The9

That Under Armour logo doesn't look remotely realistic, and the club badge is a cheap copy too. No wonder they blur the logo on their eBay adverts. The supply issues mean there are going to be enough left over that SportsDirect will probably be flogging them off dirt cheap again by Christmas (assuming they get here by then). It's actually working out quite well for me timing-wise in terms of cashflow. The wife bought one of the pink keeper's shirts on eBay, loves it, cheaper than the club shop and barely different design (and as well as being authentic, it's labelled as the UA "sample" it was advertised as, too). Beat the rush in time for her and a mate to wear it in Burnley. I cba to go.

Incredible likeness.

What I don't understand is if they're going to lift directly from the Nike Teamwear catalogue, why they didn't just use this:

Hmm, remember 2014 when Cortese left in JANUARY killing the adidas deal as he went, and we had to scramble to get a kit ready for the following season? This is not a small matter - not to mention that there's nothing actually wrong with the home kit and the away and third are epic anyway. I do expect the tacked-on sponsor to look crap though, because... well, I'm not saying it again.

Training kit looks decent pretty decent, sponsor looks nice on the training kit too. Wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't how the sponsor is put on the away shirt (and maybe a navy version on the third kit). Home kit might still need the surround though. https://southamptonfc.com/news/2019-07-01/video-southampton-squad-return-for-day-one-of-pre-season-testing

Tbf Sunderland got £26m for selling players before last season and it didn't do them much good.

It's in no way spurious to suggest that a sponsor (sic) that wasn't known when the kit was designed wouldn't be involved in the design process. In fact, it would have been entirely impossible.

As the logo is slapped on precisely because we didn't have a sponsor when the shirts were being produced, and the rumour about the delay is because we've had to get the sponsors attached post-production, I'm not holding my breath for a better version when they do eventually get released. Incidentally, with that half-basketball in the LD advert, are we the first Premier League club to feature a ball from a different sport on our sponsor's logo?

Why would you want to give the ball back to the opposition?

It's going to be horrific and is utterly pointless. Good luck to anyone getting a bus at 5pm too.

Apart from when Sports Direct put the away shirt for sale at £25 two weeks after launch and everyone I know bought one. And when Sport Pesa gave one away just for placing a bet with a new account...

It was £90 (minus 10% minus £5 gift voucher) last sesson, and nevertheless so similar to the replicas it wasn't worth the "investment". I can get an actual labelled up matchworn for that.

Nice to see this thread managed without me (and that the first pic I posted turned out to be the actual design albeit with black shoulders). Quite impressed at the 320 responses with nary a mock up... FWIW I like all 3 kits, the shoulder panel is clearly a design feature to stop stripes from two directions colliding, and stop them needing to match the stripes up across different panels of the shirt. The sponsor logo is a bit toss but whatever. Also confused how a photo I took (at West Ham away) of a bloke in a wig and terrible t-shirt made it onto here, seems friends of Facebook friends have been busy. Oh and it was £55 last season too, minus 10% for being an ST holder and with a free £5 gift voucher for buying the other kits. So using those, £44.50, though as Sports Direct are able to sell any UA gear they'll probably undercut the club shop again. That's what I'm waiting for anyway.

A couple of 2018/19 styles in the 2019 kits released so far too, doubt we'll have these designs again: Universidad Catolica: Omiya Ardija (Japan J2 League):

For some reason someone dredged up the 18/19 kit thread and started asking stuff on it, so even though I'm hardly ever on here any more, I may as well kick this off... Things we know: It will have Under Armour logos on it, as part of a 7 year deal signed in 2016. We will have at least two, possibly three kits next season. All of them will be different designs to this season. The VirginMedia shirt sponsorship ends this season. SportsDirect.com and JD have both had this season's Saints kit in sales for months, and SportsDirect are still flogging the 2017/18 shirts too. Current Under Armour 2019 designs - mostly from South America - there's a specific collar type that looks common to them (especially evident in the Estudiantes kit). Estudiantes de la Plata: Fluminense (3rd): Rosario Central:

Dan Nlundulu is back playing for the U23s again so whatever his contract status is, he's got one at the moment: https://southamptonfc.com/news/2019-04-05/u23-report-southampton-fc-norwich-city-premier-league-2 He's had a lot of injuries so I'm guessing the club has offered him to the end of the season at least.

I know of two people who I didn't have a clue were remotely interested in football who went to the match, one who worked with me for 3 years who I spoke to daily who never once mentioned having an interest in football (and I talk about it a lot), and one who... isn't on my friends list any more. In addition I saw football-related posts from a couple of others who I knew were Portsmouth fans circa 2008 but haven't mentioned football for at least 7 years. Anyone in a PO postcode was roped into going.

Two things here - one he wasn't "sacked" by Sky because he didn't have a contract anyway, they're just choosing not to use him, and two, his statement was (ham-fistedly, admittedly) merely asking a question about what is regarded as an acceptable level of abuse and for what subject. He didn't say anything of the subject of pretty much any of the things being accused of him. His point was just to say "what's acceptable and should everything be dealt with in the same way?".

This will be a first then, as I've never seen any club targeted for criticism for sacking a manager with a particular skin colour.

Just to note that our form in the last five games is better than anyone in the bottom half except Palace (and is better than Spurs, Wolves and Watford in the top half too). We played Liverpool, Spurs and Manchester United in those five games. I'm still thinking we're going to come about 13th, don't think we'll catch Palace and will have to win at maybe Newcastle and definitely West Ham to finish above both of them. As it is, losing to Liverpool only moved our most likely placing down 0.2 positions and beating Wolves would move us up 0.9 places. We currently have a 2.5% chance of being relegated. Cardiff are at 88.4%. Of note, a Burnley win v Cardiff barely changes Burnley's 2.8% chance of relegation, but it moves Cardiff to 95.3%. A draw improves Burnley to only 1.2% and drops Cardiff to 91% likely to be relegated, and a Cardiff win still has them at 74.3% likely to go down, but sees Burnley drop to 9.1% likely. Effect on Saints of Burnley win (1.3% less likely to go down) Draw (2.2% less likely to go down) Cardiff win (5% more likely to go down). So whilst the Burnley win seems like the best result, in isolation the draw is still the best result for Saints - this is because of the "lost point", our relegation rivals sharing 2 points instead of 3, so the overall probability still favours us better with the draw. A Saints win against Wolves reduces our likelihood of relegation by 2.2%, a draw with Wolves reduces it by 0.5% and losing to Wolves increases relegation threat by 1.6%. http://www.sportsclubstats.com/England/Premier.html FWIW our percentage chance of finishing in each position from 11th to a relegated 18th is: 2,6,11,16,19,20,23,3 respectively. So we're most likely to finish 17th, but only slightly more likely than to finish in one of 16th, 15th and 14th as well. More than twice as likely to come 17th than 13th, twice as likely to come 12th than 18th, and nearly as likely to come 11th as 18th. Incidentally, 6 straight wins still only gives us a 1% chance of coming 7th. 41% likely to come 10th in that situation.

Considering that booking was what stopped him just chopping down Salah before their second goal I'm going to have to disagree.

I can't see prices changing at all tbh. Ralph bringing back much of the feel-good factor will be this year's justification (and they'll be right, I think we'll sell more next season than for this).

Vestergaard was third choice behind Kjaer and Christensen at the World Cup and for most of last season before we signed him. Whilst I think he's fundamentally decent, nothing he's done this season is going to move him ahead of those two. Why they'd pick Huddersfield's Jorgensen though...

This seems to be a rare occasion when a player's absence isn't leading to everyone thinking he's miles better than he is. FWIW I'd pick pretty much anyone over that overrated clunk-beast Hojbjerg, but Lemina has been WAY too erratic and it's been about 18 months since both he and Saints were good in the same match (he was MoM for us at Cardiff but the rest of the team wasn't up to much). I think I'd probably stick Armstrong in there with Romeu and Ward-Prowse.

I miss Black boots Not having video refs (which are always useless anyway) People calling the division by it's actual name not what it was called 12 years ago Competitiveness "Daylight" in offside decisions that's it.