Best/Worst Home shirt since 2000 - Poll

[Whitechapel Owl]

[Ellis Rimmer]

7 and 4 for me. Though 4s problem is more the fit and material than the design. 7 is a beautiful shirt.

[Whitechapel Owl]

2 minutes ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

7 and 4 for me. Though 4s problem is more the fit and material than the design. 7 is a beautiful shirt.

 

Yeah, 4 was awful, fitted like a tent. 

Number 1 was a really nicely made shirt just a shame it had the big Chupa Chups logo on it. 

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

For me, 7 was the best and 12 was the worst, although it had some stiff competition from 4, 12 and 9.

[Ellis Rimmer]

When you look at all these shirts together, again the thing that lets this seasons shirt down is the all blue sleeves, such a faux pas in a Wednesday shirt, really quite ruins what could have rivalled 7 for me

[0wl18]

I thought last years was a lovely kit. Shame it’s synonymous with relegation.

 

7 was our best kit though. Had some reyt units wearing it as well. 

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

I loved 13, too - as a nod to some of our historical kits for our 150th anniversary, I thought it was great.

 

It got a lot of stick at the time, coming straight off the back of 12.. In hindsight, I wonder if some of the negativity towards it has dwindled now that it's clear the stripes weren't being ditched?

[fudge27]

13 is a very underrated kit imo

[HullOwlPhil]

I detest number 4, it's absolutely rank.

[0wl18]

1 minute ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

I loved 13, too - as a nod to some of our historical kits for our 150th anniversary, I thought it was great.

 

It got a lot of stick at the time, coming straight off the back of 12.. In hindsight, I wonder if some of the negativity towards it has dwindled now that it's clear the stripes weren't being ditched?

I think the design is lovely. Has the modern retro feel. Hindsight as you say, is a wonderful thing.

[apswfcowl]

4 was just an awful shirt. Poor quality and horrible design. The front is bad and the back is even worse.

 

Far worse than 12 and 13. 12 still had stripes and was good quality, 13 was an Anniversary kit so a historical design.

 

Have number 7 without a sponsor and still love it. Good fit and design. Also associated with a successful season too which is unusual!

[Onge]

Children's hospital one is the best - classy "sponsor", proper stripes and proper badge.

 

The pinstripe monstrosity of 16/17 is easily the worst, followed by the Ipswich shirt that followed.

[lt109]

i went 6 best didn't mind 8 or 16 either 12 worst

[mogbad]

Best 6

Worst 12

[ruscol85]

3 best

9 worst

[helmut_rooster]

39 minutes ago, Whitechapel Owl said:

 

Yeah, 4 was awful, fitted like a tent. 

Number 1 was a really nicely made shirt just a shame it had the big Chupa Chups logo on it. 

 

Think 4 design was nice it's just made from 2nd hand shït roll or summat, utter turd like  quality.

[Pablo Bonvin]

It’s a shame many of those kits are lumbered with sponsors like Channers and Napoleons and bloody Azerbaijan. Could never vote for those as the best one no matter how nice the kit underneath might have been.

[FAT OWL]

I seem to be with the majority, which always suprises me when it happens. 7 & 12 for me.

Whats really a suprise is how good the new shirt looks compared to some of the others from the last 20 years. But it would look so much better with the stylised Owl (and no shield), mirroring the Bukta logo (IMHO of course)

[onslow]

A surprising lack of black trim. I thought it was generally more prevalent over the years

[Belfast Owl 2]

7 for best

 

The Ipswich kit for worst