it won't jar with the mainstream that see this. It may jar with populations of existing fans, but so does the George Cross. 

I think a potential reason we have gone different because of the fact that the kits of become a little too formulaic, we have quite a few George Cross England RL shirts now, and had the WC been staged last year we would have worn another. 

I think the points raised about looking like GB was a consideration so they have kept it to blue instead of red and blue. But I expect red will still form a major part of their colours through training tops etc in the same way that blue has always been a part of the colour range even when not on the kit. 

I'm not seeing much RLWC advertising that causes issues, they are clearly past games, some from 2017.

I have no preference for red, white, blue, 2 colours, 3, whatever - I think we are giving too much importance to preferences, white, red, blue, all works for England imho. 

It's a shame we never find out about this kind of stuff, but I genuinely think this will sell very well, despite being provocative. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

This is a valid point. England have only played 1 full international in the last 4 years. For me, it really doesn't matter what us hardcore RL fans think - it's about creating an identity that is recognisable to the wider viewing public, and hopefully more armchair viewers will start to recognise what RL is. 

The comparisons with other sports such as football, RU and cricket aren't massively relevant, because all of those sports are regularly playing internationals all year round, and consequently their 'brands' are on display constantly. In our case - having playing only 1 full international in 4 years - we're essentially starting from scratch on the branding front, because we don't have a 'brand' that anyone outside of the existing RL community would recognise.

Where the comparisons are relevant is in the fact that despite being told that changing a colour is a terrible idea, huge brands and sports do it - they clearly don't see the huge issue. 

[Ragingbull]

Can someone please advise how i can block/mute some on here so i dont see their post.  Does that functionality exist?

[EastLondonMike]

52 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

When we lift the World Cup trophy wearing that shirt then it won't matter at all - that will be our shirt forever.

No sporting team has ever won a major trophy wearing a dull and ugly kit.

Right, whose going to provide the evidence that someone has?!.. 

[Dunbar]

As an actual kit, I like it.

And this being Rugby League, and our tendency to regularly shoot ourselves in the foot, I am far more worried about both teams being in blue for the opening game of the World Cup than just England being in blue.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Ragingbull said:

Can someone please advise how i can block/mute some on here so i dont see their post.  Does that functionality exist?

I don't know whether posts like this are so you can get to your 100 target, but if not, I suggest you have a real issue with what is very mild disagreement. 

[Dunbar]

4 minutes ago, Ragingbull said:

Can someone please advise how i can block/mute some on here so i dont see their post.  Does that functionality exist?

Who said that?

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think you are seeing it as a more profound change than it is. And maybe it's right that changes like this should be given more consideration, but I think ultimately this is a simple kit launch. 

We havent really done something too radical - most England teams in any sport are combinations of white, red, blue - it won't jar with the mainstream that see this. It may jar with populations of existing fans, but so does the George Cross. 

I think a potential reason we have gone different because of the fact that the kits of become a little too formulaic, we have quite a few George Cross England RL shirts now, and had the WC been staged last year we would have worn another. 

I think the points raised about looking like GB was a consideration so they have kept it to blue instead of red and blue. But I expect red will still form a major part of their colours through training tops etc in the same way that blue has always been a part of the colour range even when not on the kit. 

I'm not seeing much RLWC advertising that causes issues, they are clearly past games, some from 2017.

I have no preference for red, white, blue, 2 colours, 3, whatever - I think we are giving too much importance to preferences, white, red, blue, all works for England imho. 

It's a shame we never find out about this kind of stuff, but I genuinely think this will sell very well, despite being provocative. 

I disagree its not radical - England RL has never played in a white and blue strip its a fundamental change to the playing strip.

 

Look don't get me wrong, once the tournaments on and if we play well, I agree the change will be a small point, but I like detail and thought out branding and marketing processes, this is neither of them and is typical in how the game is run.

You might not see much marketing for the RLWC that causes issues now but a lot will have gone on behind the scenes that will show Englands colours as red and white, as I say the official website has England playing in red and white, Englands website still has tonnes of marketing with England playing in red and white.

Lots of people will have already bought kit and merchandise that is Red and white, and as I say onto of that we are in a group where all the other teams play in blue and white.

[FearTheVee]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Where the comparisons are relevant is in the fact that despite being told that changing a colour is a terrible idea, huge brands and sports do it - they clearly don't see the huge issue. 

I think the point is probably that when they do it they do it properly and all the branding is changed accordingly.  Or there is a common thread between the colours/branding (ours was red but red has essentially disappeared on the shirt).

You reference England cricket - unless I'm wrong they have been prominently blue since they introduced pyjama cricket and they still are.  Maybe different takes on blue, shades of blue etc, but blue.  So they don't chop and change core brand colours.  EDIT - actually I can see them playing in red in my head now actually so that is probably nonsense

Edited July 27, 2022 by FearTheVee

[FearTheVee]

10 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

This is a valid point. England have only played 1 full international in the last 4 years. For me, it really doesn't matter what us hardcore RL fans think - it's about creating an identity that is recognisable to the wider viewing public, and hopefully more armchair viewers will start to recognise what RL is. 

The comparisons with other sports such as football, RU and cricket aren't massively relevant, because all of those sports are regularly playing internationals all year round, and consequently their 'brands' are on display constantly. In our case - having playing only 1 full international in 4 years - we're essentially starting from scratch on the branding front, because we don't have a 'brand' that anyone outside of the existing RL community would recognise.

Why are we starting from scratch just beacuse there haven't been many England games in three years?  Don't see that really.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, EastLondonMike said:

No sporting team has ever won a major trophy wearing a dull and ugly kit.

Right, whose going to provide the evidence that someone has?!.. 

Trust me, I follow handball.

This will be a doddle.

[Ragingbull]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't know whether posts like this are so you can get to your 100 target, but if not, I suggest you have a real issue with what is very mild disagreement. 

Ive no idea what a 100 target is. So its fairly safe to say its the latter. 

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, FearTheVee said:

Why are we starting from scratch just beacuse there haven't been many England games in three years?  Don't see that really.

Were not starting from scratch at all.

All the footage and TV idents of England playing that will be shown in the build up to the WC will be England playing in red and white, because that's what we have played in in the limited amount of games we have played.

All the marketing that will be repurposed from the cancelled tournament that was going ahead last year will have Englands colours as red and white.

Of al the times to actually change our main playing colours now wasn't the time to do it.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Where the comparisons are relevant is in the fact that despite being told that changing a colour is a terrible idea, huge brands and sports do it - they clearly don't see the huge issue. 

But it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges - football, RU and cricket are all playing constantly, and therefore have their 'product' on display far more often than RL does. Also, football and cricket are so easily distinguishable from the action on the pitch. Superficially, RL is very similar to RU for the armchair viewer flicking channels.

For me, the major thing with the England RL kit is to have a major point of difference from the England RU kit. Where I live, many people genuinely do not know what the difference is between the two sports, so IMO it's a big help having something that can help to easily distinguish the two sports for an armchair viewer. This new shirt ticks that box for me, as did the St George cross on the shirt (even though I personally wasn't a fan).

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

But it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges - football, RU and cricket are all playing constantly, and therefore have their 'product' on display far more often than RL does. Also, football and cricket are so easily distinguishable from the action on the pitch. Superficially, RL is very similar to RU for the armchair viewer flicking channels.

For me, the major thing with the England RL kit is to have a major point of difference from the England RU kit. Where I live, many people genuinely do not know what the difference is between the two sports, so IMO it's a big help having something that can help to easily distinguish the two sports for an armchair viewer. This new shirt ticks that box for me, as did the St George cross on the shirt (even though I personally wasn't a fan).

Your point in the 2nd para is key for me. The couple of more plain shirts we have had, including the rather nice 2013 WC one were too close to RU England shirts, I like the differentiator that this shirt brings 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

11 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

Why are we starting from scratch just beacuse there haven't been many England games in three years?  Don't see that really.

For the non-committed armchair viewer who presumably we're hoping to engage with the upcoming World Cup, the England RL 'brand' is virtually non-existent. Compare that to the other major sports who are playing internationals constantly. Essentially it's a blank canvas in that regard.

[Dave T]

17 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I disagree its not radical - England RL has never played in a white and blue strip its a fundamental change to the playing strip.

 

Look don't get me wrong, once the tournaments on and if we play well, I agree the change will be a small point, but I like detail and thought out branding and marketing processes, this is neither of them and is typical in how the game is run.

You might not see much marketing for the RLWC that causes issues now but a lot will have gone on behind the scenes that will show Englands colours as red and white, as I say the official website has England playing in red and white, Englands website still has tonnes of marketing with England playing in red and white.

Lots of people will have already bought kit and merchandise that is Red and white, and as I say onto of that we are in a group where all the other teams play in blue and white.

Mate, happy to agree to disagree on this one, I don't disagree with many of your individual points, I just come to a different conclusion.

I don't see the issues as major and I see the nicest kit we've had for a long time as the positive. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

10 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Were not starting from scratch at all.

All the footage and TV idents of England playing that will be shown in the build up to the WC will be England playing in red and white, because that's what we have played in in the limited amount of games we have played.

All the marketing that will be repurposed from the cancelled tournament that was going ahead last year will have Englands colours as red and white.

Of al the times to actually change our main playing colours now wasn't the time to do it.

Those are fair points. But I would still argue that the wider viewing public would have next to no awareness of the England RL 'brand'.

I agree in that I wouldn't have changed colours now. But in reality, the only people who are currently aware of the existing/previous brand are already England fans (or RL fans). It's the millions of potential armchair viewers who aren't RL fans yet who are the ones who need engaging. 

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

For the non-committed armchair viewer who presumably we're hoping to engage with the upcoming World Cup, the England RL 'brand' is virtually non-existent. Compare that to the other major sports who are playing internationals constantly. Essentially it's a blank canvas in that regard.

I kind of get the point but the fact is England RL does have a presence, there is footage that will be used to market the WC that has England RL playing in red and white, the RLWC official marketing has Englands colours as red and white, England RL's own website is full of England RL playing and marketing in Red and White.

As I say now was totally the wrong time to make this change

[Gav Wilson]

23 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I disagree its not radical - England RL has never played in a white and blue strip its a fundamental change to the playing strip.

Small point of order, they did in 1992.