New kits for next season

[AusTiger]

My bed's fine thanks. Memory Foam.

My underlying point of that of visibility. Perhaps you have 20/20 vision? Not everyone does, but can still see. Near-black against a near-black background does not make for clarity, especially in the dark, with spotlights; rain makes it worse. In my own world I have had to go to all sort of training about the Equality Act (and its predecessors) and ensure that, as a service provider, we provide an equal level of service to non-disabled and disabled alike. Disabled has a legal definition, and it includes sight. Where a provision can be made, it should. That's the law anyway, which I suppose you may consider an ass.

Some one got out the wrong side of the bed! I didn't say you couldn't have your say.

Light green may have been used for many years but dark green will be used for many years too. So in many years to come, people will say that dark green is Tigers traditional colour.

Many years ago when we changed to light green, people probably said that black was our traditional colour so probably made comments about light green, red and white being the wrong colour.

Looks like Tigers and every team have got to change their shirts due to the Equality Act!

Unbelievable!

What is the source for that statement?

[iceman_19]

My bed's fine thanks. Memory Foam.

My underlying point of that of visibility. Perhaps you have 20/20 vision? Not everyone does, but can still see. Near-black against a near-black background does not make for clarity, especially in the dark, with spotlights; rain makes it worse. In my own world I have had to go to all sort of training about the Equality Act (and its predecessors) and ensure that, as a service provider, we provide an equal level of service to non-disabled and disabled alike. Disabled has a legal definition, and it includes sight. Where a provision can be made, it should. That's the law anyway, which I suppose you may consider an ass.

Traditional colour black?

Black may have been an early colour, but grassy green with red and white hoops is the traditional scheme for the majority of the Tigers' history, with either white or black shorts.

I don't doubt for a moment that anything I have to say will have zero influence on anything. And the present green might as well be black for all the difference it makes. Nevertheless, I am allowed my 2.1/2p worth, and I have explained why a more stand-out shade would be helpful, rather than just "I wish we could have the old colours back".

Some one got out the wrong side of the bed! I didn't say you couldn't have your say.

Light green may have been used for many years but dark green will be used for many years too. So in many years to come, people will say that dark green is Tigers traditional colour.

Many years ago when we changed to light green, people probably said that black was our traditional colour so probably made comments about light green, red and white being the wrong colour.

I suspect that you are stretching the Equalities Act a little far there, JWM! I appreciate what you are saying but at the end of the day the club home strip has white and red on it and is far more 'visible' than, say, Exeter, Newcastle, Sale or Wasps. If we go down the route you suggest we will end up with everyone having luminous kits like Saints' away monstrosity. Clubs these days generally have big screens to allow fans without a good view to watch the action a little clearer.

Also, as has already been pointed out, the club now has the darker green as a 'branded' colour because it is more marketable. It is now entrenched in the club - many under 18 will not be able to recall anything different - and our new stands are based on that colour. I don't think asking a club to effectively completely rebrand would constitute a 'reasonable provision'.

[ellis9]

My bed's fine thanks. Memory Foam.

My underlying point of that of visibility. Perhaps you have 20/20 vision? Not everyone does, but can still see. Near-black against a near-black background does not make for clarity, especially in the dark, with spotlights; rain makes it worse. In my own world I have had to go to all sort of training about the Equality Act (and its predecessors) and ensure that, as a service provider, we provide an equal level of service to non-disabled and disabled alike. Disabled has a legal definition, and it includes sight. Where a provision can be made, it should. That's the law anyway, which I suppose you may consider an ass.

Some one got out the wrong side of the bed! I didn't say you couldn't have your say.

Light green may have been used for many years but dark green will be used for many years too. So in many years to come, people will say that dark green is Tigers traditional colour.

Many years ago when we changed to light green, people probably said that black was our traditional colour so probably made comments about light green, red and white being the wrong colour.

I suspect that you are stretching the Equalities Act a little far there, JWM! I appreciate what you are saying but at the end of the day the club home strip has white and red on it and is far more 'visible' than, say, Exeter, Newcastle, Sale or Wasps. If we go down the route you suggest we will end up with everyone having luminous kits like Saints' away monstrosity. Clubs these days generally have big screens to allow fans without a good view to watch the action a little clearer.

Also, as has already been pointed out, the club now has the darker green as a 'branded' colour because it is more marketable. It is now entrenched in the club - many under 18 will not be able to recall anything different - and our new stands are based on that colour. I don't think asking a club to effectively completely rebrand would constitute a 'reasonable provision'.

Anyone under 30 will not recall a lighter green. Wasn't it 1999 the kit changed to a darker green?

[ellis9]

My bed's fine thanks. Memory Foam.

My underlying point of that of visibility. Perhaps you have 20/20 vision? Not everyone does, but can still see. Near-black against a near-black background does not make for clarity, especially in the dark, with spotlights; rain makes it worse. In my own world I have had to go to all sort of training about the Equality Act (and its predecessors) and ensure that, as a service provider, we provide an equal level of service to non-disabled and disabled alike. Disabled has a legal definition, and it includes sight. Where a provision can be made, it should. That's the law anyway, which I suppose you may consider an ass.

Looks like Tigers and every team have got to change their shirts due to the Equality Act!

Unbelievable!

What is the source for that statement?

Read what JWM has written.

Did you not get the sarcasm in my comment?

[Tiger_in_Birmingham]

Anyone under 30 will not recall a lighter green. Wasn't it 1999 the kit changed to a darker green?

I seem to remember it changing to the darker shade when we were sponsored by Vauxhall which google informs me was 1999.

The cynic in me always thought the change of shade was a requirement of the deal - presumably to match a paint colour that Vauxhall offered

[Hot_Charlie]

The cynic in me always thought the change of shade was a requirement of the deal - presumably to match a paint colour that Vauxhall offered

I think it was more a case of looking different. The 1999 shirt was the first departure in many years from the broad green, narrow red, narrow white (repeat) in many years (other than some shirts which had one repetition of the pattern missing red band below the neck/badge area.

The first "designer" shirt.