-
Rd 14 Reviews + Club boards »
BL v StK · WB v FRE · RIC v HAW · ADE v SYD · NM v COL · GWS v PA ·
And post your "Liked, Learned, Hated" right here.
AFL's rubbery white shorts policy
- Thread starter LT Smash
- Start date
- Tagged users None
It's a farce. Forget anyone from overseas, I'm completely and utterly confused.
This is an absolute joke, the rule should apply to all teams.
If Carlton were dumb enough to design a alternate jumper that looks super gay it's their own fault and they should still have to wear it when required.
If Carlton were dumb enough to design a alternate jumper that looks super gay it's their own fault and they should still have to wear it when required.
____
.
- Sep 1, 2009
- 7,496
- 8,951
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Everton, Brisbane Bullets, Thai Port FC
They could've at least made Collingwood wear white shorts and Carlton navy blue shorts.
- Apr 16, 2009
- 1,597
- 2,907
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
looks like they're going to do the same with the baby blue one
That would've made it a bit better, but I guess that's only good enough for the WA teams to have to do.
"Seek to avoid the introduction of another colour into a clubs uniform where possible"
Tonight seemed like the perfect opportunity
Father Jack
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 23, 2006
- 23,018
- 25,803
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur FC
On the very weekend that Essendon is dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age, we get this. One step forward, one step back.
If you were an Essendon supporter opposed to the clash strip you would have every right to be incredulous and outraged at tonights game.
melbournemartin
Brownlow Medallist
I'm waiting for the standard "I've been watching football for 50 years and there have never been clashes" response.
Of course that's a ridiculous argument, but it's even more ridiculous in this case since Carlton vs Collingwood used to be fine until Collingwood changed its jumper to largely black.
Of course that's a ridiculous argument, but it's even more ridiculous in this case since Carlton vs Collingwood used to be fine until Collingwood changed its jumper to largely black.
West coast got screwed. How on earth can the AFL justify making us wear white shorts v Carlton, in a WC home game - yet the Pies, who have MORE white than WC, wear black, & Carlton wear white shorts
Anyone who can't see a Vic bias is blind. Both WA teams have forced to submit to vic teams in Perth, whilst the same rules don't apply in Melbourne
Anyone who can't see a Vic bias is blind. Both WA teams have forced to submit to vic teams in Perth, whilst the same rules don't apply in Melbourne
melbournemartin
Brownlow Medallist
It is very silly, particularly since the West Coast vs Carlton game still had a bad clash despite the shorts, whereas it would have been fine if Carlton wore its clash jumper.
Martin c'mon!! show some discipline and wait for that response!!! you'll scare them all off.
if tonights match wasn't COL vs CAR, or other BS traditional big 3 match-up, the dark vs light provision in the AFL's farcical playing kit regulations would've been invoked.
COL would've worn the full-home strip, CAR their alternate.
at the very least, the 'rubbery' white shorts policy where both teams have dark strips but the team with white in it's strip wears the white shorts, i.e., COL, could've have been implemented. but that is still joke of a provision as black & white still would be the predominant colour on the field.
at least the Wests Tigers vs Canterbury game was entertaining.
COL would've worn the full-home strip, CAR their alternate.
at the very least, the 'rubbery' white shorts policy where both teams have dark strips but the team with white in it's strip wears the white shorts, i.e., COL, could've have been implemented. but that is still joke of a provision as black & white still would be the predominant colour on the field.
at least the Wests Tigers vs Canterbury game was entertaining.
in tonights game there were many "kit" options.
every single one of them would have been better to watch than the one they decided on.
even carlton in all navy would have been easier to tell apart.
every single one of them would have been better to watch than the one they decided on.
even carlton in all navy would have been easier to tell apart.
I'm going fart into a bottle and mail it to Andy D. This just pathetic. Real confusion on the wide angle TV shots.
it doesn't matter what ESS have to wear against STK.
If ESS were playing against either COL or CAR, the same predominantly black match-day strips fiasco would have occurred as well.
CAR & ESS are permitted to wear their black guernseys when they're away to COL and these games are practically untouchable.
Mind you, it wasn't a problem up until 10-odd years ago when COL changed to a black strip.
Heardy_101
LET'S GO BRANDON
West Coast and Carlton should start asking some serious questions to the AFL- such as this:
WHY are some teams exempt to the rule while others are not?
This proves that Collingwood are exempt from the rules, no doubt about it.
If North wear Blue shorts and WCE are forced to wear white shorts with their royal blue away strip I'm going to lose my shit.
WHY are some teams exempt to the rule while others are not?
This proves that Collingwood are exempt from the rules, no doubt about it.
If North wear Blue shorts and WCE are forced to wear white shorts with their royal blue away strip I'm going to lose my shit.
Tulip
Hall of Famer
- May 3, 2009
- 37,249
- 34,497
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Tottenham
I'm not kidding myself, looked very stupid
jethro11
Club Legend
Why should Carlton be asking questions? How is it Collingwood's fault that Carlton are too afraid to wear their clash strip.
This is either Carlton or the AFL's fault. Not Collingwood's
It's the AFL's fault. Their regulations are ineffective, and are applied inconsistently anyway.
What do they have?
They claim that the objective is to provide a contrast of Dark vs Light in each game, yet COL vs CAR tonight was predominantly dark strip vs dark strip.
They claim that the white shorts will be worn by the club that already has white in its strip to avoid introducing a new colour to the other match-day club's strip, irrespective of the home or away designation. yet CAR wore the white shorts when it has no white in its strip - the number and monogram should be excluded for this purpose, particularly considering that COL black guernsey is predominantly white from the front anyway. This is despite the point that modifying the shorts is limited in its effectiveness at differentiating teams if the guernseys are still predominantly similar from the front, back or both.
This is supposed to be a professional league and there is a match every week where the match-day teams aren't effectively differentiated, or other games where the away team wears an alternate strip for a reason other than avoiding a clash.
It's so farcical it's absurd.
Heardy_101
LET'S GO BRANDON
Not too sure if this had anything to do with the stupid rule, or whether or not Carlton were blind, but several if not loads of Carlton's kicks into forward 50 went straight down the throats of Collingwood defenders.
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,879
- 100,571
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Unbelievable that Carlton were allowed to wear that strip. A big mash of dark and white.
Why can a side just decide half way through a season that they don't want to wear their clash design anymore and have the AFL's blessing?
As others have said, clash guernsey hating Essendon supporters should be a bit miffed after the AFL took a hardline stance on them only to allow tonights clash abomination in the most watched match of the round
Why can a side just decide half way through a season that they don't want to wear their clash design anymore and have the AFL's blessing?
As others have said, clash guernsey hating Essendon supporters should be a bit miffed after the AFL took a hardline stance on them only to allow tonights clash abomination in the most watched match of the round
