Admittedly my eyesight isn't the best but was I the only one confused by the similarities of the two kits yesterday? As it happened most of the game took place at the north end of the pitch and I sit at the south end so a lot of it was (maybe thankfully) pretty distant.

If it's only me I'll shut up about it but I can't understand why either Saints didn't wear their home kit or us our away one. Even having one of the teams in white shorts would have helped.

Opinions?

I think its pretty much a given that a team will wear their "change kit" in any away match where the change kit doesn't interfere with the home team's kit. Yes, I know that sounds a rather bizarre point, but think about it a bit and I think you'll think it true.

Hull KR wore an away kit at the Stoop, and any time our white backed away shirt clashed with a home teams kit, we wore our first choice colours. When we played at Hull KR - we wore our home kit because our away colours are predominently white, which matches HKR's colours.

Yes, I know it's true. My point is that, to me, the two kits did clash.
Right, so why didn't Saints wear their home kit yesterday?

Erm...I dunno.



Perhaps their red V might have clashed with our magenta coloured quarter...

You must have wasted a large amount of money going to games with eyesight that poor.
Mine is not perfect but sat in back of the North stand I saw the teams pefectly.
Perhaps you were confusing the Quins team with the workmen drinking tea on the side!!!

I don't think I was ever unable to distinguish between the two kits, but it was completely pointless Saints wearing their change kit and it certainly created a near clash.

Our home kit is predominantly black, theirs is predominantly white - so they change to dark green shirts with black shorts & socks. Stupid and completely pointless. Like most change kits, including ours, it's a horrible looking kit too. I can't understand why people buy these away replica shirts that change every season.

It was the same when we played Hull KR - a team with a predominantly white home kit turns up wearing a dark grey & orange monstrosity that looks like its been cobbled together from offcuts of hi-viz jackets and German Army uniforms. Perhaps this passes for cutting-edge fashion in East Hull?

I'd like to see all clubs sticking to their normal colours unless absolutely necessary, and it would be prefereable if change kits also incorporated the traditional club colours as seems to be the case in the NRL. Those big square numbers on NRL kits that are clearly legible (instead of italic numbers in a silly font with the SL logo superimposed on them to make them even more difficult to distinguish) wouldn't go amiss either.

Add that to the list of why people dont go to the Stoop- kits not fashionable enough, numbers in the wrong font and green and black colour clashes- Action please CEO-We will get the perfect day- I can see it coming

because they were away..

Thought the Saints players blended in very nicely with the grass.

And there was me thinking that the South End was now a building site and not being used for spectators. Easy to be confused at Quins

I presume you were stood here







[url=http://img189.imageshack.us/my.php?image=quins5.jpg[/url











Well you did say the South End

Football seems to be able to get it right. There are either clear rules or guidelines on kit to avoid colour clashes in socks, shorts and tops. Sometimes teams are forced to wear shorts or socks that aren't from their secondor third strip. This is probably to help officials on whose hand or foot it was touching the ball but also to enable clarity to a television audience.

Why the rfl can't be bothered to bring in a rule to ensure some clarity is beyond me. You see it rather too often on tv where both teams end up in similar kit when they do have another choice but for some reason don't take it.

Bizarre reasons such as its their away kit or such like is a rather poor excuse. The purpose of the 'away' strip was a change of colours if both teams shared a similar colour scheme. Saints didn't so why they thought a green kit with shorts and socks the same colours as Quins was a suitable choice. Crass marketing or deliberately trying to confuse the officials.

[url=http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=quins2.jpg[/url

I don't see how the blue and claret could possibly be similar to the green but maybe that's why Quins lost!!

[url=http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=quins2.jpg[/url

Saints in Green - Quins not same Simple!!! Even socks not same Teams not have same name go compare!!!!

I thought the primary motivation was to double shirt sales to fans.

Any color clash was because of the RFL rules, they insist on the away team playing in away colors. I,m sure St Helens would have preferred to play in the home strip.

Was it sunny yesterday?

I think you will find the responsibility is with the home team.

So Quins requested that Saints turn out in something resembling military camouflage?

The bottom line is that clubs such as Saints, Wigan, the two Hull clubs etc. traditionally have smart, instantly identifiable shirts. If you see a picture of one of their players in their home shirt you don’t need a caption to tell you which club he’s playing for. I think that’s great, and I like seeing these clubs run out at the Stoop in these colours. I just think it’s a genuine shame when they switch to meaningless nondescript change colours for no good reason other than to plug these replicas to their own travelling support. It was also noticeable that very few of the visiting fans on Saturday were wearing the green replica. The North Stand was a sea of white & red. (Although I myself unwittingly turned up in a dark green T shirt!)

"I just think it’s a genuine shame when they switch to meaningless nondescript change colours for no good reason other than to plug these replicas to their own travelling support."

not so... I think you'll find that the RFL list what colours each team is playing each week and match the ref and his team's colours against them.
The refs team were clearly in white.
This is normal practice for all prof league football/rugby

That's correct, the RFL do that, and have managed to stuff it up many times this season already. In my own experience alone:
- Hull KR wore dark grey shirts/shorts/socks away to Celtic, who play in black shirts/shorts/socks
- Rovers wore the same strip away to Hull, who also predominantly play in black.
- Quins turned up for the away match at Rovers in the as-stipulated-by-the-RFL mainly white away kit, to play a KR team whose home kit is also mainly white. Rovers agreed to wear their own away kit (at home!) at the last minute because it was on telly and would have been even more of a joke than usual... but then because the Refs had brought an orange kit (not expecting Rovers to be in grey and orange) you even saw Dobson pass the ball to the ref at one point, eventually leading to a Quins try.

The relevant department really needs to get their act in order on this one, it is amateurish.

This is just too daft for words. The RFL obviously hasn't learned from that farcical televised match between Hull and Bradford a year or two ago, when both teams wore black & white kits.

I don't suppose that there's any possibility of you giving a straightforward answer to a question is there?

As you're apparently unable to understand, I'll try to make it a bit clearer for you: "I sit at the south end of the =redEast Stand." That OK for you? Now how about answering the question?

If the question is-Was there a colour clash between green tops and black tops with 4 other colours on the front other than green, on a sunny day in Jul the answer for me is No.

At no time could I not distinguish between Quins players, Saints players and the referee or his assistants.