30 Years of The AFL

[Dazzler9]

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you, the one thing Victorians never acknowledge though is that the VFL was a suburban state football league which only ever decided the best football side in the state of Victoria. As the VFL morphed into the AFL it seems to have become quite common now that the VFL was always a national league and a VFL flag in 1958 is the exact same achievement as a flag in 2010. They count of course as the VFL did morph into the AFL but for gods sake a 5 year old knows they are two totally different things.
The status of winning the VFL in 1958 was the exact same status given to the winners of the WAFL and SANFL in those years. All 3 have won the state football league.
The WAFL and SANFL rightfully cannot have those flags counted in a VFL/AFL list, it would make no sense at all. But it does not change that they were all first tier football premierships and should be recognised when discussing football history and records of Australian football. The AFL however only wish to acknowledge VFL/AFL records and thats good and well but they do try and sell it as Australian Football history records when they are not.

If someone asked me who has won the most premierships at the top tier of Australian football I would say that Carlton and Essendon have won the most premierships in competition we now call the AFL. Port Adelaide and East fremantle however hold the record for the most top tier premierships in Australian Football. I don't know why this is a big deal for Victorians. it's not as if its fictional.

Could not have put it any better than this. Well said mate.

 

[footyfan1978]

Might celebrate 125th season of the league in about three seasons time but unlikely to be the same effort put into it as the 100th season celebrations in 1996 season.

 

[Coaster2012]

Nah just stated that the league existed long before their franchises existed, West Coast supporters just can't cope with that

We handle it just fine, hence our continual success and financial position as the richest sporting team in Australia across all codes. It's just when flogs like you come along and think that interstate footy has zero history that supporters get irked.

 

[The_Wookie]

The quality of other leagues is very relevant when discussing the records and history of the sport at the top level. Not relevant when discussing just the VFL/AFL. The history of the sport and the VFL/AFL has been sold by the AFL as the same thing which is not correct.

its not relevant when discussing whether the AFL is the VFL or not. It is. Check the ASIC records that go back to 1929 and list it as formerly known as the VFL. Anything else is opinion, not fact.

And you still havent managed to get around why its acceptable for the SANFL and WAFL to keep counting, but not the VFL

 

[The_Wookie]

We handle it just fine, hence our continual success and financial position as the richest sporting team in Australia across all codes. It's just when flogs like you come along and think that interstate footy has zero history that supporters get irked.

I dont think thats what has them irked in this thread, its that you folks want to reinvent history to suit your own ends when it comes to the AFL/VFL.

 

[Coaster2012]

I dont think thats what has them irked in this thread, its that you folks want to reinvent history to suit your own ends when it comes to the AFL/VFL.

No we don't, it's common knowledge the AFL started when it did. But we do get irked when we are referred to as a franchise and somehow have innately less value than a Vic club. How could we not get irked by that?

 

[Dazzler9]

its not relevant when discussing whether the AFL is the VFL or not. It is. Check the ASIC records that go back to 1929 and list it as formerly known as the VFL. Anything else is opinion, not fact.

And you still havent managed to get around why its acceptable for the SANFL and WAFL to keep counting, but not the VFL

It's fine to keep counting WAFL and SANFL, as long as there is a delineation between pre-Eagles/Crows flags and post. In the same way it is fine to count VFL flags, as long as there is a delineation between pre-1987/1990 and post.

 

[Captain_Bender]

We handle it just fine, hence our continual success and financial position as the richest sporting team in Australia across all codes. It's just when flogs like you come along and think that interstate footy has zero history that supporters get irked.

And when did I claim that interstate footy had no history?

 

[The_Wookie]

No we don't, it's common knowledge the AFL started when it did. But we do get irked when we are referred to as a franchise and somehow have innately less value than a Vic club. How could we not get irked by that?

Less historical value perhaps, but the franchise era does separate clubs that were founded as actual clubs with clubs that were literally sold a license to be in the competition, as opposed to clubs that existed and had to sign franchise agreements in 1985.

 

[The_Wookie]

It's fine to keep counting WAFL and SANFL, as long as there is a delineation between pre-Eagles/Crows flags and post. In the same way it is fine to count VFL flags, as long as there is a delineation between pre-1987/1990 and post.

there is no official dilineations in any of those competitions.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

its not relevant when discussing whether the AFL is the VFL or not. It is. Check the ASIC records that go back to 1929 and list it as formerly known as the VFL. Anything else is opinion, not fact.

And you still havent managed to get around why its acceptable for the SANFL and WAFL to keep counting, but not the VFL

Now I don't even know where you are coming from, it was not me who said they should not count. Not ever. in fact I am one of the few that think they should.

 

[Dazzler9]

there is no official dilineations in any of those competitions.

Correct

 

[Roylion]

It's fine to keep counting WAFL and SANFL, as long as there is a delineation between pre-Eagles/Crows flags and post.

Why does there need to be a delineation in the WAFL and SANFL? Same competition, same location, same club opponents.

 

[Dazzler9]

Why does there need to be a delineation in the WAFL and SANFL? Same competition, same location, same club opponents.

...diluted talent pool

 

[Dazzler9]

Why does there need to be a delineation in the WAFL and SANFL? Same competition, same location, same club opponents.

I mean, isn't it obvious? Up until then, you had 3 leagues in which the best talent nationwide was spread out. Come the national comp, the very best talent was suddenly concentrated in just the one league, and two of the three original state leagues became second tier comps.

 

[telsor]

Why does there need to be a delineation in the WAFL and SANFL? Same competition, same location, same club opponents.

Same with the VFL/AFL.

Same comp, same opponents (yes, some changes, but no comp is completely static), still mostly in the same location (and again, what change there has been has been gradual).

Sure, it changed it's name, but so did the SANFL (renamed twice in it's history) and the WAFL (renamed in 1908, 1990, 1991, 1997 & 2001), but they get considered to be continuous...

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Still an AFL era and a VFL era.

 

[telsor]

Still an AFL era and a VFL era.

Only in the minds of people who can't imagine something being real until they're part of it.

 

[Dank Academy]

Only in the minds of people who can't imagine something being real until they're part of it.

Whatever you’re vaguely referring to sounds like a cult.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[telsor]

Whatever you’re vaguely referring to sounds like a cult.

It does, doesn't it?

The 'we hate Vic cult'.

and like most cults, they have a major disconnect from reality (in this case, that the VFL and AFL are the same thing).

 

[Dank Academy]

It does, doesn't it?

The 'we hate Vic cult'.

and like most cults, they have a major disconnect from reality (in this case, that the VFL and AFL are the same thing).

Geez you really are taking this too far - I thought my club was the one with the cult fascination. The VFL renamed itself the AFL 30 seasons ago. Surely we can all agree that that 'rebrand' occurred in 1990, and celebrate the fact that the last 30 seasons have been pretty fantastic.

 

[Coaster2012]

It's fine for Vic's to count their VFL flags because yes, it is the same competition. But just don't expect interstate supporters to take arguments seriously when you start spouting about flags won in the 50's.

A recent poll on the main board categorically showed that 90% of people believe its harder to win a flag in the AFL era. So sure, count your flags, because they do count, it's the same comp. But don't expect interstate supporters to be convinced in arguments about how successful you are because you won some flags after WW2 or Vietnam.

Only in the minds of people who can't imagine something being real until they're part of it.

Era is defined as "a long and distinct period of history with a particular feature or characteristic."

It's obvious to anyone that when it became the AFL a major re-branding took place. To say there is no difference in the eras is just being obtuse or ignorant or both. Era isn't defined by a change in corporation but a change of the nature of the beast which is what happened. It became a national competition and thus a different era. Perhaps you should stop clinging onto the past. It's unbecoming.

 

[Macpotata]

 

[Gavin Excell]

Good, get rid of a few more minnow vic teams and the competition will be better for it. Talent is spread too thin with 18 teams

Id argue port arent exactly on an unshakeable ground

 

[Gavin Excell]

For what its worth as someone who has been following geelong since the late 1970s i prefer the national comp