|
Post by downtheline on Oct 8, 2019 0:04:13 GMT -5
What’s going on here? Isn’t this KW & BS representing the USAV & on their dime? I’ve never seen one player just bring & compete in their own private labeled bib/uniform ? The 2nd photo shows her competing in it? No FIVB or USA markings. http://instagram.com/p/B3Vrg5fglZ_
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2019 8:39:27 GMT -5
norceca probably has different uniform requirements than fivb
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Oct 8, 2019 21:58:51 GMT -5
norceca probably has different uniform requirements than fivb NORCECA is one of the five regional authorities within FIVB. It is part of FIVB. I don't know why they'd have different rules. It just comes across as self centered. How can a player representing the USA in international competition REMOVE the USA from their uniform? What's next, black socks and a black gloved left fist raised overhead? Looks like Brooke still remembers whom she represents.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballislife4 on Oct 8, 2019 22:09:48 GMT -5
The tournament doesn’t provide a jersey so they just wore old ones and Kerri probably had extra p1440 so she that’s what she wore.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2019 22:32:53 GMT -5
norceca not providing them means usav should have given them to her and brooke and made them wear them
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Oct 9, 2019 3:07:47 GMT -5
norceca probably has different uniform requirements than fivb NORCECA is one of the five regional authorities within FIVB. It is part of FIVB. I don't know why they'd have different rules. It just comes across as self centered. How can a player representing the USA in international competition REMOVE the USA from their uniform? What's next, black socks and a black gloved left fist raised overhead? Looks like Brooke still remembers whom she represents. Or maybe she was protesting the thorough and complete %*$# show that USAV has been since the minute they got involved with beach? Or, as others posted, they just didnt get her the uniform. Uniforms are one of the dumbest things about beach volleyball. There is no reason for them - teams are separated by a net - and individual style is both appealing to fans and sponsors. Do you think Nike wants to pay a ton of money for a tiny logo on a bikini bottom? Ive said this before but I could tell you off the top of my head the sponsors of the top 10 mens and 8 of 10 women in 1994, but as to sponsors now, I know Sara is Nike and Alix is Adidas, but Sara I only know because of how often other players talk about the deal she signed. I couldnt tell you a single other player. Thats the kind of brand identity that drives sponsors out of the game.
|
|
|
Post by hustleslowly on Oct 9, 2019 6:50:47 GMT -5
This is an outage!!!!! She should be deported and have to dye her hair communist red.
|
|
|
Post by schmidty on Oct 9, 2019 9:45:34 GMT -5
I agree with g2.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Oct 9, 2019 11:15:47 GMT -5
Funny, I've always felt the appraral worn by athletes is one objective way they could generate some revenue, easily. Some have done it, most have not (from what I know). I'll never forget overhearing one pro say "I've worn these shorts for x years" (can't recall how long, but it was LONG) and I'm like, WHAT? Some players don't even have their names on them (nice way to avoid marketing yourself) but regardless, get a sponsor, blaze your name on them and make "a wee bit more" of beach revenue for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by schmidty on Oct 9, 2019 12:26:03 GMT -5
Funny, I've always felt the appraral worn by athletes is one objective way they could generate some revenue, easily. Some have done it, most have not (from what I know). I'll never forget overhearing one pro say "I've worn these shorts for x years" (can't recall how long, but it was LONG) and I'm like, WHAT? Some players don't even have their names on them (nice way to avoid marketing yourself) but regardless, get a sponsor, blaze your name on them and make "a wee bit more" of beach revenue for yourself. This is how I learned about Slunks. Whether you like their shorts or not, their marketing with AVP players is pretty excellent.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Oct 9, 2019 12:28:27 GMT -5
Funny, I've always felt the appraral worn by athletes is one objective way they could generate some revenue, easily. Some have done it, most have not (from what I know). I'll never forget overhearing one pro say "I've worn these shorts for x years" (can't recall how long, but it was LONG) and I'm like, WHAT? Some players don't even have their names on them (nice way to avoid marketing yourself) but regardless, get a sponsor, blaze your name on them and make "a wee bit more" of beach revenue for yourself. This is how I learned about Slunks. Whether you like their shorts or not, their marketing with AVP players is pretty excellent. Exactly. . . Plus the players NEED to market themselves, it is not done well elsewhere. As they say "Don't confuse efforts with results"...If fans don't know who you are (and they SHOULD), it might be up to YOU...
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Oct 9, 2019 16:15:56 GMT -5
What does any of this have to do with the fact that she wore a uniform that did not have USA on it, while representing the USA? I'm not as concerned about the huge P1440 logo as I am the lack of the USA logo.
|
|
|
Post by schmidty on Oct 9, 2019 18:07:20 GMT -5
What does any of this have to do with the fact that she wore a uniform that did not have USA on it, while representing the USA? I'm not as concerned about the huge P1440 logo as I am the lack of the USA logo. It probably has "USA" on the back similar to the tops worn for the Las Vegas P1440 event, seen below. To your point of "What does any of this have to do with the fact that she wore a uniform that did not have USA on it, while representing the USA?", I can't speak for everyone else that was commenting, but I was making the point that it seems like a very silly thing to get worked up about especially since you don't know what the full uniform was. Just because it doesn't have it on the front like Brooke's does doesn't mean that it isn't on the uniform. Now I'm sure you'll point out that it should be front and center on the uniforms, but then you'd have to be outraged that on the men's side the "USA" logo is probably the smallest font compared to their sponsor logos elsewhere on their uniforms at this event. This all just feels like a half assed attempt to throw shade at a player trying to get a brand recognized. Yes, I know it's the brand she had a large part in developing and not everyone in this forum likes the p1440 brand, but to that doesn't mean she can't wear that logo. I don't completely agree with everything p1440 and their leadership have done, but this is just silly to be upset about.
|
|
|
Post by downtheline on Oct 9, 2019 19:38:27 GMT -5
No ones upset except the ones defending KW basically breaking the rules because she feels, knows, thinks she can get away with little issues like this.
FIVB Equipment rule 4.3.1 is pretty straightforward.
Players to where matching colors and configuration of uniform.
So. Isn’t a rule a rule or not for KW?
What other professional, college, high school , grade school, Pop Warner, Little league, you name the team sport, allows out of uniform players to participate ?
What, wait, wait...... None... what ? None.
BTW: BS’s bib is clearly marked USA & FIVB front and back.
Why is KW above these rules and the guidelines all others must adhere too?
Clearly P is more important to her than USAV. So why should she garner financial support when she cannot properly suit up?
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Oct 9, 2019 20:14:48 GMT -5
^ I would not have reacted much if the bib had both USA and a small P1440 on it, but I still would have been bothered. I'm all for players getting sponsorship money, which a lot of FIVB do, but not in the way Kerri did. It DOES scream of "I have my own rules, cuz, well, you know, I'm Kerri Walsh Jennings"... said in the most sunshiny way.
|
|