Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

New national team kit

Monoethnic Social Club said:
You can't actually by an authentic Socceroos shirt something to do with commercialisation of the coat of arms or something, every fan replica shirt is fake.
Click to expand...
It's incredibly dumb. And it looks hilariously hideous. The old one was okay but I don't see why you don't just save up for a player one on ebay or marketplace instead of buying each new one
 
The FFA rebrand of 2017...? has to be the worst in Australian sport. Luckily the A-League changed their badge since but it's not much of an improvement
 
Monoethnic Social Club said:
You can't actually by an authentic Socceroos shirt something to do with commercialisation of the coat of arms or something, every fan replica shirt is fake.
Click to expand...

As the crest is the coat of arms it cannot be worn unless representing the country, and not worn alongside sponsorship logos. Thus why the logo is altered on all Australian kits of all sports to make supporter versions.

The below quote is taken from

The Use of the Coat of Arms
Armed with national pride
A report of the inquiry into the use of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
December 1994

3.3.7 The Committee considers that in principle the Coat of Arms should be available for use on the uniforms of national representative sportspersons. The Committee also notes that there has been an increasing trend for national sportspersons to wear the names of sponsors on their playing clothes. The Coat of Arms must not be compromised by the placement or character of a sponsors name or symbol on the same article of clothing. A suitable place to display the Coat of Arms would be a blazer, or similar non playing item of clothing. The playing clothes of national representative sportspersons are not appropriate for the display of the Arms. The Committee also considers that souvenir clothing produced for sale by sporting teams is not an appropriate use of the Coat of Arms. The Committee makes a recommendation on this matter at paragraph 4.8.5.

4.8.5 The Committee considers that the dignity and status of the Coat of Arms are matters that should be expressly addressed in the assessment of an application for national representative sports bodies to use the Arms.

- Recommendation 10
The Committee recommends that in exercising his or her discretion in relation to permitting the use of the Coat of Arms tor national representative sporting bodies, the Minister for Administrative Services take account of the need to protect the dignity and status of the Arms as a national symbol by restricting such use to dress uniforms or their equivalent and by disallowing the use of the Arms where the placement or content of other signs or symbols are not in keeping with the dignity of the Coat of Arms.
Click to expand...
 
craegus said:
As the crest is the coat of arms it cannot be worn unless representing the country, and not worn alongside sponsorship logos. Thus why the logo is altered on all Australian kits of all sports to make supporter versions.

The below quote is taken from

The Use of the Coat of Arms
Armed with national pride
A report of the inquiry into the use of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
December 1994
Click to expand...
Thats ON Football Australia NOT having a logo strong enough to be worn by our national teams AND supporters like other sports manage to do... a Massive failure in my mind.

1768429260078.png 1768429332962.png
 
Monoethnic Social Club said:
Thats ON Football Australia NOT having a logo strong enough to be worn by our national teams AND supporters like other sports manage to do... a Massive failure in my mind.

View attachment 5006 View attachment 5007
Click to expand...

Cricket changed their logo to avoid the issue, and Rugby has to place a ball over the coat of arms on replicas. There is no chance that replicas will ever have the actual coat of arms on the jerseys, no matter how strong they are.

And unlike other countries who may wear their national association logo on their kits across different sports, Australia's tradition is to wear the coat of arms, and is a massive level of pride for people to be able to wear it on their uniforms. So it has nothing again to do with a logo being strong enough to be worn by the national teams, it is a sense of national pride to wear the symbol of the nation over a random association/organisation logo. Granted cricket made the change to a unique style of the coat of arms, but they had a different history of logos on shirts compared to other sports.

I do agree though that Football Australia does need a stronger logo, the current one is just weak, but then again most of their logos are (A-League included).
 
craegus said:
Cricket changed their logo to avoid the issue, and Rugby has to place a ball over the coat of arms on replicas. There is no chance that replicas will ever have the actual coat of arms on the jerseys, no matter how strong they are.

And unlike other countries who may wear their national association logo on their kits across different sports, Australia's tradition is to wear the coat of arms, and is a massive level of pride for people to be able to wear it on their uniforms. So it has nothing again to do with a logo being strong enough to be worn by the national teams, it is a sense of national pride to wear the symbol of the nation over a random association/organisation logo. Granted cricket made the change to a unique style of the coat of arms, but they had a different history of logos on shirts compared to other sports.

I do agree though that Football Australia does need a stronger logo, the current one is just weak, but then again most of their logos are (A-League included).
Click to expand...
Yes, we used to go the rugby approach (ball over the shield) until mid 2010’s I believe, and then that changed to using the FFA ribbon ball in place of the shield/ball, until the new triple ribbon ball took its place when introduced as the new FA logo.

Our approach is essentially the same as Cricket Australia’s - in the sense the Federation Shield (an Escutcheon, but I prefer to use Federation Shield) from the coat of arms is replaced with the logo of the sporting body to circumvent and meet the requirements of the legislation.
 
craegus said:
Cricket changed their logo to avoid the issue, and Rugby has to place a ball over the coat of arms on replicas. There is no chance that replicas will ever have the actual coat of arms on the jerseys, no matter how strong they are.

And unlike other countries who may wear their national association logo on their kits across different sports, Australia's tradition is to wear the coat of arms, and is a massive level of pride for people to be able to wear it on their uniforms. So it has nothing again to do with a logo being strong enough to be worn by the national teams, it is a sense of national pride to wear the symbol of the nation over a random association/organisation logo. Granted cricket made the change to a unique style of the coat of arms, but they had a different history of logos on shirts compared to other sports.

I do agree though that Football Australia does need a stronger logo, the current one is just weak, but then again most of their logos are (A-League included).
Click to expand...
In 2004-'05 you might remember the FFA logo was featured on one of the NT kit's sleeves(the right-hand side, IIRC), in addition to the coat-of-arms on the chest. That was discontinued w/the kit used at Germany '06, and hasn't featured anywhere on an NT kit since.

Personally I'd like to see it brought back, as it adds a touch of distinctiveness ie. along other countries' NTs who also use their national-FAs' logo alongside their coat-of-arms and/or flag.
 
BA81 said:
In 2004-'05 you might remember the FFA logo was featured on one of the NT kit's sleeves(the right-hand side, IIRC), in addition to the coat-of-arms on the chest. That was discontinued w/the kit used at Germany '06, and hasn't featured anywhere on an NT kit since.

Personally I'd like to see it brought back, as it adds a touch of distinctiveness ie. along other countries' NTs who also use their national-FAs' logo alongside their coat-of-arms and/or flag.
Click to expand...
Have a look at what Spain do actually - I’m not sure what laws they have in place regarding selling items with the coat of arms, but their national kit has the coat of arms rather than the RFEF logo (and I believe used to until around the same time as you mentioned the FFA logo on the sleeve, did the same thing)
 
craegus said:
Cricket changed their logo to avoid the issue, and Rugby has to place a ball over the coat of arms on replicas. There is no chance that replicas will ever have the actual coat of arms on the jerseys, no matter how strong they are.

And unlike other countries who may wear their national association logo on their kits across different sports, Australia's tradition is to wear the coat of arms, and is a massive level of pride for people to be able to wear it on their uniforms. So it has nothing again to do with a logo being strong enough to be worn by the national teams, it is a sense of national pride to wear the symbol of the nation over a random association/organisation logo. Granted cricket made the change to a unique style of the coat of arms, but they had a different history of logos on shirts compared to other sports.

I do agree though that Football Australia does need a stronger logo, the current one is just weak, but then again most of their logos are (A-League included).
Click to expand...
The replica jerseys for the Socceroos used to have the coat of arms with a football on the shield in the middle, like the rugby jersey. The 2006 replica kit was like that.
 
Monoethnic Social Club said:
Thats ON Football Australia NOT having a logo strong enough to be worn by our national teams AND supporters like other sports manage to do... a Massive failure in my mind.

View attachment 5006 View attachment 5007
Click to expand...
I like that the jersey has the coat of arms. I think it would be a source of pride for an Australian representative to have a jersey with the coat of arms. Consequently I don’t have an issue with the replica jerseys not having it.
 
NicCarBel said:
I believe you’re correct with Scotland there - I’d assume they’d have been given the same leniency as Australia (but the leniency would have been for Umbro specifically)
Click to expand...
Scotland only started with Umbro on the shirts in May 1974, this lasted until 1990, when they went with Fila. They were actually with Umbro from the early sixties, just not on the shirt as i think it was not allowed at that time.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top