Jumper clash fails

[BobbyMorri]

Richmond wore a highlighter yellow clash in a grand final ffs. What part of us not coming to the party are we not doing?

We have stated our preference is to wear our traditional top as much as possible. We don't when the AFL tell us they need greater contrast, and we wear yellow.

You can bash us for a lot of s**t, but this is just stupid

When you "refuse" to wear their clash tops against each other....

for example,
Richmond v Port. Clash top
Port v Carlton Clash top
Richmond v Carlton.......Nope, nothing to see here.

The pressure you 4 put on the AFL has caused this crapshow to not be fixed and the AFL Gutless policy led to a game which was just shameful for all concerned. Even now, some fans are calling to change the home strips(which INCLUDES THE SHORTS) to match with your style which I think that arrogant.

Don't get me wrong, your clubs are doing what it thinks best for its members. It up to the AFL to force change and come up with a clear policy which is consistent with all clubs and the modern age of 18 teams. lol. as if that is ever going to happen.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

When you "refuse" to wear their clash tops against each other....

for example,
Richmond v Port. Clash top
Port v Carlton Clash top
Richmond v Carlton.......Nope, nothing to see here.

The pressure you 4 put on the AFL has caused this crapshow to not be fixed and the AFL Gutless policy led to a game which was just shameful for all concerned. Even now, some fans are calling to change the home strips(which INCLUDES THE SHORTS) to match with your style which I think that arrogant.

Don't get me wrong, your clubs are doing what it thinks best for its members. It up to the AFL to force change and come up with a clear policy which is consistent with all clubs and the modern age of 18 teams. lol. as if that is ever going to happen.

We didn't pressure s**t, otherwise we would have fought to keep our kit in the gf.

Your issue is with the AFL, they are the ones who decide where a clash is and where it isn't. Clubs should not be expected to do the AFL's job for it, as their job will be 100% about what's good for their club

And wtf do you mean fans are pressuring to force clubs to change home kit to match "my" (I assume you mean Richmond's) style?

When has Richmond demanded a club switch their home kit? The only example was wce for the royal blue, and that was mostly fan driven (it was back in the tricolour days and wce fans used it as an excuse to pressure for their fan fav to get more play)

 

[BobbyMorri]

We didn't pressure s**t, otherwise we would have fought to keep our kit in the gf.

Go back to where this all started.

To that laughable elimination final against Port. Or all the quotes Eddie has done in the past regarding the fact Collingwood only wear black and white strips. Or Essendon being absolutely stubborn for many years regarding designing and then wearing a clash. They were only brought into the modern age kicking and screaming after many many years. The AFL put in a directive in 2007 regarding the clash top. and we are still talking about it....members didn't like the change, and so Presidents did the least amount of work into it. wider red slash for example. And the AFL just played along and we had shambles like the 2014 elimination final, where the AFL didn't know which rules it was following.

Your club took the GF strip well, despite pressure from one club legend around that time. but the inconsistency is still there regarding when you play each other and the AFL just plays along without enforcing its own rules.(still)

Your issue is with the AFL, they are the ones who decide where a clash is and where it isn't. Clubs should not be expected to do the AFL's job for it, as their job will be 100% about what's good for their club

Yes, agreed.

And wtf do you mean fans are pressuring to force clubs to change home kit to match "my" (I assume you mean Richmond's) style?

When has Richmond demanded a club switch their home kit? The only example was wce for the royal blue, and that was mostly fan driven (it was back in the tricolour days and wce fans used it as an excuse to pressure for their fan fav to get more play)

I am talking about the discussion in this thread exclusively. But you can put in the "gentleman's agreement" between Collingwood and Geelong in this argument. I am not condoning what happened on Friday night btw, but Geelong shouldn't be forced to wear different coloured shorts if they don't want to. I do wish they were consistent with it and not change just to prove a point if that is what happened.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Go back to where this all started.

To that laughable elimination final against Port. Or all the quotes Eddie has done in the past regarding the fact Collingwood only wear black and white strips. Or Essendon being absolutely stubborn for many years regarding designing and then wearing a clash. They were only brought into the modern age kicking and screaming after many many years.

Your club took the GF strip well, despite pressure from one club legend around that time. but the inconsistency is still there regarding when you play each other and the AFL just plays along without enforcing its own rules.


Yes, agreed.



I am talking about the discussion in this thread exclusively. But you can put in the "gentleman's agreement" between Collingwood and Geelong in this argument. I am not condoning what happened on Friday night btw, but Geelong shouldn't be forced to wear different coloured shorts if they don't want to. I do wish they were consistent with it and not change just to prove a point if that is what happened.

Go back on the elimination final and know your facts.

We had the AFL sign off in JANUARY that our clash top was acceptable. It was unchanged from previous years, we had previously played port in it. No issues were flagged and there was no lobbying going on.

Prior to the wce game C7 suggested the AFL switch the Eagles jumper to optimise viewer experience. It went through with few grumbles because Eagles fans were on board with the plan b.

Then the week of the elimination final the same s**t happened again. AFL initially wanted port in their clash top, but RFC supported port playing in their home kit as they were the home team for this final. WE DID NOT ASK FOR PORT TO PLAY IN THEIR AWAY OR CLASH KIT. the AFL finding it had no friends from either club or the media on this then agreed to the port compromise to let them play in the prison bars. Richmond supported this, but did not propose or force this on port. This was a cluster * of the AFL's own creation. They played in the RFC clash vs port in may 2013, and barely two *s was said in the media or by the AFL about this. They reconfirmed our clash kit in January, raising no objections or concerns. It's bullshit to put this on Richmond because we did everything the AFL asked of us.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Go back on the elimination final and know your facts.

We had the AFL sign off in JANUARY that our clash top was acceptable. It was unchanged from previous years, we had previously played port in it. No issues were flagged and there was no lobbying going on.

Prior to the wce game C7 suggested the AFL switch the Eagles jumper to optimise viewer experience. It went through with few grumbles because Eagles fans were on board with the plan b.

Then the week of the elimination final the same s**t happened again. AFL initially wanted port in their clash top, but RFC supported port playing in their home kit as they were the home team for this final. WE DID NOT ASK FOR PORT TO PLAY IN THEIR AWAY OR CLASH KIT. the AFL finding it had no friends from either club or the media on this then agreed to the port compromise to let them play in the prison bars. Richmond supported this, but did not propose or force this on port. This was a cluster fu** of the AFL's own creation. They played in the RFC clash vs port in may 2013, and barely two fu**s was said in the media or by the AFL about this. They reconfirmed our clash kit in January, raising no objections or concerns. It's bulls**t to put this on Richmond because we did everything the AFL asked of us.

sorry, I made a late edit when i reread that bit and didnt like it where it headed, so I added

The AFL put in a directive in 2007 regarding the clash top. and we are still talking about it....members didn't like the change, and so Presidents did the least amount of work into it. wider red slash for example. And the AFL just played along and we had shambles like the 2014 elimination final, where the AFL didn't know which rules it was following.

so we agree there.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

sorry, I made a late edit when i reread that bit and didnt like it where it headed, so I added



so we agree there.

On the AFL's rules, it's still on them. If they (for example, using a made up %age) said that clubs needed 55% light for their light top, people and the AFL can't get shitty if they deliver on 55% only, and not 65%.

The AFL rules were arbitrary, focused on light vs dark instead of contrast, ignored shorts (because home team dark...), and were haphazardly implemented (we have been clash, no clash, clash with Adelaide for example)

Rather than doing stupid %ages and idiocy like relabeling red a dark colour instead of a light one, they should have done the obvious - compare each home jumper to every other clubs home jumper and made an assessment on acceptability.

Know you agree with 99% of this btw,

 

[Dc9798]

Go back on the elimination final and know your facts.

We had the AFL sign off in JANUARY that our clash top was acceptable. It was unchanged from previous years, we had previously played port in it. No issues were flagged and there was no lobbying going on.

Prior to the wce game C7 suggested the AFL switch the Eagles jumper to optimise viewer experience. It went through with few grumbles because Eagles fans were on board with the plan b.

Then the week of the elimination final the same s**t happened again. AFL initially wanted port in their clash top, but RFC supported port playing in their home kit as they were the home team for this final. WE DID NOT ASK FOR PORT TO PLAY IN THEIR AWAY OR CLASH KIT. the AFL finding it had no friends from either club or the media on this then agreed to the port compromise to let them play in the prison bars. Richmond supported this, but did not propose or force this on port. This was a cluster fu** of the AFL's own creation. They played in the RFC clash vs port in may 2013, and barely two fu**s was said in the media or by the AFL about this. They reconfirmed our clash kit in January, raising no objections or concerns. It's bulls**t to put this on Richmond because we did everything the AFL asked of us.

100%, it’s amazing as big as the AFL is they cannot get uniform clashes correct. Have a clear criteria on what constitutes a clash jumper, stick to it and enforce it.
This year we’ve seen absolute farces with Geelong vs NM, Geelong vs Collingwood and GWS vs Hawthorn twice and even West Coast vs Adelaide when the Crows hadn’t worn their home jumper away vs West Coast since 2003!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Ned_Flanders]

100%, it’s amazing as big as the AFL is they cannot get uniform clashes correct. Have a clear criteria on what constitutes a clash jumper, stick to it and enforce it.
This year we’ve seen absolute farces with Geelong vs NM, Geelong vs Collingwood and GWS vs Hawthorn twice and even West Coast vs Adelaide when the Crows hadn’t worn their home jumper away vs West Coast since 2003!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I have no issues with clubs wearing their away kit at home, if it's what they want.

I love seeing wce in the royal for instance, and if they want to play us in that, awesome. It has to be their choice though, not imposed by away club or AFL.

 

[CollarJazzKnee]

No, the white based Collingwood jumper was a nightmare against the cats, and Roos, whilst I was growing up watching those three teams play through the 70’s-90’s. I used to ask my dad in the seventies why they didn’t have alternative jumpers. Collingwood’s full dark v Geelong’s full light is great. If Geelong want to be the dark team, they can, but they can’t be half way.

Yes but now Collingwood v dark teams is an eye sore

 

[Matt_TY]

I have no issues with clubs wearing their away kit at home, if it's what they want.

I love seeing wce in the royal for instance, and if they want to play us in that, awesome. It has to be their choice though, not imposed by away club or AFL.

As a Collingwood supporter I'd have no problem with us wearing our white jumper and shorts at home against Carlton, Essendon and Richmond.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

As a Collingwood supporter I'd have no problem with us wearing our white jumper and shorts at home against Carlton, Essendon and Richmond.

I still prefer your white to the black.

 

[Dazzler9]

Yes but now Collingwood v dark teams is an eye sore

Not when they're the away team and they wear their clash. Which is now all the time thankfully.

 

[CollarJazzKnee]

Geelong were happy to wear white shorts against Carlton at GMHBA.

We can argue all day but we all know it was just a sook up against the fact they played the MCG.

Their is zero logic in anything but pies black shorts and Geelong white.

They were in their indigenous which was predominantly blue...

 

[10571z]

They were in their indigenous which was predominantly blue...

So even more reason they should have worn blue shorts and Carlton their white strip? Oh

 

[Matt_TY]

They were in their indigenous which was predominantly blue...

Which makes the white shorts all the more baffling, especially given that they wore it with navy shorts the last time they wore it at home. So they're happy to wear the white shorts at home with their blue kit (which they decided to wear against a team wearing... blue), but all of a sudden when they're playing us in their white kit it's dreadfully important they wear the home shorts? Riiiiiiight.

 

[CollarJazzKnee]

Which makes the white shorts all the more baffling, especially given that they wore it with navy shorts the last time they wore it at home. So they're happy to wear the white shorts at home with their blue kit (which they decided to wear against a team wearing... blue), but all of a sudden when they're playing us in their white kit it's dreadfully important they wear the home shorts? Riiiiiiight.

Why did Collingwood change from white to black when Eddie took over? As if Collingwood would play all home games in white shorts

 

[SaltPeter]

And here I thought the 2017 grand final would've fixed everything.
If a proud club like Richmond would tolerate the change, win and celebrate the victory in their clash guernsey, making it part of the clubs identity.
Youd think other clubs would have no issue.

I flicked on the game and watched maybe 20 seconds on Friday night. My first thought was this thread will be blowing up right now. Geelong wear their white shorts. Collingwood wear their black shorts. Such a simple fix.

Also, what were peoples thoughts with the other qualifying final. On the contrast factor which is common sense, it was tolerable. However, based on the AFL's 'light/dark' crap they spouted in the past. Both were dark. Letting Richmond wear their home kit contradicted their past stance.

Probably unpopular, but I like the Richmond away jumper and I like the shade of yellow. To me it's a much better shade of yellow than Adelaide's attempt at a yellow away jumper

 

[10571z]

Probably unpopular, but I like the Richmond away jumper and I like the shade of yellow. To me it's a much better shade of yellow than Adelaide's attempt at a yellow away jumper

Richmond new yellow is excellent! The old looks so bad now!

 

[StillAtLarge]

Why did Collingwood change from white to black when Eddie took over? As if Collingwood would play all home games in white shorts

Not sure. The original black stripes on white kit is sooooooo much better

 

[WestCoast05]

That's what I always thought.

It's very odd this AFL culture that values dark shorts so much clubs would even prefer to change their home jumper than wear white.

It's similar to how opposition supporters seemed astounded that Freo would choose to wear our white jumpers in the GF once it was mandated we were in the white shorts, as if choosing white over dark was some kind of surrender instead of a perfectly valid version of our kit.

I agree, except I hate how our white shorts look with our yellow away top.

Freo has done a good job of owning its all white clash kit.
I wish we would do the same or come up with another combo.

 

[mcgarnacle]

Not sure. The original black stripes on white kit is sooooooo much better

must be a young 'un.

1. Adidas - 3 stripes is the Adidas logo and white on black stands out more, i.e., marketing
2. Port - threat of prison bar campaign. by going white stripes on black, there was an argument that Port adopting their prison bars would infringe on Collingwood's identity.

 

[mcgarnacle]

The clusterf*** we got on Friday night was similar to what happened a few rounds ago when Geelong hosted North at the Cattery. Usually this matchup sees North in their full royal blue kit (shorts and all) with Geelong in full white. For some reason this year Geelong were in navy shorts and North wore their clash outfit, which was MAINLY WHITE!!! The AFL has dropped the ball with clash kits in 2019.

apparel & sponsorship agreements. in this case, it is likely North Melbourne & Canterbury contracted the Roos to wear the 3rd jumper in X number of games during the season. i'd say Hawthorn have similar agreements over the years with Adidas.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I

apparel & sponsorship agreements. in this case, it is likely North Melbourne & Canterbury contracted the Roos to wear the 3rd jumper in X number of games during the season. i'd say Hawthorn have similar agreements over the years with Adidas.

It’s north’s offical “clash” strip this year.

How the hell it got approved, who knows.

Well, because AFL.

Surely their clash strip shouldn’t be blue like their home strip.

 

[hcd199]

Dark/coloured shorts with a light guernsey isn't inherently a problem, and the AFL now being willing to allow Geelong to play in a white-based guernsey with navy shorts is IMO a good thing - the problem is the same as it's always been, a lack of clear principles and sensible decisions on which combinations are and aren't acceptable, so you end up with a horrid mix of white and black/navy for a qualifying final...

Personally I'd love to see North revert to the white-based top with blue shorts where possible for home games (e.g., against Essendon, Richmond, Port, Sydney, Gold Coast, Hawthorn...) - the Indigenous shirt looked great with the blue shorts when we played Richmond this year.

 

[kozi]

The crux of this particular situation is Collingwood doesn’t have a 2nd clash strip as they have never needed it. The only match up they would ever need it for is v Geelong in full home gear, however Geelong has accomodated them all these years by wearing white shorts regardless of being the home team.

This was a neat and simple solution for Collingwood as opposed to designing a 2nd clash strip just for one team. However, current rules dictate Geelong has the right to stop the good will, wear dark shorts as the home team and put the onus on Collingwood to design a 2nd clash strip.

Logic dictates this situation would be the catalyst for the AFL scrapping the archaic “dark shorts = home team” and simply dictating what shorts teams wear on a game by game basis. If a team has a predominately lighter colour guernsey than their opponents then tough luck, they wear white shorts. No doubt there would be an adjustment period with some clubs and fans unhappy, however once clubs and fans stop associating dark shorts with being the home team this whole issue ultimately becomes a moot point. It’s high time to stop letting sentiment override logic, fan enjoyment and the commercial viability of the game.

Ultimately I have little to no faith in the AFL to actually make this happen. Thus, Geelong will most likely keep wearing dark shorts in home fixtures against Collingwood. If that’s the case and the rules don’t change, unfortunately for Collingwood the onus is on them to design a second clash strip, even though it will be worn exclusively against only one team.