Manchester City unveil brand new 2025/26 away shirt
City and PUMA have launched their latest edition in what is described as a 'tribute to the early Cityzens', in an all-black design that takes inspiration from the Club's oldest-known kit, combined with metallic details to celebrate the timeless essence of Manchester City.
Manchester City's earliest known kit dates back to 1884, when the football Club was based in Gorton, and an iconic kit has now been 'brought to life with a slick new design that honours the Club's origins'.
Manchester City and PUMA say of their newest design, 'The design merges classic and contemporary, with the stylish all-black look taking inspiration from the historic kit, complemented by a traditional collar with a white trim.
'The metallic crest and silver details add a unique contrast to the black base, giving the kit a stunning aesthetic and creating a truly special Away jersey.'
Photo: Manchester City
YOU CAN !
Speaking on the kit, Marco Mueller, PUMA's Senior Director of Product Line Management Teamsport Apparel, said: 'Reimagining Manchester City's oldest-known kit was a special honour for us, not many people would know that black was the original colour of the Club, and we love to celebrate the culture and identity of our Clubs and what sets them apart.
'Being able to bring an all-black kit was exciting and gave us the opportunity to do something new with the Away jersey. Another first is that this is the first time PUMA has ever shot a campaign fully in black and white which really ties in beautifully to the design of the kit.'
Nuria Tarre, Chief Marketing & Fan Experience Officer for City Football Group said: 'We are delighted to unveil this season's Away kit to fans for the first time – a powerful tribute to our earliest-known kit, when the Club was based in Gorton, Manchester.
'The striking all-black design is a fresh take on a traditional kit with a sleek, contemporary edge. Our fans have always had a deep appreciation for kits that honour the Club's history, and this kit does exactly that.
'It's a bold expression of our identity that we hope will soon become a favourite amongst our passionate fanbase.'
Photo: Manchester City
YOU CAN !
Manchester City have also confirmed that their brand new Away kit will make its debut on pitch when Pep Guardiola's side play Palermo at the Renzo Barbera Stadium on Saturday 9 August in a pre-season friendly.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If not Sesko: 75-goal Premier League hero ‘feels the time is right' to make the move to Old Trafford
In the event Manchester United fail to get a deal over the line for Benjamin Sesko, Ollie Watkins is waiting in the wings ready to lead Ruben Amorim's frontline. According to a new report from The Sun, the Aston Villa talisman 'feels the time is right' to pull the curtains on his five-year stay in the West Midlands and embark on a new venture with the 20-time champions, having been made aware of their interest last month. Ollie Watkins and United: What's been said so far? Watkins has consistently been one of the division's standout performers. (Photo by) Watkins had been added to United's shortlist after they missed out on Liam Delap and Viktor Gyokeres, with INEOS desperate to revitalise Ruben Amorim's misfiring attack after a campaign in which the side netted only 44 Premier League goals. The England international posed as an ideal candidate. His track record in the English top flight (75 goals and 36 assists in 184 appearances) speaks for itself, while he also boasts a wealth of experience that could transform the current disjointed attacking contingent. Over the last week, reports have emerged suggesting Watkins is actually Amorim's first-choice striker target, whereas director of recruitment – and former Red Bull chief – Christopher Vivell is pushing for the club's acquisition of Benjamin Sesko, whom he scouted for RB Salzburg when the player was just 16 years old. INEOS prioritise Benjamin Sesko coup As a result, United submitted their opening bid, worth a total of £73.8 million, to Leipzig on Tuesday. They are neck and neck with Newcastle United in the race, but are of the belief that Sesko is favouring a move to Old Trafford over St. James' Park. Some fans have raised concerns over the 22-year-old's suitability for the current setup, given he is being brought in as a direct replacement for Rasmus Hojlund. Yet, Sesko's record looks incredibly similar to that of Hojlund's at Atalanta prior to his United switch. More Stories / Latest News If not Sesko: 75-goal Premier League hero 'feels the time is right' to make the move to Old Trafford Aug 6 2025, 7:00 United reject offers from three PL clubs for formerly-exiled Red, he's now set to sign a new contract Aug 6 2025, 6:15 Sky Sports: 'Verbal agreement reached' in Benjamin Sesko transfer saga after Man Utd make first bid Aug 5 2025, 14:32
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Brentford Forward Returns To Training as Transfer Talks with Newcastle Continue
Brentford Reintegrate Wissa Amid Transfer Tensions Yoane Wissa returned to Brentford training this week, a development confirmed by the club via a post on X. For Brentford fans, the sight of Wissa back in the fold offers reassurance, though it comes laced with intrigue and uncertainty. Wissa's Return After Missed Friendly Brentford's squad was granted Monday off following their 1-0 pre-season friendly win against QPR at Loftus Road. Notably absent from the matchday squad was Wissa, who, according to head coach Keith Andrews, 'was not quite ready' for selection. His absence came after he missed parts of Brentford's pre-season training camp in Portugal due to ongoing discussions about his future. Despite that disruption, Andrews clarified that Wissa had resumed training late last week ahead of the QPR fixture and is expected to continue integrating fully this week. The forward's reintegration comes at a crucial time as the club navigates the final weeks of the transfer window with more questions than answers. Newcastle Interest Fuels Unrest Wissa is reportedly keen on a move to Newcastle, a desire that has introduced tension into his relationship with Brentford. The West London club, however, remain resistant. Having already sanctioned the £71 million sale of Bryan Mbeumo to Manchester United earlier this summer, Brentford are reluctant to lose another key attacking figure without securing a replacement. It is widely reported that Brentford have no immediate intention of selling Wissa, prioritising squad stability over short-term gain. This impasse may not hold indefinitely; the club could revisit their stance later in the window should a suitable replacement be acquired. Transfer Plans Hinge on Reinforcements Brentford's refusal to part with Wissa now is rooted in pragmatic squad planning. The club have yet to replace Mbeumo, whose departure left a sizeable hole in the attacking third. Omari Hutchinson has emerged as Brentford's primary target to fill that void, but no deal has been completed. Beyond Hutchinson, Brentford are also active in the market for another forward, underscoring the urgency to bolster their attacking options before entertaining any bids for Wissa. Their cautious approach highlights a broader trend among Premier League clubs: the need to manage player ambition with squad depth, particularly when European qualification ambitions hang in the balance. Wissa's return to training may quell immediate concerns, but the story is far from over. For now, Brentford have their forward back on the pitch, but whether he remains there beyond August remains uncertain.
New York Times
5 minutes ago
- New York Times
How Manchester United can afford to spend big on Benjamin Sesko and explore more signings
Manchester United fans have a favoured refrain, often given prominence during leaner times, one which ends with the view they're 'never ignored'. It is a maxim proving true this summer. On the back of their worst domestic showing in half a century, with no European football on the horizon, staff numbers being scythed and, just five months ago, an owner claiming the club would have gone 'bust at Christmas' without cost-cutting measures, one might have expected a quiet transfer summer at Old Trafford. Advertisement No chance. Only two new faces have arrived so far, though Matheus Cunha and Bryan Mbeumo cost a combined £127.5million ($169.5m) in guaranteed transfer fees alone. Even with that spend and without permanent departures — though Marcus Rashford's loan to Barcelona does have a purchase option — United's name continues to crop up frequently in high-profile transfer discussions. For all their recent malaise, they remain one of the preeminent clubs in world football, at least off the pitch. The latest move they are working on is for RB Leipzig's Benjamin Sesko. The Athletic revealed on 30 July that the Slovenian striker is viewed as a priority signing by United's decision-makers. Like Cunha and Mbeumo before him, Sesko wouldn't come cheap. After Newcastle United sent an improved bid to Leipzig on Monday, Manchester United followed up with their opening bid on Tuesday of €75million plus €10m in add-ons and believe the player wants to join them. That Manchester United are able to commit so much money to deals this summer might perplex some. As well as up front, the club have been considering their options in midfield — and in goal too, even as current first-choice keeper Andre Onana is expected to stay put. At the same time, for all the talk of outgoings, nobody has yet been sold for any money this summer. Naturally, the question arises of how United can be so active. Even against a backdrop of tightening finances, United really can and are pondering more big spending. We say more not just because of Cunha and Mbeumo, but because of what has come before. Indeed, it is that 'before' which led Ratcliffe to bemoan, as recently as March, United still having sizeable instalments to pay on transfers long since inked. Cunha's signing was confirmed before United's June 30 year-end, meaning the £71.3m total cost of signing him, per the club's third-quarter financial report, fell into 2024-25 for accounting purposes. Alongside the £272.1m spent in the nine months to 31 March, that took United's outlay on player registrations last season to a staggering £343.5m — the third highest single-season mark in English football history (though Liverpool may soon bump them to fourth). It's United's highest-ever single-season spend, though hardly out of character. They've spent more than £200m on new signings in each of the past three seasons, recouping comparatively little in return on sales. The £66.3m earned last season, per that third-quarter report, was United's second-highest player sales figure in the past decade; they still spent a record £277m net last season. Advertisement That includes Cunha, so this season's spend is lower than if we look at a transfer window basis. But still. The sums United have spent in recent years are huge, have contributed directly to the financial woes Ratcliffe aired earlier this year and, correspondingly, the huge ongoing job cuts. Assessing a club's ability to spend in the modern age really spans two different areas: profit and sustainability rules (PSR) and the presence of, or access to, actual cash. In terms of the former, United's purported PSR woes are less than once recently thought. As The Athletic revealed in June, that's in part because the club's PSR calculation is based on the results of Red Football Limited, thus stripping out some chunky costs at the PLC level, which don't come under the sphere of football activity. Figures for last season aren't yet known, but The Athletic estimated United could have lost £141m in 2024-25 without incurring a PSR breach. They didn't and, on the back of improved commercial and matchday income (offsetting a big drop in broadcast revenues) and a noteworthy drop in the wage bill, United likely still made a loss but a manageable one, at least in the context of the three-year £105m PSR limit. Though they will hope for a big improvement in the Premier League, United won't generate any TV money from Europe this year, and their continued high transfer spending won't help bring down a player amortisation bill which is nearing the £200m a year mark. There are, however, already elements helping toward reducing, or at least restraining, any 2025-26 losses. Rashford's departure might not have brought in a transfer fee but is calculated to generate a wage bill saving of £14m this season. United might not have sold anyone yet but they've benefited from others selling their former players; moves involving Alvaro Carreras, Anthony Elanga and Maxi Oyedele have earned them over £20m in sell-on fees. A further £5m has arrived from Chelsea after their failure to agree personal terms with Jadon Sancho to turn last season's loan permanent, though that sum will be eaten into if Sancho isn't sold this summer, as United are now back on the hook for his full wage. Those transactions help United's bottom line and, dependent on the timing of payments in those deals which have spawned sell-on fees, could help their cash position too. In truth, it's that, rather than too many PSR woes, which provides the clearest limiting factor on United keeping up their heady rate of transfer spending. Advertisement Projecting United's PSR headroom for 2025-26 is tricky (or foolish) as it requires estimating two full years of financials at a club undertaking significant change, particularly when it comes to expenditure. Yet based on United's third-quarter earnings statement, a loss last season in line with 2022-23's deficit doesn't seem unreasonable. That result drops off the PSR calculation this season, one figure replacing the other. In other words, our estimate of their ability to lose £141m in 2024-25 without a PSR breach could hold true again for this season. Their big problem in regard to available cash is past spending catching up with them. United's net transfer debt — instalments owed to clubs, less those owed from clubs — has exploded in recent years, from below £100m in June 2021 to £308.9m at the end of March. The signings of Cunha and Mbeumo have only added to the sum, with each of their fees spread over instalments. That is better in the immediate term than having to fork out nearly £130m right now (and so widens the scope for United to spend more this summer), but then they already owed a significant amount in fees in the near future; at the end of March, net transfer payments owed before the end of March 2026 stood at £175.5m. As well, the three-year payment term of the Cunha deal came after United had unsuccessfully sought five years of instalments, a clear sign of their need to be careful with cash. United have also invested much more in infrastructure recently, the Carrington Training Complex being the most obvious example, all of which further squeezes cash. The club's cash balance was £73.2m at the end of March, even after £238.5m of equity injections from Ratcliffe. That's still a lot of cash by most clubs' standards, but then United aren't most clubs. They have a lot of bills to pay. United have held a few revolving credit facilities (RCFs — effectively, corporate overdrafts which aid day-to-day liquidity) for a while, though only started dipping into them to deal with the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. Surprisingly, at the end of April, they paid off £50m of their existing RCF borrowings. In a roundabout way, that gave them extra borrowing scope this summer. On 28 April, following the £50m repayment, United had drawn down £160m across their three RCFs, which have — or at least had — an overall combined limit of £300m. At the end of April, therefore, United could draw down a further £140m if they chose to, though of course they'd be on the hook for extra interest costs in doing so. Activity since the third quarter report was filed on 6 June is unknown and won't be confirmed until the club's full year 2024-25 accounts are published. But on July 10, a new charge was registered against various United entities at Companies House in favour of Bank of America, which already acts as the security trustee across the existing £300m of RCFs. Advertisement A year ago, on 28 June 2024, a linked charge was filed, as United extended a £150m tranche of the RCF to expire in June 2027. The new charge suggests a further time extension related to the RCFs, or it is possible that United have increased their borrowing capacity, drawing down even more than the £140m we know was available to them at the end of April. When contacted by The Athletic, the club declined to comment on the matter, other than to state any changes to the nature or size of the RCFs would be detailed in the club's 2024-25 annual accounts, expected to be published in September. Separately, there's also the point of those staffing cuts and other cost-saving measures having a tangible effect on cash flow. Savings might be a drop in the ocean compared to if United could get rid of millions in player salaries at the drop of a hat, but they can't, and the amount of redundancies since Ratcliffe's arrival will clearly have an impact. United also projected adjusted EBITDA (an accounting measure they use as a proxy for operating performance) for 2024-25 in the £180m-£190m range, a marked increase on 2023-24's £147.7m, which should have translated to stronger operating cash flows last season. Even now, United still have the capacity to spend if they wish to. Cash needs to be rather more carefully managed than was the case in the past at Old Trafford, but a combination of recent actions and the club's continued ability to borrow, if they wish to, means there are avenues available to them. Still, it is expected, both inside and outside the club, that sales will be made. It isn't controversial to say United need to improve at selling, having lagged behind peers for a long while. That ballooning transfer debt is proof enough of their need to get better at player trading — and there's no time like the present. Alejandro Garnacho and Antony are the most obvious candidates for sales which might make United decent money this summer. Meanwhile, the prospect of Sesko arriving heightens the chance of Rasmus Hojlund departing just two years into his five-year deal. Advertisement Hojlund signed from Atalanta for an initial £64m which, after tagging on agent fees and the Premier League's transfer levy, leaves his current book value at £43m. United will consider offers of £30m (though the player has said he wants to stay). That would be an eight-figure loss for PSR purposes — but could well generate some useful cash for the present. Additional reporting: Mark Critchley and Laurie Whitwell (Top image: Getty Images)
