Home kit revealed

[sverigegreen]

Nice kit, rather classic apart from the white road marking.

Being a supporter now for many decades I would just add how much better it would look
if it were emerald rather than moldy green.

suspect the away kit is going to be garish.

 

[Tony Flags]

Oh for goodness sake cannot we just reimport everyone's comments from last year and be done with it.

Today- those who like change will like it, those who hate change or reminisce will hate it.

End of season - if we get promoted a good kit, relegated then an awful kit.

 

[Biggs]

Not the best, but I happen to think the red DOES go well with the dark green.

Nowhere near as bad as something like Chevrolet on the Man United shirts, which really does ruin the design.

I was always more interested in the away shirt.

 

[Adam R]

We can't judge it until Sept 12th surely??

 

[PL2 3DQ]

It's ok and will do the job, the white trim will help for Tuesday night home games.

I don't understand why the release of the first photo of the home kit is not done a lot better and from different angles, I suppose we'll have to wait for the next two days for better photos.

Last year the first glimpse of the all green kit was a photo of Jake Jervis stood in front of green bushes and the green cladding of the outside of the Barn Park End - the new home green shirt revealed in front of the all green of the away end. :facepalm:

The shirts are the identity of the club and a good source of income for the club so the first photos should be better than what we see today and saw last year.

Hopefully the new marketing man will sort out things like this.

 

[Bernie Bernbaum]

Too much white.

 

[X Isle]

Can we have a fourth option on the poll please because it's a big fat MEH from me.

It has the right colours and the additional white will assist those who seem to have a problem seeing the players...I don't and never have but some consider it a problem.

But the design doesn't blow my socks off, I dislike stick on badges and whilst we have (I can't see the sleeve branding) seemed to have lost two of the three Puma logos we do have to swallow their imposed 'dot branding'. Why can't we have shirts we want instead of the shirts that fit the manufacturers criteria?

On balance an average shirt that ticks the primary box but still irritates me with the Puma branding and cheap badge. It will do it's job for a season then be lost to historical obscurity.

One question that still hasn't got a logical explanation, why wasn't the new contract with Puma publicised at the end of the year? If we're so embarrassed by the association that we have to keep it quiet, why re-sign with them?

Three more years is it?

I don't like the inflexibility and 'customer comes second' set up with these global megabrands and this shirt does nothing to inspire confidence that anything will change for whatever the duration of this 'secret' contract turns out to be.

No shirt purchase this year from me.

 

[Biggs]

And the Jake Jervis shoot last year didn't have the sponsor on either. Is it just me or is the Ginsters sponsor super-imposed as well....? It looks a bit weird because the trainers are on the pitch, but Ness himself isn't.. Unless I'm seeing things.

 

[X Isle]

It is Biggs, enlarged as well. I like Ginsters as sponsors, right brand for the right club, but from those images the logo is too big. I expect the real thing to be the same size as last season.

Perhaps Argyle too were bored rigid with GA84's constant posting and rushed to put something out as quick as possible to stop them. The images certainly have a whiff of 'cobbled together' about them. Shame as it should be a big 'anticipation driver' for the new season.

 

[NJS37]

Get rid of that 'stripe' and we would have a nice kit.

 

[PAFCMatt84]

It's ok and will do the job, the white trim will help for Tuesday night home games.

I don't understand why the release of the first photo of the home kit is not done a lot better and from different angles, I suppose we'll have to wait for the next two days for better photos.

Last year the first glimpse of the all green kit was a photo of Jake Jervis stood in front of green bushes and the green cladding of the outside of the Barn Park End - the new home green shirt revealed in front of the all green of the away end. :facepalm:

The shirts are the identity of the club and a good source of income for the club so the first photos should be better than what we see today and saw last year.

Hopefully the new marketing man will sort out things like this.

I could be completely wrong, but I think it's because of the Ginsters logo. To me it looks photoshopped on, which is relatively easy on a front-on shot, bit more difficult from a side on view.

The Ginsters badge in the picture is missing the 'of Cornwall' tagline present last year too, not sure if that's relevant or not, we know there have been rumours of rebranding or similar on the Ginsters side of things.

 

[Deacster]

Have to say don't like it, looks a bit cheap and busy. However sure it will look better when there's 11 men wearing it and bossing the league!!

 

[Larry David]

Bleddy el! The Ginsters logo takes up about 25% of the shirt! Not very impressive.

 

[Nobby]

The ginsters logo is 100% photoshopped. In a promo photo earlier the badge barely crossed into the white stripe.

The kit itself is OK.

 

[Adam R]

Forget the logo, the more pertinent question is why you can get an XXXXL for the same price as a small yet you get about 5 times the material!?!