Toast #BringBackTheBars - Our Heritage, Our History, Our Right!

Assuming there were no obstacles, would you prefer the PB/Pylon guernsey to be our home colours?


  • Total voters
    408

Interstater

Club Legend
Jun 7, 2015
2,287
4,328
SA
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Hang on, so the 2007 “agreement” is that we won’t try to wear the PBs full time if they let us market the 1870 angle?

Cross purposes much?
What disturbs me a little is that you (with others) have been in consultation with the club but this had not been raised to you before.

As paid up "members" we have little or no say in this matter.
My hope was that during your discussions you would have had full knowledge of the situation and you would be able to put the position of this (bigfooty) group forward with that knowledge in mind, so that once an announcement is made, it would have had our input considered.

I'm now losing faith in that assumption.

---

On a different topic, I am still confused.

KT says:
"OK so let me, let me, categorically say that there is no agreement, SIGNED, that prevents us from wearing the Prison Bar post 2020."

The argument that the administration back then was having, was recognition that 1870 was in fact our birthday.
Up until then the AFL had only ever acknowledged us, post 1997, and so the agreement there was that we were not to seek to wear the prison bars on an ongoing basis, in the AFL which they were happy to sign, because they were never intended to anyway.


So this is how I understand it.

While there is not a signed agreement that prevents us for wearing the prison bars post 2020, there is a signed agreement that we will not seek to wear them on an ongoing basis in the AFL.

i.e. we can wear them in the SANFL as much as we like.

So what does ongoing mean?
Does it mean all the time or does it mean on certain occasions each year?

Here we go back to KT:
but there was a provision around having to consult with the AFL if you wanted to use the prison bars on special occasions such as
heritage round


So in summary, we can only wear them in the AFL after consultation with the AFL and only on special occasions.
But we can wear them in the SANFL whenever we like.

So what is a special occasion?

My confusion continues.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Enviable Tradition

Professional Procrastinator
Oct 12, 2007
17,059
17,353
The Hills
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Hang on, so the 2007 “agreement” is that we won’t try to wear the PBs full time if they let us market the 1870 angle?

Cross purposes much?
True but if our history pre 1997 wasnt acknowledged then our right to wear the prison bars was non existent.

On SM-G960F using
BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Last edited:

Pappagallo

Co(m)poster
Jun 12, 2012
16,424
50,141
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
What disturbs me a little is that you (with others) have been in consultation with the club but this had not been raised to you before.

As paid up "members" we have little or no say in this matter.
My hope was that during your discussions you would have had full knowledge of the situation and you would be able to put the position of this (bigfooty) group forward with that knowledge in mind, so that once an announcement is made, it would have had our input considered.

I'm now losing faith in that assumption.

---

On a different topic, I am still confused.

KT says:
"OK so let me, let me, categorically say that there is no agreement, SIGNED, that prevents us from wearing the Prison Bar post 2020."

The argument that the administration back then was having, was recognition that 1870 was in fact our birthday.
Up until then the AFL had only ever acknowledged us, post 1997, and so the agreement there was that we were not to seek to wear the prison bars on an ongoing basis, in the AFL which they were happy to sign, because they were never intended to anyway.


So this is how I understand it.

While there is not a signed agreement that prevents us for wearing the prison bars post 2020, there is a signed agreement that we will not seek to wear them on an ongoing basis in the AFL.

i.e. we can wear them in the SANFL as much as we like.

So what does ongoing mean?
Does it mean all the time or does it mean on certain occasions each year?

Here we go back to KT:
but there was a provision around having to consult with the AFL if you wanted to use the prison bars on special occasions such as
heritage round


So in summary, we can only wear them in the AFL after consultation with the AFL and only on special occasions.
But we can wear them in the SANFL whenever we like.

So what is a special occasion?

My confusion continues.
I think you have me confused with chiwigi bomberclifford who have met with the club re: Prison Bars. Maybe they can shed some light on this for you.

True but if our history pre 1997 wasnt acknowledged then our right to wear the prison bars was non existent.

On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app
We already had done so prior to this arrangement, back in 2003. It just seems like an unnecessary trade off that almost defeats its own purpose.
 

chiwigi

I’ll make tears from your Wines.
Apr 9, 2009
17,083
29,775
Port Adelaide Zone
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
What disturbs me a little is that you (with others) have been in consultation with the club but this had not been raised to you before.

As paid up "members" we have little or no say in this matter.
My hope was that during your discussions you would have had full knowledge of the situation and you would be able to put the position of this (bigfooty) group forward with that knowledge in mind, so that once an announcement is made, it would have had our input considered.

I'm now losing faith in that assumption.

---

On a different topic, I am still confused.

KT says:
"OK so let me, let me, categorically say that there is no agreement, SIGNED, that prevents us from wearing the Prison Bar post 2020."

The argument that the administration back then was having, was recognition that 1870 was in fact our birthday.
Up until then the AFL had only ever acknowledged us, post 1997, and so the agreement there was that we were not to seek to wear the prison bars on an ongoing basis, in the AFL which they were happy to sign, because they were never intended to anyway.


So this is how I understand it.

While there is not a signed agreement that prevents us for wearing the prison bars post 2020, there is a signed agreement that we will not seek to wear them on an ongoing basis in the AFL.

i.e. we can wear them in the SANFL as much as we like.

So what does ongoing mean?
Does it mean all the time or does it mean on certain occasions each year?

Here we go back to KT:
but there was a provision around having to consult with the AFL if you wanted to use the prison bars on special occasions such as
heritage round


So in summary, we can only wear them in the AFL after consultation with the AFL and only on special occasions.
But we can wear them in the SANFL whenever we like.

So what is a special occasion?

My confusion continues.
What are you asking here? It is unclear.

Do we as supporters know the ins and outs of everything? - Good god no, they wont show us the agreement.
Has the club consulted with us and listened to our needs? - Yes
Are we satisfied that the club are trying to wear the PB's in an ongoing basis and value them in this way? - Yes
Are we confident in the ability of the club to win the battle with the AFL? - maybe

What we have been promised is that the club will never sign an agreement that forbids us wearing the PB's again.
That there will be constant struggle to make sure they are represented in the AFL.
full time? - no,
but special occasions and working on regularly (eg. Showdowns and ANZAC).
 

El_Scorcho

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2007
25,337
58,454
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Special occasions worries me, because as I posted above, the only special occasions the AFL have okayed since the 2007 agreement is the last game at AAMI and that time Richmond didn't have an adequate clash solution.

They specifically didn't okay us wearing the bars for the 1914 centenary. That's a huge red flag for me, because we've never had a bigger season. Perhaps they are wary of allowing us to use them to celebrate premiership anniversaries, because as people have pointed out here, that's every year.
 

Pappagallo

Co(m)poster
Jun 12, 2012
16,424
50,141
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Special occasions worries me, because as I posted above, the only special occasions the AFL have okayed since the 2007 agreement is the last game at AAMI and that time Richmond didn't have an adequate clash solution.

They specifically didn't okay us wearing the bars for the 1914 centenary. That's a huge red flag for me, because we've never had a bigger season. Perhaps they are wary of allowing us to use them to celebrate premiership anniversaries, because as people have pointed out here, that's every year.
Surely it couldn’t be that, I mean that one was clearly an exceptional anniversary. It’s not every season that we’d be celebrating 100 years since the best Australian Football season of all time or anything close to it.
 

Interstater

Club Legend
Jun 7, 2015
2,287
4,328
SA
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Apologies Pappagallo, I wrongly assumed you were one of the people that met with the club.
I really should stop myself from posting before work.

On the other topic I couldn't make sense of why KT would make these two statements that appear to be contradictory:

1 - "OK so let me, let me, categorically say that there is no agreement, SIGNED, that prevents us from wearing the Prison Bar post 2020."

2 - The argument that the administration back then was having, was recognition that 1870 was in fact our birthday.
Up until then the AFL had only ever acknowledged us, post 1997, and so the agreement there was that we were not to seek to wear the prison bars on an ongoing basis, in the AFL which they were happy to sign, because they were never intended to anyway.


Ok so my understanding is that we are not prevented from wearing it, but we are prevented from wearing it on an ongoing basis and we have to consult with the AFL to use them on special occasions such as heritage rounds.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lockhart Road

Cultural Attache
Mar 26, 2013
4,401
19,223
Happy Valley Bar & Grill, Hong Kong
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide Magpies
The Man With An Agreement for Every Occasion: Eddie Everywhere, Eddie Everything, Eddie Every Time ... :straining:


AFL Finals Geelong v Collingwood: Fans fume over jumper clash

Eddie McGuire claims there was a gentleman’s handshake agreement Geelong would wear white gear to avoid jumper clashes, but Cats president Colin Carter says it’s news to him.

Geelong was wearing its home kit with blue shorts, a move that angered McGuire, who believed the clubs had a “gentlemen’s agreement” dating back two decades.
But, with Geelong finishing atop the AFL ladder, Carter says the Cats had the right to wear their home jumper and if the Magpies had a problem it was up to them to solve it.

... “The home team has the right to wear their home strip, which is what happened last night.
“And I think if certain clubs want to keep protesting about that, then they’ve got to make the running on that....”


... After seeing his side secure a 10-point win, McGuire lashed out at the strip clash.
“I saw the beginning of the game and I went over to (AFL boss) Gil (McLachlan) because 20 years ago, Frank Costa and I shook hands on an agreement because 21 years ago, there was a day when Collingwood had predominantly white, white shorts and Geelong had white and no one could tell what was going on,” he told Brian Taylor.
“But we had an agreement, home, away — have a look at the Grand Final in 2011. For 20 years, they’ve worn the white gear because we had a gentlemen’s agreement,” McGuire said.


 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
56,276
74,984
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
The Man With An Agreement for Every Occasion: Eddie Everywhere, Eddie Everything, Eddie Every Time ... :straining:


AFL Finals Geelong v Collingwood: Fans fume over jumper clash

Eddie McGuire claims there was a gentleman’s handshake agreement Geelong would wear white gear to avoid jumper clashes, but Cats president Colin Carter says it’s news to him.

Geelong was wearing its home kit with blue shorts, a move that angered McGuire, who believed the clubs had a “gentlemen’s agreement” dating back two decades.
But, with Geelong finishing atop the AFL ladder, Carter says the Cats had the right to wear their home jumper and if the Magpies had a problem it was up to them to solve it.


... “The home team has the right to wear their home strip, which is what happened last night.
“And I think if certain clubs want to keep protesting about that, then they’ve got to make the running on that....”


... After seeing his side secure a 10-point win, McGuire lashed out at the strip clash.
“I saw the beginning of the game and I went over to (AFL boss) Gil (McLachlan) because 20 years ago, Frank Costa and I shook hands on an agreement because 21 years ago, there was a day when Collingwood had predominantly white, white shorts and Geelong had white and no one could tell what was going on,” he told Brian Taylor.
“But we had an agreement, home, away — have a look at the Grand Final in 2011. For 20 years, they’ve worn the white gear because we had a gentlemen’s agreement,” McGuire said.


Good on Colin Carter for sticking it to Eddie the Exaggerator - what I have called him since about 1996, when according to Eddie every week was a big week in football, despite it being an average, bland and boring week.

But where was Colin Carter sticking it to Eddie when he was on the bloody AFL Commission??? We need to look at some important history to see that Carter has played his part in handing over too much power/influence to Eddie.

Lets have a look at Carter's back ground. He worked for Boston Consulting Group for over 25 years and it was his report that lead to the first step towards the independent VFL Commission where clubs/presidents transferred some powers across to a new independent VFL Commission, but the big bang changes came in mid 1992 with the establishment of the David Crawford Inquiry, and the subsequent Crawford Report which made its recommendations in March 1993 and were adopted pretty much in full, on 19 July 1993 transferring almost all powers from the clubs/presidents to the AFL Commission and its executives. The Wookie has done a good basic summary of these 2 big changes in this thread about the AFL Commission Formation at;


In Carter's CV listed on the Geelong website it says he was a director of Geelong between 1987 and 1993 and then again since 2008. In between 1993 and 2008 he was an AFL Commissioner. Looks like he got on around the time The Crawford Report was implemented by the clubs and commission. He's been President of Geelong since 2011 when Frank Costa stepped down.

......
Colin’s involvement with football started in 1985 when his report for the VFL outlined a national competition and the draft and salary cap strategies to keep all clubs competitive. Two years later, he brokered agreement between the VFL and MCC which led to the return of VFL Members to the MCG and building the Great Southern Stand. Later, he led the working group that prepared the AFL’s strategy for grassroots development. .....

It was this dopey deal with the MCC and trade off for the 23,000 AFL Members Reserve and shiny new offices in The Great Southern Stand at the MCG that has lead to the AFL owing Eddie big time.

The trade off was that from 1992, the stand was completed for the 1992 World Cup played in March - the MCG got guaranteed Grand Finals until 2032 as well as guaranteed 1 final per week for the first 3 weeks before the GF. In 1987/88 when the deal was negotiated there was Sydney, WCE and Brisbane in the VFL and they wanted an Adelaide team, yet to get their shiny new offices and 23,000 members reserve the VFL signed away rights to force non Vic teams to play "home finals" at the MCG.

When this deal was negotiated it was a final 5, when Adelaide came in was a final 6 in 1991, and then a final 8 was invented in 1994 to try and help get around the MCG/AFL deal as it meant 2 PF's gave the opportunity for a non Vic team not have to play a home PF at the MCG.

Deals were done in the late 1990's and when Docklands was being built to bank finals in the first 2 weeks, to get around potential problems and to have finals at Docklands as well as home week 1 and 2 finals at the MCG for the non Vic side.

But as non Vic teams started dominating, the home PF rule looked like it was going to cause a fu** up and national embarrassment for the AFL. If Port didn't lose the 2002 QF it would have come to a head then, but it was in 2004 when both Port and Brisbane won their home QF's and Brisbane were forced to play their home PF at the MCG.

Eddie saw an opportunity, knew this looked s**t house for the AFL to be screwed by the MCG to force non Vic sides to play a home PF at the MCG, so he got the MCC and AFL talking, and was part of the negotiations and said Collingwood would play more games at MCG, against the bigger Vic clubs, to increase revenue and crowds at the MCG, plus move games from Docklands, so that 12 of the biggest 15 matches when the draw was done, between 2 Vic sides, would be at the MCG. The deal got the AFL out of an embarrassing mess. The AFL have owed Eddie ever since, so they are scared of his media power and influence and bend to his whims too often.

The question to Colin Carter is, what did you do when you were on the AFL Commission, to stop yourself, other Commissioners and AFL Executives pi**ing their pants every time Eddie demand things go his way???? A bit of karma me thinks Colin.
 
Last edited:

Enviable Tradition

Professional Procrastinator
Oct 12, 2007
17,059
17,353
The Hills
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The Man With An Agreement for Every Occasion: Eddie Everywhere, Eddie Everything, Eddie Every Time ... :straining:


AFL Finals Geelong v Collingwood: Fans fume over jumper clash

Eddie McGuire claims there was a gentleman’s handshake agreement Geelong would wear white gear to avoid jumper clashes, but Cats president Colin Carter says it’s news to him.

Geelong was wearing its home kit with blue shorts, a move that angered McGuire, who believed the clubs had a “gentlemen’s agreement” dating back two decades.
But, with Geelong finishing atop the AFL ladder, Carter says the Cats had the right to wear their home jumper and if the Magpies had a problem it was up to them to solve it.

... “The home team has the right to wear their home strip, which is what happened last night.
“And I think if certain clubs want to keep protesting about that, then they’ve got to make the running on that....”


... After seeing his side secure a 10-point win, McGuire lashed out at the strip clash.
“I saw the beginning of the game and I went over to (AFL boss) Gil (McLachlan) because 20 years ago, Frank Costa and I shook hands on an agreement because 21 years ago, there was a day when Collingwood had predominantly white, white shorts and Geelong had white and no one could tell what was going on,” he told Brian Taylor.
“But we had an agreement, home, away — have a look at the Grand Final in 2011. For 20 years, they’ve worn the white gear because we had a gentlemen’s agreement,” McGuire said.


Port should be on the phone to Colin today offering support.

On SM-G960F using
BigFooty.com mobile app
 

PA88

Premiership Player
Apr 6, 2014
4,090
4,635
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
How disrespectful is Geelong! The AFL needs to send them a stern reminder that Collingwood is the home team every week and especially in finals.

Eddie would also be angry that this 'incident' is likely to cause a spinoff discussion about Collingwood needing a completely alternative clash strip. Of course the AFL will bring the hammer down on Geelong.

Carter's words below should be enlarged, bolded, and framed, and then posted to the PAFC Board of Directors and CEO. If I have interpreted that final sentence correctly then it he means that clubs being suppressed from wearing their preferred jumper should just wear it when it is right to do so. Much like what Timmy and George have expressed.

“The home team has the right to wear their home strip, which is what happened last night.
“And I think if certain clubs want to keep protesting about that, then they’ve got to make the running on that....”
 

Full Credit

Club Legend
Nov 17, 2012
1,038
1,570
Liartown, USA
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Absolutely and by that same token if we're serious about wearing the bars full-time so should we! The silver and white number alluded to by Hodges in your avatar would probably do the trick..

I've said before in this thread, had we hypothetically been allowed to wear the bars on joining the AFL - either in 1990 or 1997, chances are we would have needed to produce a viable clash design - a 'bastardisation' of our own somewhere in the intervening years till now..

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

Pappagallo

Co(m)poster
Jun 12, 2012
16,424
50,141
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Absolutely and by that same token if we're serious about wearing the bars full-time so should we! The silver and white number alluded to by Hodges in your avatar would probably do the trick..

I've said before in this thread, had we hypothetically been allowed to wear the bars on joining the AFL - either in 1990 or 1997, chances are we would have needed to produce a viable clash design - a 'bastardisation' of our own somewhere in the intervening years till now..

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Once we can wear what we want at home then it doesn’t even matter what we wear away. It could be teal and magenta polka dots for all I care. Changing your strip for away games is the convention in every sporting code globally (apart from our own) and it’s just good manners. Everyone wipes their feet before entering someone else’s home but Collingwood thinks it’s cool to lay back and put their muddy shoes on your couch for some reason.
 

chiwigi

I’ll make tears from your Wines.
Apr 9, 2009
17,083
29,775
Port Adelaide Zone
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Collingwood has two great, contrasting strips. The white shorts rule was at fault on Friday.
The fact that Eddie is allowed to make so many side deals is ridiculous. They should have a third strip is they want their away one to be so close to their home one. Geelong shouldn't have to have a side deal that prevents them wearing their home kit because Eddie doesn't want a proper clash guernsey and follow the rules.
 

MitchIn3D

Boot-Studder
Sep 11, 2014
975
3,222
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The fact that Eddie is allowed to make so many side deals is ridiculous. They should have a third strip is they want their away one to be so close to their home one. Geelong shouldn't have to have a side deal that prevents them wearing their home kit because Eddie doesn't want a proper clash guernsey and follow the rules.
We should just make secret side deals with everyone except Collingwood to wear the PBs.
 

Top Bottom