The numbers no club will print: why no statute says so

A Tuesday evening order asks for one number on the back: 88. Felix, who manages a club's online shop, is not sure what he is looking at. A far-right code? Or the year the buyer joined the club?

Felix is made up. His question is not, and Werder Bremen has answered it. Two jerseys hang in the Werder shop, and only one may carry 18: the player jersey of Cameron Puertas, who took 18 for his August 18 birthday. In the free-text field of the same shop, 18 is blocked, and so is 88.

No provision of the German criminal code requires that. The shop pays for the gap in between. Block nothing, and 88 arrives in the order field. Block too widely, and real surnames are refused.

As Deichstube reports, Werder's media director, Christoph Pieper, put the reason on the record: the numbers are clear codes from the far-right scene ("weil die Zahlen klare Codes aus dem rechtsextremen Bereich sind"). Individual flocking, he adds, is used more and more to carry political messages.

No statute sits between those two jerseys. A decision does.

That puts the blocklist in the same category as a price list: a document with a version, a reason and a name on it. Felix now has to write one, and he starts where every shop starts: is 88 in the statute?

Criminal law does not name 88

One caveat first: what follows reports the sources and is not legal advice. Counsel belongs beside any blocklist.

Section 86a of the German Criminal Code bans symbols of unconstitutional and terrorist organizations. A Bundestag research briefing, WD 7-3010-105/21 of November 10, 2021, files it under state-protection law on page 6.

It is not a general ban on offensive signs. The courts require similarity to an emblem that actually exists, so foreign-language versions of original slogans fall outside it, "Blood and Honour" among them. On page 17, Felix finds his answer. The numeric abbreviations of the far-right scene fall outside the provision too: 18 for Adolf Hitler, the first and eighth letters of the alphabet, and 88 for "Heil Hitler".

The briefing rests that on legal literature, not on a judgment. This research found no court ruling on these numbers on a jersey, and for 1933 and 44 no classification at all.

A club that wants to justify its blocklist in law has no ruling to cite, only a judgment call. So Felix looks at other clubs' calls.

Five clubs write five different rules

There is no template for this clause. Four German shops wrote one anyway, and no two read alike. With Werder, that makes five wordings and five boundaries:

None of these clauses names section 86a as its basis. Each picks its own category words and describes a person who looks and decides, just like Felix now.

Hardly anyone writes it down. The audit of 66 club shops found 8 that do. And what changes when the shop sits in Switzerland?

Swiss law hands the club even less

Swiss law has no equivalent of section 86a. Article 261bis of the Swiss Criminal Code covers the public call to hatred. According to the Confederation's legal guide on racial discrimination, it also covers the spreading of ideologies that degrade the people they target. What counts is spreading an ideology, not the sign.

The Federal Supreme Court drew that line for the Hitler salute. In public the salute is an offense only where third parties are to be won over for the ideology it stands for. That is BGE 140 IV 102, paragraph 2.2.5, in the case law collection of the University of Bern. The case is about a gesture, not a print on a shirt.

The new bill leaves the gap open on purpose. On June 19, 2026, the Federal Council adopted a bill banning National Socialist symbols in public, with a 200-franc fine. Numeric codes are to be exempt after critical feedback, as the SECO announcement says: "Einschlägige Zahlencodes will der Bundesrat jedoch aufgrund der kritischen Rückmeldungen vom Verbot ausnehmen". SRF named 88 as the example the same day.

The bill sits with Parliament and is not in force. So in a Swiss shop, 88 in the free-text field is a house rule or it is nothing.

One federation has settled it centrally, and that too hands the shop nothing. Since June 27, 2023, players in Italy may not wear squad number 88, football-italia.net reported. The rule covers the squad number, not the free-text field.

So neither the law nor a federation helps Felix. His Tuesday order is still waiting: what does a club's own list have to do?

Holding is the third option

Felix has two switches on the free-text field: through, or refused. For the clear case that is enough.

The case that arrives is rarely clear. It is a surname that is also a former player's. It is 1933, for which nothing above found a classification. It is the 88 on Felix's desk, which the buyer may mean as the year he joined. Two switches force each of those to be settled for good the second the order is placed.

Both failure directions cost, and not the same. A surname refused in error costs one sale and one angry supporter. A code that goes through costs a week in the press.

kit.ink holds an uncertain name or number for a human decision instead of refusing it outright. While it is held, no production system can read it. The reviewer sees the value, the severity, the channel, how long the case has waited, which rule fired, and whether a colleague already has it open.

The individual case belongs to the club: it decides who reviews and how fast, and can require a second approval for serious cases. kit.ink curates the rule list itself. When a case sits, kit.ink names four waiting stages and sends the team a notice and then an escalation, outside the club's quiet hours. It releases nothing by itself.

For a shop that offers squad names only, none of this applies. The decision is made. It is not yet justified.

Reasons belong with the decision

In March an email points back to October: why was this supporter's surname refused? Felix opens the thread at the order desk. The order is in it, the reason is not.

Whoever decided back then has moved on.

The five clauses above describe that person. None of them says what survives the decision.

Whoever decides in kit.ink picks a reason from a fixed list, for a release as much as for a refusal. kit.ink keeps one timeline per personalization: every step, every attempt that was refused, every system that read the case or was denied, and who acted. It holds the course of the case, never the name that was on the jersey.

The question from March becomes a lookup, not a reconstruction. That is data hygiene, and not a statement about data-protection law. A club with two refusals a year gets by with a notepad. From the first query nobody can answer, it does not.

The single decision now stands up. The list it came from does not yet.

New words get a test run

After a week in the press, Felix adds words to the list on Monday morning. That is the right reaction. But the new rule also catches three surnames with the same run of letters.

Those three supporters do not write in. They drop out.

In kit.ink a rule never goes live on a hunch. It first runs quietly and shows what it would flag. Once that measured result is on the table, a person at kit.ink switches it on. No volume threshold does it.

Before a word is allowed through, kit.ink replays it against past decisions and shows which holds it would have suppressed. The replay covers a chosen period, 30 days by default and one year at most.

The check reads text: names, numbers, free entries and their combinations. It does not read uploaded pictures, crests or sponsor artwork, nor how a permitted value ends up looking in the chosen typeface. Where text checks end is covered in the article on their boundaries.

A blocklist breaks in one last place: on the path from release to print.

Production reads only after the decision

Felix's list travels as a mail thread. The shop keeps one copy, the counter a second, and the print partner a third, from last summer. What gets printed follows the third.

A version that holds in one mailbox holds nowhere.

In kit.ink, production may read a personalization only once its state allows it. kit.ink records every attempt, allowed or refused. What decides it is not an instruction to production but the state of that jersey.

Behind that point sits the fixed record of that one jersey. What a production system does with it stays its own business. How blocks become decisions is covered in Checked, not blocked. Back to Bremen, then, and to Felix's desk.

A version, a reason, a name, a trail

In the Werder shop, 18 is for sale on Cameron Puertas's jersey and blocked in the free-text field. That is not a contradiction but a decision, and somebody made it.

Felix has to make his own, for the Tuesday 88 and every order after it. In Germany and Switzerland alike, the personalization blocklist is not criminal law in disguise. It is the club's own decision, and it needs the discipline of one: a version, a reason, a name, a trail.

The numbers no club will print are in no statute book. They are on a list the club writes itself. Felix has just started on his.

---

Want an outside look at how your own blocked names and numbers are handled today? A short, no-obligation conversation about that workflow is the place to start.

We accessed the HSV, Mainz 05 and St. Pauli rules on August 5, 2026, the University of Bern case law on September 22, 2026, and all other cited pages on August 6, 2026.