England football shirts should 'bring people together'

Nike's “playful interpretation” of the St George's cross on England's new football kit has sparked a debate over the nation's identity. Critics have slammed the design as “disrespectful”, but there is a long and literally colorful story behind the fight over England's shirts.

England playing Brazil at Wembley is one of the great sporting events. His two proud footballing powers boast instantly recognizable uniforms. However, developments in recent matches have been dominated by a small cross engraved on the neck of the home team's new kit.

Manufacturer Nike has changed the St. George's cross so that its horizontal bars are a combination of blue and purple instead of the red of the original flag.

Political leaders, including the prime minister and opposition leaders, have also added their voices to the fray, reigniting the passions that regularly erupt whenever the essentially plain white shirt is redesigned.

As the FA pointed out on Friday, the 2010 kit is an example of this and is “not the first time” different colors have been used.

Peter Saville, OBE, who was behind the design, said the Red Cross posed an immediate challenge to him.

Earlier this week, Chancellor Rishi Sunak said the flag was a “source of pride” and “should not be touched”, while Labor leader Keir Starmer said it was a symbol of unity that did not need to be changed. Stated. The FA said this week that the flag “unites and inspires us”.

In 2010, Saville felt decidedly different.

In his eyes, he says, it has come to represent “a particular kind of full-blooded human being, usually at the level of what you might call aggressive patriotism.”

“That was a real problem [for me]'' says the graphic designer who worked on some of Factory Records' most famous covers in the 1980s.

“You can't ignore the fact that it's a national symbol and you quickly find yourself dealing with it. [but] I felt that symbol was alienating and when I saw it I couldn't relate to it.

“However, there is nothing wrong with this symbol. It is not overtly Christian, it is just shaped like a square or a circle.”

He likened the job to creating a new flag for a country that was “bigger in some ways,” given the then-manufacturer Umbro's “colorful white stripes” design brief.

Determined to avoid what he describes as “gratuitous pattern-making”, he instead turned to symbolizing “modern Britain” in a “provocative but positive” way.

To do this, he came up with the idea of ​​using the shape throughout the shirt in different colors.

“Diplomatically speaking, this is a very diverse country,” he said. “I live in a very diverse society.

“I wanted this uniform to belong to everyone because when the national team is playing, the uniform belongs to everyone. No one should be excluded.

“It's interesting that we're talking about it in 2024. I thought it was pretty topical 10 years ago, but it might be even more talked about now.”

Saville's design process was interesting, seeing the national team's famous white shirt as a “special canvas”, but he said he was ultimately disappointed as his concept was “neutralized”. To tell.

“I had no idea how that got to the FA. I remember at one point there was a little bit of negative feedback that I thought was the FA's fault.” [England’s then-manager] Fabio Capello, but who knows if it's from him or not.

“He didn't want too big a cross.” [I was told], so the pattern became smaller and smaller until it ended up just on the shoulder panels. It cannot be viewed on a TV screen.

“It was quite an anticlimax as an experience. I felt like there was going to be some discussion and feedback, but almost no one talked about it. To some extent, almost no one noticed it.”

But among those who discovered it, he says some of the reactions, particularly on internet forums, were “eye-opening” and “vigorous.”

Umbro did not respond to a request for comment on Saville's criticism, but the designer insisted he wanted to express the pride he feels when he sees the diversity of the England team on the field.

“It's cool watching the England team. That's what I wanted to celebrate with this piece, and it's a real shame that it was overshadowed.”

The reaction was even stronger this week when Nike announced its latest England home and away commitments as part of a £400m deal with the FA.

The change kits worn by England's men's, women's and para teams will feature purple for the first time, with the home shirt being advertised as a “modern take on the classic white stripes”.

The use of navy, light blue and purple alongside red on the cross on the back of the shirt's collar was described by Nike as a “playful interpretation” and an attempt at “unity and inspiration”.

However, as with Saville's design, critics branded it “rude” and an example of “virtue signaling”.

The FA defended the kit, saying on Friday: “We are extremely proud of the red and white St George's Cross, the national flag of England. We are proud of what it means to our fans and how it unites us. We understand what's inspiring and that's what will be on display.” Tomorrow, as always, will feature prominently at Wembley, where England take on Brazil. ”

Despite requests, Nike was unable to recommend anyone for an interview in the months leading up to the release of the new kit.

Disagreements over the image and flag of England's national team uniform continue as Leicestershire-based Admirals break with century-old tradition to launch kit with large, distinctive red, white and blue bands below the shoulders This goes back over 40 years.

When the team played an Argentina team featuring a teenage Maradona at Wembley in 1980, BBC commentator Barry Davies dryly said, “England will unveil a new strip tonight.But why? It remains a mystery why England's kit should be in the colors of the Union Jack.”

Initially ridiculed, with Nottingham Forest manager Brian Clough likening it to “one of my mother's old little dogs”, it is now widely regarded as one of the team's best kits.

However, from the mid-90s onwards, the St George's flag became more prominent among supporters in the stands, and from the turn of the 20th century the Red Cross, or elements thereof, began to appear on jerseys.

Though relatively subtle, former Umbro creative director Rob Warner said the company's 2012 home kit, which ditched the use of blue completely, was ironically similarly divisive. says.

“I remember getting more criticism than the previous kits because people said these weren’t the traditional colors of England kits.”

There are strict regulations regarding the use of national symbols on football kits, but Umbro was “very smart in how they incorporated it”, including the shoulder details and stripes, he said. To tell.

But why has the team's latest release caused such a stir?

Warner, co-founder of Spark Design Academy for aspiring kit builders, believes this debate is influenced by the nature of social media and the broader debate that exists in this country. He thinks he lacks confidence.

“It's not necessarily about me, but I get it,” he says.

“This country feels like a completely different place to when I started making kits with Umbro for the London Olympics in 2010.

“Lapel flags are relatively unnoticeable. The St. George's Cross hasn't always been on shirts, and the multicolored cross isn't on people's passports or flying in front of Buckingham Palace.”

But as Admiral and Umbro discover, these storms predate social media and exist in a world where the inferences and implications can be very different.

Despite the criticism, Saville continues to insist that national team uniforms should be “more than just a design act”.

“Some of them are really bad,” he says dismissively of previous efforts. “There are one or two things that I think are 'okay' or 'wrong but right,' but a lot of it is just ugly.

“But this shirt is attracting massive public interest.

“A national team soccer uniform is something people pay attention to and can be something that brings people together.”