With the newly christened Gallagher Premiership just around the corner, the new 2018/19 kits have started to arrive for all 10 teams taking part in this year’s competition. Below you’ll find out every new Gallagher Premiership 2018/19 kit that’s been revealed so far* – click the links to take a closer look, and we’ll update this page as new kits get revealed! 

Bath Rugby


Bath have finally deviated from the classic black, blue and white hooped design that has been basically the same for the first three years of their time with Canterbury.

Instead this year we have a stunning pair of partially hooped/partially flat coloured designs that hark back to the club’s successful early-to-mid 90s period.

Bristol Bears


The newly christened Bears have revealed all their kits for their return to Premiership rugby, once again produced by Bristol Sport.

The home shirt blends blue and red with hooped sleeves, while the away shirt is plain white with hooped black sleeves and shorts.

Gloucester Rugby


Gloucester have done a soft rebrand themselves this season – the name has stayed the same, but they’ve got a brand new club crest to go with it.

So far only the new home shirt has been revealed, which harks back to the jerseys worn by the club in the early 2000s.



The Paul Gustard era at Quins is kicking off with a pair of striking new home and away kits from long-term apparel sponsor, Adidas.

The home shirt is a modern take on the classic Quins recipe, while the black and green away kit is altogether more polarising.

Leicester Tigers


The Tigers have revealed both their home and away shirts for the new season, once again produced by UK company Kukri.

The home shirt features a more classic take on the Tigers hoops, while the away is white with purple pinstripes – both shirts features a sublimated tiger stripe pattern.

Newcastle Falcons


The Falcons revealed their brand new ISC Sport home shirt for the Premiership 7s, while the away shirt is yet to be shown.

The home shirt features a black and white hooped design with the white hoops being made up of pinstripes.

Northampton Saints


The Saints kicked off the Chris Boyd era with a brand new Macron home shirt – it’s predominately a black design with green and gold hoops across the front of the design.

The new away shirt is yet to be revealed, but given the darkness of the home design, a white or light shirt is expected.

 Sale Sharks


The Sharks are once again with Samurai Sports this season, and as usual the UK brand has kept it pretty clean for the home shirt, while adopting a striking red for the away.

Both shirts feature the club’s crest prominently on the bottom of the jersey – the first time the shark itself has been a design point on the Sharks kit.



The 2017/18 Premiership champions have returned to Nike this season after three years with BLK sport, and revealed their new home shirt on the eve of the Premiership 7s.

The new home kit keeps things extremely minimal with the plain black jersey accented only with the badges and sponsors.

Wasps Rugby


Wasps have revealed their brand new 2018/19 home shirt, which is once again produced by Under Armour.

The new jersey sees the long-awaited return of the club’s gold and black hoops, at least on the bottom of the shirt

Worcester Warriors


Worcester have swapped Under Armour for UK teamwear specialists and Lovell Rugby sub-brand VX3 this season.

The new home shirt is a classic dark blue with gold accents, the away is a striking light blue, while the third shirt is white with blue and gold hoops.

* Rugby Shirt Watch has decided to no longer cover Exeter Chiefs while the club persists with its problematic Native American-influenced branding. Exeter’s kits are some of the most visible examples of the club’s controversial appropriation of Native American culture, and we can no longer in good conscience feature them on RSW. We remain hopeful that Exeter will alter their branding, and that we will be able to cover them again in the future. 



37 thoughts on “Every new Gallagher Premiership Rugby kit for 2018/19

    1. We appreciate that some people won’t agree with our decision, but we realised that we couldn’t in good conscience be vocally opposed to Exeter’s branding and then carry on publicising and promoting their jerseys. Hopefully people will understand that if nothing else.

  1. But the website is fine with the use of the Saracen moniker?
    The clubs “problematic” use of a camel in a fez is ok?
    Either make a proper stance or don’t. Don’t jump on the bandwagon just to gain brownie points

    1. We understand why people understand why people might take issue with the Saracens name, though for us the key difference is the use of sensitive imagery and cultural iconography within the jerseys themselves.

      At the end of the day, we’re a rugby shirt website – if Exeter didn’t regularly appropriate Native American culture in its jerseys and branding, we wouldn’t be taking this decision. But unfortunately they do, and we felt hypocritical continuing to publicise and discuss this, even if we were doing so critically, because we’re ultimately still promoting and profiting off something that we personally don’t agree with.

      We quietly made the decision to stop covering Exeter shirts in 2016, but when we were putting this article together, we didn’t see a way of tackling the absence of Exeter in the list without overtly stating our position, so we did.

      We’re not doing this for ‘brownie points’ – we know this is a hugely divisive issue and it will probably cost us traffic and ad revenue to make our position as overt as we have, but this is a matter of personal conscience, and we stand by that stance.

      1. Oh dear. Do we really need another example of the imposing of one persons conscience on that of others?

        The inference is always “we know best” even if it is not meant that way. It’s condescending.

        if you as a collective find Exeter shirts and related products problematical, i have absolutely no problem with that. Why then, can you not accept that I don’t feel the same way and stick to reportage?

        I will bet my last quid that none of you have read “Bury my heart at wounded knee”.

        So silly.

      2. Without wishing to be dismissive, the fact that we find it problematic is rather the key here. ‘Sticking to reportage’ is not how journalism works – every outlet no matter how big or small is made up of real people with beliefs that transcend their subject matter.

        If we were to continue to cover Exeter in spite of our reservations, we would be compromising our principles for improved traffic and a quiet life.

        We don’t feel that’s a great way for any website to operate, and while you’re welcome to take your clicks elsewhere if that offends you, we have to run this in a way that we believe is right.

    2. Couldn’t agree more with your comment.

      I’m a Chiefs fan who understands the issue with the NA imagery, however this is a clear attempt at gaining “Brownie Points” AKA ‘virtue signaling’.

      If that is your viewpoint that is fine. Maybe just don’t post up Chiefs content. That whole paragraph at the end cries out “Look at me, I’m going to use terms like “problematic” and make people feel guilty for not having an issue with it’.

      As a proud Exonian, I have never been keen on the NA imagery purely because I feel this region has enough history of its own. I never saw the need to use imagery that has no link to the region. This is a view that has always been shared by many others.

      However when people try to assert intellectual dominance over others it just create the polar opposite. Just look at how people like Trump and Tommy Robinson (both absolute tools IMO) have thrived in the face of ultra liberalism.

      Anyway, the point I’m trying to make is- if a change to Exeter’s branding really is what you want, maybe don’t try such obvious attempts to belittle people/make your view seem more worthwhile. Call me fragile but reading that last paragraph did trigger me somewhat. It makes people like myself who aren’t pro NA branding think “I want us to keep the branding so that we don’t panda to the beliefs of the condescending”.

      I’m not saying I’m right, or your wrong (because there is no right or wrong- it’s just two beliefs) however felt the need to convey my viewpoint.

      1. Genuinely intrigued to know what you specifically think has been belittling or condescending?

        We’ve tried to respond in the most open way possible to commenters here, even when the language used hasn’t always been particularly friendly.

        We aren’t telling anyone what to think – the opposite in fact. We don’t feel comfortable covering Exeter given the current branding, so we won’t – that’s not telling people what to think, so why is that different to anyone else expressing an honestly held opinion, such as yourself?

  2. As a Native American I am not offended by the Chief they use. It is not a cartoon character or insulting. It does seem to be a rip off of what the Boston Braves used in the 40s. What is odd to me is they could have used a non American type of Chief. Oh and since you are in the UK and have minimal interaction with Native Americans most of us find this issue about Native names and logos silly. Most are honorific not insulting. The Redskin name is not the best. But if you know your history it had to do with the Boston Tea Party. Remember they were in Boston before Washington. But that narritive gets lost by the PC police. The Indians name is fine, but the characture cartoon is bothersome. But this is your web page and you do not seem to claim you are an impartial media type just a fan. But Native Americans are not as offended over this as the media would like us to be. We have bigger issues, like substance abuse, and chronic unemployment, not sports team logos.

    1. Thanks for your input Charlie – we appreciate the issue of NA sports mascots etc is by no means a consensus, but while there’s a significant proportion of people who do find it belittling and offensive, we’d rather Exeter didn’t use it.

      Your point about bigger issues is very fair too – we’ve often felt that if Exeter are so wedded to using Native American branding, the least they could do would be to reach out to charities and initiatives in the US aimed at helping Native American communities to donate money, resources and expertise to help in a practical way, while also learning how to use their adopted culture in a more tasteful and respectful way.

      1. And so could you. Perhaps every post about the Chiefs you could have a link to a charity in the US to benifit Native Americans. Lead by example, not by playing a petty PC game that has no real effect on the folks in the UK. And yes perhaps the Chief depicted should be an Anglo tribal chief, or some other regional historical link. I am not 100% schooled in the history of SE England.

      2. That’s a really good idea Charlie, and a great way for us to continue to cover Exeter while trying to make something positive out of the situation – we’ll definitely look into it.

        There is indeed a more culturally appropriate alternative the Chiefs could easily adopt – the Dumnonii tribe were the Celtic peoples who inhabited Devon and Cornwall in the pre-Saxon period, and whose name is actually the linguistic root of modern-day Devon, where the Chiefs are based.

        Unfortunately, given that Exeter fans are very enthusiastic in their adoption of NA culture – wearing war bonnets and face paint, chanting, erecting totem poles at their stadium etc – we’re not sure there’s much will to change any time soon.

      3. Have you raised any of your concerns with Exeter or are you just playing agent provocateur and pandering?

      4. Actually we have on many occasions, as have various other much more significant outlets, all the way up to the New York Times – each time the club has refused to comment or engage with the concerns.

  3. Saracens is a derogatory name given by Crusaders for Muslims in the Middle East, the star and crescent are symbols of Islamic faith. You have no problem with this, but a Native American Chief you do? This is political correctness without any understanding of history or culture. This is about sport not politics.

    It’s your website, but heed the opinions of your readers on the matter.

    1. As stated above, we appreciate the Saracens brand is potentially problematic for this reason, but it is also an archaic term that hasn’t been widely used in the Western world for 300 years.

      Would we object to Saracens rebranding? Not at all – it’s an unfortunate cultural hangover from a bygone age. But it has also evolved over time to effectively become disassociated from its original usage, particularly in this context, and context is king here.

      The difference between that and Exeter’s top-to-bottom appropriation of Native American culture in the club’s branding and particularly their jerseys is clear to us, and why we felt it was a different proposition.

      We take on board our reader feedback, but as you can see in the above contents, the opinion is pretty evenly split. The decision ultimately is about what we’re comfortable with – we have nothing against Exeter as a club nor it’s fans, and we hope some day to cover them again.

      1. That is a typically leftist, intolerant statement . You left off the last part of your final sentence…. “when they stop using images that WE find inappropriate.

        I only found this site today and was looking forward to being a regular viewer/ commentator. Not now. If in the future, etc………………., You can fill in the rest.

      2. Sorry but the whole point of journalism/reportage is to be unbiased. If as in this case, personal views hold sway over content then the whole exercise is compromised.

        You didn’t address all the points I raised either but to be honest, I expected you to be both selective and dismissive and i was correct on both counts.

        You are in the wrong business.

      3. Every news outlet, website and magazine has an editorial line that shapes the content – be that political, ethical or whatever.

        Choosing to continue to cover the Chiefs kits in spite of the growing criticisms is just as much of an editorial decision as to not do so.

        By continuing to feature them, we’d be tacitly endorsing Exeter’s branding through publicising it, and earning and revenue as a result. We felt the most straightforward way to avoid compromising our editorial integrity was to stop covering the Chiefs and leave that to people who don’t have a problem with it.

        We’re trying to be frank and open with our readers about our reasons for coming to this decision, so by all means reiterate the questions you feel we didn’t answer.

  4. RSW I have to commend you on how you’ve handled the feedback. It’s been an interesting read to say the least. It sparked me to delve into the issue a bit more and conduct my own personal research which has broadened my understanding.

  5. It’s laughable that someone complains about “intolerance” when the thing you’re refusing to tolerate is, in no uncertain terms, racism. If anyone’s being intolerant, it’s those who are telling you how to think and how to run your website. And that’s the real point: this is YOUR website. If they don’t like your policy they can go somewhere else and/or start their own.

    1. Honestly, we appreciate that people have different viewpoints on this, and we’re trying our best to be open and transparent about the issue here, as we want to encourage people to look into it if they haven’t already. We’ll see!

  6. Absolutely agree on the Exeter issue. Their insistence on keeping the Native American branding is such a shame, because in so many other ways they seem to be a club who are run “the right way”. I hope they see the light soon.

  7. Personally, I think you’re all being snowflakes regarding the Exeter issue, there’s a lot of hand wringing going on. You need to teach yourselves to separate the political issue with the sport of rugby. I’m sure no one at the club endorses or possibly even associates the Native American plight with their club.
    Maybe I should just concentrate on looking at the pictures and not read the comments. Great website otherwise.

  8. I’ve read all the comments and I think this is a woeful misjudgement from your website. This website should be 100% unpolitical and stick to its raison d’etre, reporting on rugby shirts.

    You’re not the New York times, you’re a web site that shows rugby shirt designs and as such your comment above regarding editorial lines being political is a non starter. You should not be operating in that arena. You haven’t earned that right.

    I’ve looked at the jersey and I personally can’t see what the issue is. Unlike the Cleveland Indians logo where the Indian is given a red face (which could be viewed as stereotypical and racist), i can’t see that with the Chiefs logo. The logo in question portrays strength and pride when I look at it and I’m mystified as to where the offence is caused.

    With that said, if there is a single Native Indian who is upset by this logo, then of course their view comes first and it should be changed. My point is, you don’t have the mandate or right to start imposing your views on people who come onto this site to look at rugby shirt design like myself. It’s not what we came for.

    I’ve found some of your responses to people above condescending. You’ve made the decision to take this stance in an inappropriate forum and of course there will be people who won’t like that, that’s the territory you’ve walked into.

    Don’t then get down in the gutter by sniping at people who have as much right to an opinion as you do saying they “should take their clicks elsewhere”. That’s where you’ve really let yourself down.

    N.B. Should the Irish boycott the Notre Dame College football team because it has an ugly Stereotypical Leprechaun on the crest……as an Irishman i would categorically say NO.

    Why? Because its a logo and there are bigger issues in the world.

    Love and Peace to all.

    P.S. where is the new Ulster Shirt? 🙂

    1. I recall a Brendan Gleeson quote from The Guard ‘ah, f**k off back to America with your appropriate f*****g Barack Obama’ and it made me think: if a member from a previously disenfranchised community argues that something is or isn’t offensive (in a race relations context) with a member of the community who perpetrated the disenfranchisement but who maintains that something is offensive which opinion in that scenario carries more clout?

    2. Firstly, we want to reiterate that we’re not trying to be condescending to anyone – if it comes across that way, it’s not intentional. We respect that this is a controversial subject, and people are entitled to their opinions – we wouldn’t expect anyone to change their views on our say so.

      However, we’re also not going to change our editorial line because some people demand that we do so. That’s the only reason why we suggested that if people are that unhappy about our stance, they might be better off going elsewhere.

      We don’t want them to of course – we respect and appreciate our readers greatly – but the reality is that there’s no such thing as being ‘unpolitical’. Ignoring this issue is effectively endorsing it, and we simply didn’t feel ethically comfortable doing that any more.

      If you’re at all interested in understanding why, we’d recommend this piece on CNN:


      The bit that’s always stuck with us is, “When the status of a Native American is demoted to that of a caricature, we are objectified and diminished as a people. We become entertainment, not fellow citizens. How are you supposed to take me seriously if all you see is the stereotypical image of the Hollywood or sports mascot Indian?”

      Outside of America, this is equally true – you’re unlikely to meet a Native American in the pub or at the shops in the UK, and so reducing a living, breathing minority to a caricature is harmful in a different but no less damaging.

      We’re not trying to spoil anyone’s fun, but equally if our fun was being had at the expense of someone else’s dignity, we’d want to be told – that’s all we’re trying to do here, and we hope people can understand that.

      Oh, and no new Ulster home and away shirts this year – new Euro shirt next month!

  9. I think you’re missing the point. What Exeter are doing is cultural appropriation. I don’t think anyone has made an argument to say this isn’t the case. But people come here to spy the shirts, not for a lecture. It’s your self importance that people find grating and not necessarily what you stand for.

    1. We aren’t lecturing anyone – we’ve presented our opinions, but we’re not asking people to agree or disagree – they’re perfectly entitled to ignore it and not give it a second thought.

      We’re also not a public service. We value and appreciate our readers, but they don’t own RSW, and don’t get to decide what we think or how we express our views about matters of conscience.

      With that in mind, we’ll continue to run this site in line with our beliefs, and hope that people respect that, as we respect their right to hold their own opinions.

  10. I’m literally stunned at the omission of the Exeter shirt for the stated reason. As an animal lover, should I be offended by a league that has teams named after Bears, Tigers, Falcons, Sharks and Wasps? No, because I’m not a tool. I do find it repulsive that you do display Wasps despite their merchandise being made by the vile Under Armour, a company that considers hunting to be a “sport” and even more sickening, one of their main sports. Having said that, I have no doubt that I am in a huge minority here and such is life. The PC thing is getting ridiculously out of control and sadly seems to have crept into rugby. What next?

    1. Next, hopefully people will stop making absurd and stupid false equivalency arguments comparing animals with the tasteless appropriation of a minority culture… but we don’t hold out much hope!

      1. How very disrespectful of you to demean and dismiss my comment. Isn’t your entire argument based on disrespect? I’ll leave you alone now to continue your hunt. Best wishes. Incidentally, I don’t consider my argument to be absurd, stupid or false but you clearly know better.

      2. We’re afraid that until such a time as animals develop self-awareness and the ability to communicate their distaste for being used in sports team branding, we’re going to go ahead and continue to make fun of your bad faith, straw man argument, Colum, but thanks for playing.

  11. Not really, it’s just odd that some points are deemed valid by yourselves and not others. I didn’t realise that Exeter Chiefs persecuted Native Americans, just that they used an image in their badge. Once again I stand corrected, culturally insensitive me.

    1. You’ll forgive us if we feel that points that equate minority cultures with the fictional ‘culture’ of animals are not entirely valid…

      If you aren’t aware of why the Exeter Chiefs’ use of Native American culture is offensive and demeaning, then Google is your friend – everyone from academics to rugby writers to New York Times reporters have written about it in recent years, and they’re all explain the situation much more eloquently than we can.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.