Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
not that i can recall.Have Collingwood ever worn Hooped socks? Mero?
Yeh im aware, hence the comment that VFL/SANFL/WAFL until the late 80s were fairly equivalent.A lot of the SA players were at AFL clubs, Kernahan to name probably there best at the time.
the bolded is incorrect.In was in response to a Port poster saying Port are the most successful club because they have won 36 Premierships. 1998 and 1999 was their reserves side in the SANFL. It would be the equivalent of Melbourne claiming that they have won 14 Premierships because they won the 2000 reserves premiership.
I doubt it would’ve worked. Adelaide was able to gain support to compete in the AFL because it was representing the entire state, so people got behind it. Norwood wouldn’t have gotten anywhere near the support that the Crows did.If only Norwood were able to gain entry into the AFL rather than the Crows. Would've had two clubs with great football heritage from SA in the comp, but a similar palava between the Red Legs and Demons would've ensued, like the Port and Collingwood.
Fair enough - but doesn't really change the point does it?the bolded is incorrect.
Port Adelaide had a stand alone SANFL team until the end of 2013. Port did not have an AFL reserves team in the SANFL until the start of the 2014 season.
These were the ones I was thinking ofIf they havent ive been properly Mandela effected here, would put my house on that they have.
They would want it.Anyone that seriously thinks it’s unreasonable that GEELONG supporters would prefer their HOME finals are played in GEELONG, especially when playing a Victorian team has rocks in their heads. The fact it won’t happen doesn’t change that they would want it.
Melbourne, Richmond, North called the G home in the 80s.Back when one team played home games at the G. So 1/12 had a home advantage in finals.
Sydney didnt get home finals at SCGYes and 125 years later, 14/18 clubs happen to play their home games at the same venue they get home finals at. From less than 10% in the 60s to 75%.
Victorian finals are just as they always have been - two clubs going at in a packed MCG with plenty of fans from both clubs packes in.Whether you like it or not, finals aren’t neutral anymore. They are just as much H+A as the regular season.
Which Victorian club gets 11 home games at thier preferred ground?Great point, thank you. We want 11 home games and finals. Its a joke that clubs can sell home games to tassie, ballarat, darwin etc and still get their other home games where they please whilst we get told we should be considered lucky to go from 7 (which it was before 2017) to 9 home games at home.
Make them both wear red AND yellow shorts. Assholes.The problem seems to be Essendon and Richmond just not wanting to wear Red or Yellow shorts.
Personally I think once Geelong’s ground is comparable in capacity and amenity to all other primary interstate grounds used for finals there should be no reason they don’t get their finals at home. AFL gate takings be damned, they’ve earned it.They would want it.
But finals arent home games.
They are games dictated by the league, fans get equal access to them.
It has always been play them at the biggest ground available, as they are used to raise $$ for the entire league.
And then it becomes perfect to introduce two conferences.Personally I think once Geelong’s ground is comparable in capacity and amenity to all other primary interstate grounds used for finals there should be no reason they don’t get their finals at home. AFL gate takings be damned, they’ve earned it.
Yes they've been quite spectacular at conning money out of various levels of government.Personally I think once Geelong’s ground is comparable in capacity and amenity to all other primary interstate grounds used for finals there should be no reason they don’t get their finals at home. AFL gate takings be damned, they’ve earned it.
No idea about how much they earn, but I would suspect that with the addition of an indigenous jumper for every team, and potentially various retro/promotional jumpers, that there’s no need for clubs/manufacturers to crank out a new clash every year or two like they use to. I reckon clubs will move towards a more permanent clash jumper, particularly for a club like Richmond who have won a flag in theirs.How much revenue do clubs get from guernsey sales? Would it be profitable enough of an endeavour for to clubs to pump out a new clash/alternate jumper every couple of seasons?
I'm guessing it's not given most teams stances on jumper designs, but I'm curious as to the financials of such an exercise.
Yep, and gives Port the perfect next step on the road to the Prison bar holy grail-- all interconference games!And then it becomes perfect to introduce two conferences.
A 9 team Melbourne conference, and a 9 team non-Melbourne conference.
Geelong should then be treated like the non-Melbourne teams and head interstate every other week, the trade off for having a genuine home ground advantage.
I'd be happy for St Kilda to settle for something like this plus a jumper for Indigenous Round:No idea about how much they earn, but I would suspect that with the addition of an indigenous jumper for every team, and potentially various retro/promotional jumpers, that there’s no need for clubs/manufacturers to crank out a new clash every year or two like they use to. I reckon clubs will move towards a more permanent clash jumper, particularly for a club like Richmond who have won a flag in theirs.
I think this is pretty fair.Probably an opinion likely to annoy both Collingwood and Port Adelaide supporters, but here goes.
Collingwood shouldn’t argue with PA being able to wear their black and white jumper once a year in Adelaide, eg for a showdown.
On the flip side, if Collingwood wanted to “protect” the black and white, PA should at the same time have teal in their jumper for all the other matches.
Dropping one of your club colours for half your games isn’t really conducive to creating an identity with them.
The above scenario is a case of you give a little, you get a little.
AgreedI doubt it would’ve worked. Adelaide was able to gain support to compete in the AFL because it was representing the entire state, so people got behind it. Norwood wouldn’t have gotten anywhere near the support that the Crows did.
Yep, Port was only just big enough to survive that Primus era, and I wonder if Port hadn’t been so successful in the early 2000s whether they would have.Agreed
I'd probably be a Sydney supporter (Dad had soft spots for North Melbourne (North) and South Melbourne come Sydney (Red and White)) - Then in the mid 90s we moved to Sydney. Probably end up supporting them as we couldn't bring ourselves to support Port or Norwood.
A family friend of ours who support Adelaide/Glenelg. He probably would've stuck with Richmond and his children are raised Tigers fans, rather than Crow fans.
Like, yes, Port/Norwood were the 2 biggest clubs in Adelaide at the time. But the cities fanbase would probably be heavier towards Vic clubs had it been Norwood or Glenelg or whoever in place of Adelaide. The Crows unified the state/south australian ex-pats.
And we've also seen at times Port struggling (ie. Primus era) - If that happened to another club, god, Norwood would probably be in a worse place than North Melbourne right now if they were in the same place as Adelaide.
I’d almost guarantee the AFL don’t care about that part of itOne part of the prison bars debate that is very much relevant here is Port's request to wear it twice per season in Showdowns.
If we had a proper freaking policy there's no way they'd be wearing it in away Showdowns even if Collingwood was fine with it. The Crows wear navy, you can't have the away team in a black jumper. Port away should be in their clash strip.