150th Anniversary kit/celebrations

[Proudtobeblue&white]

The club continue to treat the fan base with contempt.

[Herbie6590]

2 hours ago, J*B said:

How quickly can you turn around a white kit with a blue maltese cross, with a 135/15 logo on the inside, sold with an independent assessment of the last 15 years of Venkys ownership, at less than £90?

I notice rumoured 150th anniversary kit has no trademarked items on it. 

About 8-10 weeks…

[Herbie6590]

2 hours ago, ... said:

I'd of accepted a quartered shirt with a Maltese cross

Me too

[...]

1 minute ago, Herbie6590 said:

About 8-10 weeks…

With WWVO embroidered on the nape

[...]

8 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

Me too

Blue n White.

That's our identity. 

Honestly dont care for a white one whether it be our first or not. Our closest link with the here and now is  to the gentleman in the earliest photo above in Blue and White. 

The Maltese cross can still be linked to us because they wore it, doesn't matter how they came to wear it Individually, it's still an emblem of our infancy whether it was meant to be or not,  it was there and its there in Black and white print

 

Edited 3 hours ago by ...

[RevidgeBlue]

3 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

Me too

Not sure why we just didnt go with that first known strip.

Would have been sufficiently unique with the design, the Maltese Cross and the small numbers on the front of the shirt underneath the cross.

Some beauties slightly later on and in the early 1900's as well.

[jim mk2]

2 hours ago, ... said:

I'd of accepted a quartered shirt with a Maltese cross

They're halves

[Upside Down]

2 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It's evidence that a motion might have been passed at some point It's not evidence that we ever actually  wore the kit.

It's a bit like convicting someone of murder on the basis that they said they were going to do it 12 months previously with zero actual evidence they eventually followed up on the threat.

In any event, even if we did start  in a white kit, we know we did swap to blue and white halves so it seems the founders must not have liked the white and swapped to the blue and white halves as a nod to their old school colours. We dont know if we played in a white kit at all, for a week, a month, a season, or just as a temporary measure because the blue and white ones weren't ready.

We do know we were in blue and white halves by 1898 and of course they could have been in use for some time prior to that so if the white shirt ever existed at all, it must have proved unpopular (with the founders) and been an extremely short lived thing.

But hey, let's use it as an anniversary shirt 150 years later.

This is spot on. 

We're the only club in the world that plays in our colours. 

What is so funny about this is that they've literally taken that shit mock up on that football shirt website and just given it to the manufacturer and said "here you go, just make something like this".

The complete lack of effort put into this perfectly sums up this regime. 

A perfect celebration for 15 years of venky FC.

Blackburn Rovers F.C. 1875-2010 R.I.P.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 minute ago, jim mk2 said:

They're halves

(Opens can of worms) 🤣

Id agree with that. Bristol Rovers are quarters not eights.

[rigger]

30 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

They're halves

The team I have supported since 1969 in my mind play in blue and white halves, but if anyone wants to call them quarters, fine by me.

[Upside Down]

Technically it's a quartered shirt as the shirt is split into four panels but more commonly it is referred to as halves as the focus is always the front.

It seems that quarters was used quite frequently as the description in the 1800s and changed somewhere along the way to halves.

[...]

Interesting piece on 1800s football kits

https://www.pendlesportswear.co.uk/blog/football-kit-design-1880s-90s/?srsltid=AfmBOoour5zUDJQ0sV7NKyqaGPOZoWj8rLnzUhJIZCTNLiKhO27jienh

 

 

I suggested this earlier today on wearing white😃 (rather proud of my own logic 😃😃😃) only just found this article too

 

Edited 1 hour ago by ...

[Exiled in Toronto Mk2]

6 hours ago, CheshireRover said:

I personally have always liked the connection to the Maltese cross, and have often said the club should do more to play on that heritage. It was (almost certainly) the first badge worn by players representing the club during a Blackburn Rovers fixture, whether every player wore it is clearly up for debate, but nevertheless the club should've done more with that history sooner.

I think from the perspective of a (former) marketing professional, whoever was the ultimate decision maker on this project has opted to use it because it seems the most historic externally, IE to someone who isn't a Rovers fan, because it's a very ancient symbol that really isn't used that much in the modern day - maybe it is in Malta but that aside. 

I can see the logic of the white kit, and I think objectively it's a nice idea - it does exactly what it says and reflects the original kit we had 150 years ago as far as the records currently state. Does it truly represent Blackburn Rovers, our town or our history? Probably not, it should've been blue and white and probably included the town badge - but as Gary Aspden found out, it's not always easy to get the necessary permissions to use the town name in branding (the Adidas Blackburn trainers) so I presume the same is the truth for the badge, and as we know they don't like to do anything that requires hard work down at Ewood.

I'll still buy it, assuming it's ever put on sale, because in 15, 20, 25 years it'll represent to me 150 years of Rovers' existence, hopefully by then that lot will be gone and the anniversary celebrations won't be quite as underwhelming!

I (as another former marketing professional) agree. 

The 150th anniversary is the anniversary of our founding, not of all the bits inbetween. It’s a celebration of what happened 150 years ago, just like a wedding anniversary is a celebration of the wedding day. If, to pick a completely random example 🙄, the groom had a moustache at the wedding 40 years ago but shaved it off a couple of years later, looks better without it and virtually everyone only knows him without it, that wouldn’t justify airbrushing it out of the wedding photo reprinted for the occasion.