2020 AFL fixture released

[Senor M]

The AFL itself separates the VFL and AFL as I proved in the earlier post where there are numerous references on its website to 'VFL/AFL' when it comes to records, stats, history etc.

The correct way to state facts is something like 'Tony Lockett kicked 1360 goals in VFL/AFL games, the most of any player in VFL/AFL history'

But's it's ONE set of history books; not two separate set of books that can also be combined.

You never hear anyone in the media [and I'm sure if it fitted your analogy that would love to] that Lance Franklin has kicked the most goals in 'AFL History'

I'm not saying that they are separate. I am also not saying that anything before 1990 should be deleted out of history.

I am saying that there are very distinct differences between the two eras and should make that very clear in the language we use to talk about the two periods in history.

Shouldn't you be taking that up with the AFL and the media rather than just repeatedly melting about it on Big Footy?

It's spoken about as one continual history and not separated. Whether you think there is distinct differences in the eras or not doesn't change how the AFL sees the history.

 

[FreeTK]

But's it's ONE set of history books; not two separate set of books that can also be combined.

You never hear anyone in the media [and I'm sure if it fitted your analogy that would love to] that Lance Franklin has kicked the most goals in 'AFL History'



Shouldn't you be taking that up with the AFL and the media rather than just repeatedly melting about it on Big Footy?

It's spoken about as one continual history and not separated. Whether you think there is distinct differences in the eras or not doesn't change how the AFL sees the history.

Commentators and pundits often refer to "most x of the AFL era".

The AFL doesn't refer to Richmond as having 12 AFL flags.

It refers to Richmond having 12 VFL/AFL premierships.

I'm just breaking that down and saying that Richmond have 10 VFL Premierships and 2 AFL Premierships. Which is accurate, as that is what is written on the trophies.

Don't understand why it is such a sore point?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

The fact that there are more teams since 2012 than there was in 1990 doesn't change what I am saying. It is the features of the competition that changed, not how many teams are in the competition.

1980 1990 2012 2019
sal cap. NO. YES. YES. YES
Draft NO. YES. YES. YES
travel NO. YES. YES. YES
Ntnl cp. NO. YES. YES. YES

Bullshit. Increasing the number of teams changed three issues significantly:

1) 1990 had a final five. Which then became a final six and then eight. Each change significantly effected the issues around survivability in the finals. We have basically gone from 33% of teams getting into finals under the final 4 to 44% under the final 8

2) each increase in teams meant we moved further and further from a draw where everyone played everyone twice, to one where who you place twice can impact upon the difficulty of your fixture. How this was managed has changed several times too.

3) the dilution of the national talent pool by increasing list sizes faster than development of player numbers meant teams with restricted zones to access players and better finances to fund massive development had a huge competitive advantage (both of which the AFL has had to nullify through more structural changes)

You're not here to discuss jack s**t, just to sook about why west coast isn't number one every year. Guess what, no club gets that right ever, so get over yourself and stop behaving like a millennial

 

[VicBased]

When you've got 12 cups in the cabinet come talk to me.

That would be ONE in the AFL period. Only knobs hang onto pre AFL cups.

 

[Forward Press]

But's it's ONE set of history books; not two separate set of books that can also be combined.

You never hear anyone in the media [and I'm sure if it fitted your analogy that would love to] that Lance Franklin has kicked the most goals in 'AFL History'

That is precisely the point. It all counts the same but the AFL definitely separates the two. Tony Lockett will always hold the AFL record even if Lance Franklin technically kicked more goals from 1990 onwards - the AFL is the natural continuation of the VFL. But the AFL as an organisation clearly still states things from before 1990 as the VFL as evidenced in countless references on its website.

 

[Senor M]

The AFL doesn't refer to Richmond's 1980 premiership as an AFL flag tho.

It refers to Richmond having 12 VFL/AFL premierships.

I'm just breaking that down and saying that Richmond have 10 VFL Premierships and 2 AFL Premierships. Which is accurate, as that is what is written on the trophies.

Don't understand why it is such a sore point?

Point to ONE occasion when the AFL media has referred to Richmond have one or two "AFL Premierships" and discussed the 'AFL history' as separate from that of the VFL?

 

[Crankyhawk]

Very unlikely melb and Geelong get killed, given their role in the start of the game. Also the govt has spent $200m at the Kat Park s**t hole, so they won't let the AFL walk from that, and the MCC have reactived their relationship with the Dees

Pies and dons are a lock, so that leaves imo Richmond and carlton joining the outs.

Reason I asked this is the hawks and tigs have nearly 200000 members just between them. Deregistering two of melbournes largest supported clubs would bring on a political s**t storm, and the AFL is inept at handling them

The only way I see it is forced merge the 10 vic teams to 6. Geelong stays stand alone, which ever of hawks and Roos moves to Tassie stands alone the the others proceed as one “big 4” and one “not big 4”. Will anger everyone equally - so might work

 

[Senor M]

That is precisely the point. It all counts the same but the AFL definitely separates the two. Tony Lockett will always hold the AFL record even if Lance Franklin technically kicked more goals from 1990 onwards - the AFL is the natural continuation of the VFL. But the AFL as an organisation clearly still states things from before 1990 as the VFL as evidenced in countless references on its website.

Where does the AFL state that Richmond only has 2 "AFL Premierships" then?

 

[VicBased]

Richmond have definitely played in both Geelong & Tasmania since 1920.

But keep melting-- it's entertaining how pathetic the West Coast Whingers supporters have become.

It's also incredibly entertaining how much Richmond supporters are in denial about their privileges.

 

[FreeTK]

Bullshit. Increasing the number of teams changed three issues significantly:

1) 1990 had a final five. Which then became a final six and then eight. Each change significantly effected the issues around survivability in the finals. We have basically gone from 33% of teams getting into finals under the final 4 to 44% under the final 8

2) each increase in teams meant we moved further and further from a draw where everyone played everyone twice, to one where who you place twice can impact upon the difficulty of your fixture. How this was managed has changed several times too.

3) the dilution of the national talent pool by increasing list sizes faster than development of player numbers meant teams with restricted zones to access players and better finances to fund massive development had a huge competitive advantage (both of which the AFL has had to nullify through more structural changes)

You're not here to discuss jack s**t, just to sook about why west coast isn't number one every year. Guess what, no club gets that right ever, so get over yourself and stop behaving like a millennial

None of those things affect the "features of the competition". I.e the things that define the scope and form of the competition. I'm not looking about where West Coast is at. We have the best overall record for consistent success in the AFL era

 

[Senor M]

It's also incredibly entertaining how much Richmond supporters are in denial about their privileges.

....at least my supporter base isn't trying to change facts and rewrite history

 

[FreeTK]

Where does the AFL state that Richmond only has 2 "AFL Premierships" then?

They circumvent that by combining the two. For instance they refer Richmond having 12 VFL/AFL premierships which is true. But inclusion of VFL/AFL prefix also clearly denotes differences between the two.

....at least my supporter base isn't trying to change facts and rewrite history

Not rewriting history my dude, just ensuring we are making clear distinctions between a national comp and its earlier iteration as a state level comp with part time athletes running around suburban footy grounds.

 

[VicBased]

If the AFL changed its name in 2021, would you still count the eagles as having 4 premierships. ?

That is not up to the supporters but from my point of view...NO...would be my answer. New competition means we should go back to zero, as would any fair minded supporter.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

None of those things affect the "features of the competition". I.e the things that define the scope and form of the competition. I'm not looking about where West Coast is at. We have the best overall record for consistent success in the AFL era

The number of teams and the finals system don't effect the competition. You have lost it

 

[Ned_Flanders]

That is not up to the supporters but from my point of view...NO...would be my answer. New competition means we should go back to zero, as would any fair minded supporter.

Fine, from the year gws joined

 

[FreeTK]

The number of teams and the finals system don't effect the competition. You have lost it

The competition could add rounds, add teams, merge teams (all things that they have done since 1990) but the architecture of the competition remains the same.

1) Branded as a national competition
2) Salary cap
3) Draft
4) Travelling interstate

All those things have been present since 1990 irrespective of finals format. The four things above are high level visions for the league.

The things you mentioned are operational details.

It's all good mate, you guys just won your second premiership of the AFL era, you should be loving life and not getting so worked up.

 

[Senor M]

They circumvent that by combining the two. For instance they refer Richmond having 12 VFL/AFL premierships which is true. But inclusion of VFL/AFL prefix also clearly denotes differences between the two.

So even though the AFL itself combines the two leagues and continually refers to the history of BOTH together-- you think that it's NOT re-writing history to refer to it otherwise??

Not rewriting history my dude, just ensuring we are making clear distinctions between a national comp and its earlier iteration as a state level comp with part time athletes running around suburban footy grounds.

Your 'clear distinctions' are using facts, figures and history that is DIFFERENT than what the code uses itself.

You tried to use the 'different era' context to insult Richmond as a club and its supporters (many pages ago) and you've now just repeatedly melted by making up your own history to suit your world view. A history that is DIFFERENT than the way the AFL and it's main media responds to it.

Just because YOU think that's how the history should work, doesn't mean that's how the competition talks about it.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

The competition could add rounds, add teams, merge teams (all things that they have done since 1990) but the architecture of the competition remains the same.

1) Branded as a national competition
2) Salary cap
3) Draft
4) Travelling interstate

All those things have been present since 1990 irrespective of finals format. The four things above are high level visions for the league.

The things you mentioned are operational details.

It's all good mate, you guys just won your second premiership of the AFL era, you should be loving life and not getting so worked up.

Jfyi this dick measuring means nothing for RFC fans. We don't have anywhere near as many as the blues pies dons and hawks, we are middle of the pack and that's fine

Your desperation to remove 100 years of history to pump your own club up is frankly sad

 

[FreeTK]

So even though the AFL itself combines the two leagues and continually refers to the history of BOTH together-- you think that it's NOT re-writing history to refer to it otherwise??



Your 'clear distinctions' are using facts, figures and history that is DIFFERENT than what the code uses itself.

You tried to use the 'different era' context to insult Richmond as a club and its supporters (many pages ago) and you've now just repeatedly melted by making up your own history to suit your world view. A history that is DIFFERENT than the way the AFL and it's main media responds to it.

Just because YOU think that's how the history should work, doesn't mean that's how the competition talks about it.

How is it an insult to Richmond fans pointing out that 10 premierships were before 1990 and 2 were after?

Use of the term AFL era is pretty common place. Not inventing anything....

 

[FreeTK]

Jfyi this dick measuring means nothing for RFC fans. We don't have anywhere near as many as the blues pies dons and hawks, we are middle of the pack and that's fine

Your desperation to remove 100 years of history to pump your own club up is frankly sad

Pump up my club? Nah, we're cool. We have won 4 premierships in the AFL era. West Coast are doing pretty well. Speaks for itself really.

 

[Senor M]

How is it an insult to Richmond fans pointing out that 10 premierships were before 1990 and 2 were after?

Use of the term AFL era is pretty common place. Not inventing anything....

I've asked this before and I'll ask this again

Provide ONE example of evidence where the AFL or anyone in the mainstream media [so not some dude's blog] that has referred to "Richmond winning two Premierships in the AFL era"

Until then--you're just talking out of your arse and changing history.

 

[Senor M]

Pump up my club? Nah, we're cool. We have won 4 premierships in the AFL era. West Coast are doing pretty well. Speaks for itself really.

If you were "cool" you and your fellow West Coast Whinger supporter base wouldn't be spending so much time whinging about #VICBIAS and how the FIXture and the MCG finals is corrupt

 

[VicBased]

But the AFL as a competition counts the VFL/AFL as one history, not as two separate eras.

• Ian Stewart is still a 3x Brownlow Medal Winner; even though he won it in '65, '66 & '71.
• Has Tony Lockett kicked 1360 career goals or 895 career goals (goals kicked since the '90 season).

So despite as 'logical' as you think it is-- it goes against the established history that the AFL presents as a competition.
You are currently sprouting an alternative set of history to what the league itself states.

But we all know (Interstaters do any way) that the AFL is just a VFL boys club with people like Eddy not wanting to let go of things. Just gotta remember the MCG G.F decision was made without ANY Interstate team consultation.

 

[FreeTK]

I've asked this before and I'll ask this again

Provide ONE example of evidence where the AFL or anyone in the mainstream media [so not some dude's blog] that has referred to "Richmond winning two Premierships in the AFL era"

Until then--you're just talking out of your arse and changing history.

Even the RFC Website talks combined VFL/AFL stats. If you are using that prefix to talk about the period 1897-2019 it would make sense to refer to 1990- as AFL era and pre 1990 as VFL, no?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Pump up my club? Nah, we're cool. We have won 4 premierships in the AFL era. West Coast are doing pretty well. Speaks for itself really.

You have been freaking out about the draw not benefiting wce, finals not benefiting wce, clubs getting flags that are not worthy because they are not the wce. You're unhinged and an embarrassment. Congrats, my first ignore post the gf clean out