A clubs colours and kit are a fundamental part of their tradition and heritage, indeed many would recognise a team because of their uniform before their badge.

Take my side, Arsenal, and the introduction of their famous white sleeves back n the 1930’s. Manager Herbert Chapman introduced white sleeves to the previously all-red Arsenal shirts in 1934 but how this idea came about depends on which source you believe. One version of events has Chapman spotting someone in the Highbury crowd wearing a red sleeveless sweater over a white shirt. A look that he felt it would help the players identify each other on the pitch.

Alternatively, some credit the look to famous cartoonist Tom Webster, who wore a striking blue pullover over a white shirt whilst enjoying a round of golf with the then Chelsea chairman, Claude Kirby. Kirby himself was taken with the idea of adding white sleeves to Chelsea’s shirt, though Chapman upon being told of the look made sure his cherished Arsenal adorned the new style. Furthermore, it was Chapman who incorporated the badge on to the left hand side of the new shirt and added stripes to the teams socks, reasoning that the distinctive pattern and colours would make team mates more visible and thus, easier to pass to.

Last season a new white away kit was released by Arsenal and Nike incorporating Chapman’s striped socks and having his name embellish the shirt. Furthermore, Chapman was the driving focus of the advertising campaign for the shirt.

This came in for heavy criticism by a lot of Arsenal fans, firstly for having a kit the same colour as Spurs and secondly for what was seen as a pretty shameless campaign by Nike.

It now seems somewhat ironic that ideas that were seen as so innovative back then are now so trivial and more often than not on solely for commercial gain.

This year many more Gooners are in uproar over the removal of the traditional white sleeves by Nike. Why they have decided to remove one of the clubs most identifiable characteristics is beyond me, for surely someone at Nike must’ve realised its an integral part of the clubs identity - they’ve been doing our kits for over 10 years at least. Take away the sponsor and the badge and you have a Manchester United shirt. Or a Liverpool shirt. Or a Middlesbrough shirt. Or a ….

Similarly the new yellow away shirt, whilst adhering to traditional colours is again the victim of a the money men at the head of Nike, associating the strip with the 89’ title winning side. If the trend of basing a shirt on historic events continues (something also seen with Liverpool’s grey and red update of their 80’s away kit) then by 2020 we will be having shirts commemorating last seasons 1-1 draw with Wigan at the JJB.

In this time of rising ticket prices, corporate named stadiums and excessive foreign investment it feels to me we the fans, Arsenal or otherwise, are again being taken for a ride. Last season Arsenal released a red and blue striped third shirt, a shirt I invested £45 in, only to see the team play in it around about 8/9 times and be scrapped for next season. The purpose? And yet they keep the unfavourable white shirt for the coming campaign.

The sting of several years ago upon Umbro, Manchester United and JJB Sports over the retail prices of football shirts seems to have been cunningly overcome by simply releasing more shirts.

Chelsea last season released the much publicised electric yellow shirt, only to replace this season with a mundane black affair. Surely a purely financial move? They too released a third shirt, though like Arsenal it appeared a scarce number of times.

Liverpool this season have released a new home and away kit, with another to be confirmed. Last season they released 2 away shirts, as well as a new home and 2 away shirts the season before.

Ditto Sp*rs.

Serial offenders Manchester United aren’t even on a par with the likes of these 2 clubs.

I could go on (be thankful you aren’t a Real Madrid fan - a new, practically unchanged kit every season!) but I shan’t bore/offend you/r club.

I know you could argue that there’s no compulsory need to buy any shirts, that it’s a contribution to the club and that people do get excited by new kits and technological advances. But what of the parents now spending up to £120 a season on replica shirts (before you mention shorts, socks, numbering etc), of those who get fed up with seeing their shirt on the sales rack in JJB for under £20, having spent more than double that mere months earlier and what of a clubs identity?

Liverpool have in the past 3 seasons had a:

How many more can and will they have? And this isn’t a slight on Liverpool F.C and so on, but on the multi million pound suppliers like Nike and Adidas who are neglecting fans and club ideals in favour of profit margins and in addition vindicating doing so with tawdry historic references.

The ‘technological advances’ that arrive every year are nothing more than jargon to concur with the elitist image companies are trying to promote within football and on a broader, global scale.

- Nike advertise new national kits on their website, describing Brazil’s as:

‘Brazil’s love affair with the World Cup began 50 years ago with the first of their record five victories. The new home shirt reflects that heritage in classic yellow with Brazilian green on the collar, cuffs and a new flash on the side. Made from DRI - FIT to keep you cooler, drier and lighter‘.

Essentially the same as nigh on every Nike kit at the moment, bar colouration. And none to different from the one preceding it and more than likely than the next . In many cases the shirt will vary very little, again detracting from the price - why pay another £40 for what is nigh on the same shirt with some minor alterations.

I remember a commentator uttering during the 2002 World Cup that should the USA and Russia be seen playing in largely the same kit about 40 years ago someone would have been for it.

This may seem a somewhat insignificant matter in the current climate of greedy agents, mercenaries (no names mentioned) and Game 39, but I write this knowing full well that not only will this trend continue and worsen in the coming years but that it represents another victory for big business and money when it comes to football - however trivial it may seem right now.

.

It would appear that the Samir Nasri 'will he/won't he' saga is fast approaching and end with Arsene Wenger confirming a deal is not far off being confirmed.

"It is likely to happen," he told Telefoot.

"And if it does happen, it will be before the start of the European Championship."

If or when he does sign Nasri looks to be a very good and very essential addition to the squad. With long terms doubts over Rosicky, Van Persie and Eduardo's fitness, another creative player is a must really, especially when you bear in the mind the likely departure of midfield schemer Hleb.

It would appear all that is holding the deal up now is Nasri's inclusion in France's provisional Euro 2008 squad, so expect any confirmation of a deal to come towards the end of the week, even over the weekend.

Its a promising sign that Wenger has already started strenghtening and its good to see him sticking to his guns and not blowing money on 'big names', as some people have been calling for. Nasri would fit well in a squad high on skill and pace and low on age.

I won't go on and on about the likely departure of Hleb. All I will say is he has done nothing to endear himself to us Gooners in the last few months. Not having the spine to come out himself and talk about his future, allowing his numpty of an agent to address the Arsenal faithful has shown the character of the man. Furthermore, 11 goals in 3 years is nowhere near the type of return you'd expect from a £13 million investment. If Inter etc come in with a suitable offer then I think it'd be wise to snap their hands off, and Hleb can have all the ice cream he wants.

Young Theo Walcott has been talking to The Times about his hopes for the future, with England and Arsenal. Walcott has flourished in the England under 21 squad since his infamous 2006 World Cup 'campaign' and is happy to be on the pitch be it with the seniors or otherwise.

“It’s just good to play really, 

 “Maybe the experience we get with the seniors will help with the under21s, because there’s quite a few of us from the under21s in the seniors.

"Also, it gives us the opportunity to try to win the tournament as well, if there are senior-squad players still young enough to play for the under21s who Stuart Pearce can call upon."

Thats not to say he isn't keen to try and cement a place in Fabio Capello's World Cup squad for 2010, starting with a good appearance at Wembley this week in the friendly game with the USA.

“It’d be a dream come true, to play for England at Wembley this week,” 

“I know I probably won’t start but hopefully, if I work hard and train well, I can give the manager something to think about and, if I do come on, hopefully I will do well.”

“If I work hard and play well for Arsenal, then hopefully I’ll get my chance and why not?”

Seeing Theo more is something I think every Arsenal fan wants next season and all the better if it means seeing less of Eboue.

Finally, Rafa Benitez has played down Liverpool's chances of winning the Premiership next season, citing the amount of money spent by Manchester United, Chelsea (fair enough) and Arsenal (what?!) as the reason why. I'm sorry Rafa but having spent millions upon millions in the last few years I'd go as far to say that its not the amount you've spent but who you have spent it on. Bellamy £8 million? Pennant £6 million? I could go on. I think its a pretty tired excuse to use when you bear in mind the amount of money Wenger has spent in the same amount of time.

And on that angry note, I'll bid you good day.