coincidence

Today's Sure cricket ad from the Metro

Last year's Nike rugby ad.

We've often observed that brands trying to build credibility in the sports arena will 'borrow' the Nike tone of voice. One result of this is that misattribution of other brands' advertising often contributes to Nike's ad awareness figures. Which is nice for our client.
But the resembalance above goes beyond tonal similarities.

White-clad English sporting heroes? Tick.
'Not without a fight' line? Tick.
Defiant, aggressive attitude? Tick.
Tick-shaped logo? Tick.

In the past when we've pointed out such things on this blog it's prompted a host of negative comments. So, to be clear, I honestly think this must be a coincidence and that somehow no-one at Sure or their agency was aware of our campaign for Nike from last year. (Despite the fact that it ran widely across a number of media, was widely reported and awarded and could reasonably be assumed to be part of the competitive set for this Sure campaign.) This is the only reasonable explanation for such a potentially embarrassing coincidence. Isn't it?

Comments

[Shib]

maybe they wanted "spoof" the ad, knowing that people will have seen the Nike ad and relate to it?

[Holly]

It's not a spoof. A spoof ad intentionally copies most of the ad, but with a humorous or new twist. That's just a rip-off.

For what it's worth, I don't think it was intentional. I think it was one of those things where you've seen a ton of stuff, go off and have a think, and then accidentally come up with something you've looked at. I once wrote a song that turned out to be to the "Always Coca-Cola" tune, but probably would never have realised it myself.

Still, someone should have noticed before it went out. I blame the planners.

[neil]

Perhaps it's a whole new concept: the unfunny spoof.

[jon]

or another new concept. "the not even as good spoof"

the execution sucks!

[Barrett]

Speaking of Cricket ads:

I'm an American, and a bit of an Anglophile. My wife and I honeymooned in London, and we really fell in love with it. I love watching rugby, even though it baffles me.

I saw some cricket ads that made it look AWESOME! Close-ups of grim-faced warriors, The ads made me feel energized and excited about cricket, until I tried watching a match. Moments like that make the cultural divide hugely apparent.

Is that how Britons feel when they try and watch baseball? If so, I'm sorry.

[Rachel]

You can't really complain about the Sure logo, as that is their logo and has been for years. Nor the whites, as that is what cricketers wear. The other two, you definitely have a point, it does appear the call-back was deliberate.

[Rachel]

Glad the previous comment got posted eventually. I'd left the page open and went to post a comment - it told me 'we cannot accept this data'. I wondered what I'd done to upset you ;-)

[neil]

I was joking about the whites and the similarity of the two logos is, of course, just an extra level of coincidence that happened to amuse me when I noticed it. I do realise that sure has been using that logo since before the dawn of time when their TV ads were based on spraying gunk through tick-shaped stencils in palm leaves onto the sweaty backs of nubile, tree-climbing jungle babes.

[Rachel]

Sorry, test is terrible for irony! Interesting that you remember the tree-climbing jungle babes...I seem to remember well-muscled blokes! So advertising that appealed to all

[Gilbert]

Oh give it a rest Christie, what are you trying to prove?

[neil]

That I remember the days when Sure had distinctive advertising?

[monkey]

I find both ads pretty wet to be honest. The idea of turning a sport into a war/battle is old hat and a bit zzzzzz!
Sky sports have been doing it with the premier league every super sunday since it started.

Que dark skys, flashes of lightning, anthemic music (orchestra usually), mangers/coaches chewing gum, gesturing and looking stressed, sports men with serious faces in little shorts and tight shirts, looking vacant.

Time to move on and change the tune i say.

Whtas next?

[neil]

That's pretty much how these debates always wind up. Someone says, 'Both ads are shit. Who cares?"

[monkey]

@neil
I'm not saying they are shit at all.
They both do a job.
I Just find the approach a little overused.
I say if your gonna make a suggestion of war or battle, the least you can do is cover yourself in blood in a way that makes up the flag of St George... now thats a F+*kin good call to arms i say.

[neil]

Yeah, wish we'd thought of that. ;-)

[Dragos Lupascu]

It's obviously a big rip-off, not doubt about.

I can't imagine what's going on in their heads when they decide to copy paste a big huge awarded ad...

@monkey, dude are you on crack?

[monkey]

@Dragos Lupascu

Yep.

[Juliana]

I am not on crack, and would also hate to see anything covered in blood (arghhh), but I don´t like both of them. Sorry.
Of course you it´s much worse when you are a copy of something already not that brilliant...(the bloke on Sure´s ad is cute, though!)

[Promotional Products]

Hmmm very similar, maybe it was the same creative director to pen both ads. I gotta say, however, I don't want to fight the guy in the cricket ad because he uses Sure deodorant or maybe it's that bat in his hand. I hope he can put up a fight with that weapon.

[Graeme]

my one will have you all innit.

http://www.iamglad.co.uk/wk/fight.jpg