AFC: Heritage Guernsey?

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
It just should never be the State guernsey!!

That guernsey was originally in effect a reward to the elite playing in the SANFL competition for their performances in that year. With no disrespect to Nathan Bock he and several others in our side would never have earned such a guernsey at this stage of his career.

Later on it virtually became a reward to the best South Australian footballers irrespective of which team or State they were playing in, when the selection basis became State of Origin.

How the hell then does the State guernsey relate to the Crows?? It doesn't of course, and neither should it have to either. IMO it would be an insult to those past players who earned the right to wear that jumper if the Crows were to wear that as their heritage guernsey.

1991 is when the Adelaide Crows played their first game, and that is the guernsey which should be our heritage guernsey. That and no other!!

Rucci please quote this

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by macca23
How the hell then does the State guernsey relate to the Crows??

I told you how it relates, as did Jars458. The state gurnsey represents the 10 SANFL clubs - which is the Crows heritage.

It doesn't of course, and neither should it have to either.

In your opinion.

In my opinion, the State gurnsey does relate to the Crows heirtage. Note the distinction - it arguably doesn't relate to the AFC itself, but it does arguably relate to the heritage of the club.

AFAIK, the Crows are suggesting the use of this gurnsey on heritage weekend. That makes some sort of sense, IMO.

 

[Stiffy_18]

state guernsey is given to a player that has earned it and is South Australian. In other words the state guernsey is given to the cream of South Australian footballing crop.

Now while the likes of McLeod, Massie, Carey, Burns, Hudson, Mark Stevens, Tyson stenglein etc are all good or promising players they are not South Australian and as a result should never wear the state jumper.

Yes we have stong links to SANFL and yes SANFL is our heritage BUT using state guernsey is wrong and shouldn't even be contemplated. Some of the players on our list do not deserve to wear state jumper simple as that. State guernsey are not given out lightly. Using a state jumper for Heritage week would be an insult to all those players over the years who had to work their backside off to get the previlige to pull on the state jumper.

Maybe we should wear Port's prison bars. Afterall its their willingness to leave SANFL high and dry that established AFC in 1990

 

[Jumbo]

Originally posted by ok.crows
IIn my opinion, the State gurnsey does relate to the Crows heirtage. Note the distinction - it arguably doesn't relate to the AFC itself, but it does arguably relate to the heritage of the club.



Do you think it would be right if a victorian club felt the Big V jumper was a part of their heritage and decided to wear it during heritage week?

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Now while the likes of McLeod, Massie, Carey, Burns, Hudson, Mark Stevens, Tyson stenglein etc are all good or promising players they are not South Australian and as a result should never wear the state jumper.

This is an interesting point but I don't think origin is really the issue. (Although I do wonder how these players feel about singing "We're the Pride of South Australia" but that's another matter...)

The state guernsey was originally given to the best SA based players. And indeed that's what it is again now with the SANFL v WAFL v VFL contests. e.g. Darren Bradshaw wore the red SA guernsey last year, but a Croweater he is not.

The real issue is that we are a football club; not a representative side. And we shouldn't be donning the state representative guernsey.

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Jumbo
Do you think it would be right if a victorian club felt the Big V jumper was a part of their heritage and decided to wear it during heritage week? [/B]

No I don't, because no one Victorian club's heritage is a composite of all VFL clubs.

The Crows heritage IS a composite of all 10 SANFL clubs.

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
state guernsey is given to a player that has earned it and is South Australian. In other words the state guernsey is given to the cream of South Australian footballing crop.

Now while the likes of McLeod, Massie, Carey, Burns, Hudson, Mark Stevens, Tyson stenglein etc are all good or promising players they are not South Australian and as a result should never wear the state jumper.

Yes we have stong links to SANFL and yes SANFL is our heritage BUT using state guernsey is wrong and shouldn't even be contemplated. Some of the players on our list do not deserve to wear state jumper simple as that. State guernsey are not given out lightly. Using a state jumper for Heritage week would be an insult to all those players over the years who had to work their backside off to get the previlige to pull on the state jumper.

Couple of points:

1. A lot of players who earn a state gurnsey nowadays aren't anywhere near the standard of AFL-listed players.

2. A player has to work his backside off a lot more to stay on an AFL list than he must in order to earn a state gurnsey these days.

3. From one point of view, the gurnsey is the state gurnsey. From another POV the gurnsey is the gurnsey of a SANFL side picked to represent all 10 SANFL sides - to play against similar sides from other state leagues. Is it a state gurnsey, or is it a SANFL gurnsey ? Was there ever a player to earn the gurnsey who was not a SANFL player ?

4. Before the SOO rules were changed, didn't Wayne Carey play one game in the state/SANFL gurnsey ? How many players originally from other states who joined the SANFL earned a state/SANFL gurnsey ?

OK, so thats 4 points. Sue me.

PS: The gurnsey itself has a "SANFL" logo. I'm not sure if it also has a piping shrike.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by ok.crows
Couple of points:

1. A lot of players who earn a state gurnsey nowadays aren't anywhere near the standard of AFL-listed players.

2. A player has to work his backside off a lot more to stay on an AFL list than he must in order to earn a state gurnsey these days.

3. From one point of view, the gurnsey is the state gurnsey. From another POV the gurnsey is the gurnsey of a SANFL side picked to represent all 10 SANFL sides - to play against similar sides from other state leagues. Is it a state gurnsey, or is it a SANFL gurnsey ? Was there ever a player to earn the gurnsey who was not a SANFL player ?

4. Before the SOO rules were changed, didn't Wayne Carey play one game in the state/SANFL gurnsey ? How many players originally from other states who joined the SANFL earned a state/SANFL gurnsey ?

OK, so thats 4 points. Sue me.

PS: The gurnsey itself has a "SANFL" logo. I'm not sure if it also has a piping shrike.

1. But they earn that gurensey at the particular level they are playing at. whether thats SANFL, U19s, U17s or U10s it doesn't matter. What matters is that they are the cream of the crop in a particular level they are playing on. Crows are at AFL level and I would say only about 5 players at best have earned the right to wear that guernsey. The others haven't and never will.

2. Again we are talking different levels of competition.

3. But again you are not talking about AFL standard there.

4. Yes he did BUT the rules have changed and if we are really honest he is not South Australian. He is a New south Welesman.

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
1. But they earn that gurensey at the particular level they are playing at. whether thats SANFL, U19s, U17s or U10s it doesn't matter. What matters is that they are the cream of the crop in a particular level they are playing on. Crows are at AFL level and I would say only about 5 players at best have earned the right to wear that guernsey. The others haven't and never will.

2. Again we are talking different levels of competition.

3. But again you are not talking about AFL standard there.

4. Yes he did BUT the rules have changed and if we are really honest he is not South Australian. He is a New south Welesman.

You miss the point. You are stuck on the idea that the gurnsey represents the state.

In reality - the gurnsey represented the SANFL.

 

[raboyle]

Originally posted by DaveW
The state guernsey was originally given to the best SA based players. And indeed that's what it is again now with the SANFL v WAFL v VFL contests. e.g. Darren Bradshaw wore the red SA guernsey last year, but a Croweater he is not.

But Darren Bradshaw was selected for SA in a State League contest not State of Origin. Origin footy is a completely different set-up to League obviously... of which is quite fine with me really 'cause I enjoy State footy at either level.

As a player for West Adelaide for more than one season he was deemed eligible to play in the State guernsey. Just like James Byrne & Richard Ambrose was selected for WA last year.

 

[DaveW]

Exactly.

 

[Nige_Bix]

Its back in the news again with a follow up by Rucci and a mention of the bigfooty.com public debate. Also Greg Boulton has had a swipe at the club too for considering a state jumper.

To me it seems the AFC is hellbent on copying all the clubs who can bring out an old type jumper - probably feeling rather envious that they can do that.

For me its the '91 jumper - we are young club with a young heritage! [and thats from an old guy!]

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by raboyle
But Darren Bradshaw was selected for SA in a State League contest not State of Origin. Origin footy is a completely different set-up to League obviously... of which is quite fine with me really 'cause I enjoy State footy at either level.

As a player for West Adelaide for more than one season he was deemed eligible to play in the State guernsey. Just like James Byrne & Richard Ambrose was selected for WA last year.

The point you miss is that most of the games were the gurnsey in question featured historically have been State League contest games and not State-of-Origin games.

State-of-Origin games had only a relatively brief period of about 20 years.

 

[Mego Red]

I think the true question is - what do you want our clubs's heritage to represent?

If it should represent that the we have a heritage of 13 years, then we wear the '91 jumper.

If it's to acknowledge and represent the clubs that gave birth to us, and who have been around for decades, then another solution needs to be found.

I think the state guernsey is representative, like DaveW said, and there's no problem at my end from seeing it used.

It's not like it's going to be used anytime in the near future, anyway. Well, except by the Bradshaws of the world.

Perhaps we could use the first state guernsey?

 

[DaveW]

Whoa... I am arguing against its use in the heritage round.

Just saying the state guernsey hasn't always been an origin one, that's all.