Ive always wondered. Replica kits.... Are the kits the players wear more better quality, stronger etc ?? or are they the same, and do they just get them when they want from the City Store ?

of course there different have you ever wore the blue kit for more than an hour uncomfy as fuck never mind playing init

I think some r i remember having the old orange kappa goalie top and it never had ne padding in it yet weavers did.

I hope not for £40

The real kits are made with different materials.
Everything is different on the real kits. The stitching especially. Its also heavier too that the replica kit.

Right.

I can give you the definitive answer. And part of it is that it depends on the manufacturer. I've had loads of players shirts over the years and had quite a large collection before I sold most of them fairly recently.

Not sure how far you want to go back, but I'll go back to the early 1980s with Umbro. At those times, it was easy to know which was the replica and which was the players shirt because on the players shirts, the badges were embroidered and the shirt itself was made out of a different fabric, and had a sort of fleecy inside. They were thicker than the replica shirts which only had heat applied badges on. Even before that time, the players shirts had embroidered badges and the replicas had a sewn on badge. Whilst we were with Umbro there were always these differences to the players shirts. In the early 1990s they started doing replica shirts with embroidered badges, although it was a low quality embroidery, whereas the player shirts had a thicker, better quality embroidery. The replicas still had heat applied Umbro logos. If you remember the purple shirt with thin white stripes, that was one of my favourite player shirts I had, because not only was it long sleeved (and you could never get long sleeved replicas, after the 1980s that is) but the collar was 2 piece, the back had a plain section without stripes for the name and number, and it was double stitched on the shoulders. These kind of differences were apparent until we left Umbro and went to Kappa, where the "replica" shirts became almost the same as the player shirts. The blue home and white away Kappa players shirts were identical to the replicas, but there was a yellow third shirt which wasn't available as a replica, and these bring good money nowadays owing to their rarity. Also, the Wembley, striped citrus and navy shirt was a heavier fabric than the replicas. Most of the player shirts in the Kappa days were XXL too. As the previous poster says, the goalkeeper shirts were different in that they had padding on the shoulders and arms, whilst replica GK shirts didn't.

When we moved to Le Coq Sportif first time round, there were no differences between replica shirts and players shirts, apart from that on some shirts, you couldn't get long sleeves in the main, apart from at the end of the season, when the shop sold a few off which Les Chapman ended up not using.

The Reebok replica shirts were identical to the players shirts, with one or two exceptions. In the shadow striped First Advice shirt, only the label would have identified a players shirt as it said T0304 or P0304 if it was a players shirt, and R0304 if it was the replica version. I couldn't find any other differences on these shirts. The same was true of long sleeved versions. Not generally available, but sometimes the last few of Les's were sold off. One of the best examples of this was the long sleeved red and black with the Thomas Cook logo, which were never available to buy but a few XL long sleeved versions went into the shop.

When we went back to Le Coq Sportif, again the players shirts were identical to the shop sold ones. The only other differences have been the size and quality of the names, numbers, and Premier League badges and whilst the shop puts smaller, plasticy names number and badges, the players shirts have a larger felty type lettering and badge. You can still get these from certain suppliers anyway.

Now we're with Umbro again, it remains to be seen if there will be any differences between player shirts and replica shirts, but I'd hazard a guess that they will be the same. If you notice nowadays, you'll find that part of the sales pitch for new kit is the fabric performance which is there for the players benefit in the main.

You often seen "Match worn" or "Player issued" shirts on eBay, and if it's an old Umbro one, you can definately tell if it is or not, whereas the later ones, from Kappa onwards, with a few exceptions if you know what you're looking for, you could easily make up a replica and say it was match worn. That's why these later shirts are not nearly as valuable as the old Umbro ones.

Thanks for such a detailed and definitive response!

From what I've heard of the quality of the new kits they sound like they will probably be the same as what the players wear...

i always wondered why in the second stint we had with Le Coq that in the first season the goalkeepers Le Coq logo on the player 'official shirts' was visible top of the left chest yet the replica goalkeeper had a different version without the logo upper chest

did they ever sell the same kit or stick with the different version?





????

So this last seasons were identical to the player worn ones then? Bloody hell, the home shirt is by far THE most uncomfortable replica shirt I've ever worn! Itches like buggery after about 20 minutes, especially in warm Arizona weather. Black and red away shirt is fine though. Funny that.

Yes, the player shirts and the replicas from last season were the same material. Which is why I reckon most players wore an under-armour layer, to avoid the dreaded destroyed nipple when playing.