Discussion Prison Bars debate

Should Port be allowed to wear the PBs as their home jumper?

  • Total voters
    253

Remove this Banner Ad

Zoops said:
I think a jumper so historic and so steeped in tradition shouldn't be the subject of compromise. My two cents worth, have at it how you will.
Click to expand...
A jumper so steeped in tradition?
The prison bar jumper has zero tradition in the AFL.
It is a SANFL jumper and that where the tradition should stay.
 
jakson68 said:
I did listen to myself! and I stand by it.
Port come into a competition and think they can do whatever they want, as if it is their right.
They entered in teal, stay in teal.
If you want to support the black and white Magpies, either follow Collingwood, or go watch a SANFL game.
Click to expand...

I’m good bro.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

jakson68 said:
A jumper so steeped in tradition?
The prison bar jumper has zero tradition in the AFL.
It is a SANFL jumper and that where the tradition should stay.
Click to expand...

Using that same logic:

Sydney has no right to use the South Melbourne jumper as the SM jumper was a VFL jumper.

Brisbane have no rights to the Fitzroy jumper, using the above example.

Heck, Western Bulldogs can't call themselves Footscray, either.

Oh and since Port is being singled out about it's heritage and being told we have no claim to it, let's cancel, null and void all Premierships and seasons prior to 1990 when the AFL started.

So that means.... Collingwood have no flags prior to 1990.

Because that's how it works, right?
 
Heardy_101 said:
Using that same logic:

Sydney has no right to use the South Melbourne jumper as the SM jumper was a VFL jumper.

Brisbane have no rights to the Fitzroy jumper, using the above example.

Heck, Western Bulldogs can't call themselves Footscray, either.

Oh and since Port is being singled out about it's heritage and being told we have no claim to it, let's cancel, null and void all Premierships and seasons prior to 1990 when the AFL started.

So that means.... Collingwood have no flags prior to 1990.

Because that's how it works, right?
Click to expand...
Welll to be fair Brisbane bought the rights to the Fitzroy stuff because Fitzroy ran itself into the ground and needed a bailout, South Melbourne just moved, Footscray just changed their name because they needed a broader appeal but kept the same name in the reserves and the VFL to AFL was introduced with the introduction of the Bears and Eagles, so it was just a brand change not a whole new league. The VSFL merged with the AFL reserves and became the VFL.

But regardless i think not acknowledging Ports success is dumb.
 
Nickimus Rex said:
Welll to be fair Brisbane bought the rights to the Fitzroy stuff because Fitzroy ran itself into the ground and needed a bailout,
Click to expand...

Revisionist. Fitzroy were largely sabotaged by the VFL/AFL. arbitrarily kicked out of junction oval and pushed into a number of bad ground deals, went to the trouble of setting up lucrative sponsorships which the league spiked for no reason, they attempted to sell games to Tasmania but got no support from the AFL to do it to the point that they ended up losing money. This is all very well documented, but the AFL's propaganda documentary skims over all of it. The AFL's agenda was to force Fitzroy to its knees so they could make room for more interstate sides (their license ended up going to Port Adelaide, though Port can't really be blamed for this.) I know this isn't the most on-topic reply for this thread but i see variations of this idea repeated everywhere and it's just wrong, at the end of the day there's nothing Fitzroy could have done.
 
Liam Boy said:
Revisionist. Fitzroy were largely sabotaged by the VFL/AFL. arbitrarily kicked out of junction oval and pushed into a number of bad ground deals, went to the trouble of setting up lucrative sponsorships which the league spiked for no reason, they attempted to sell games to Tasmania but got no support from the AFL to do it to the point that they ended up losing money. This is all very well documented, but the AFL's propaganda documentary skims over all of it. The AFL's agenda was to force Fitzroy to its knees so they could make room for more interstate sides (their license ended up going to Port Adelaide, though Port can't really be blamed for this.) I know this isn't the most on-topic reply for this thread but i see variations of this idea repeated everywhere and it's just wrong, at the end of the day there's nothing Fitzroy could have done.
Click to expand...

Propaganda? I'm going off what I have seen in "the Merge" and a bunch of news articles growing up, i sincerely doubt the AFL had a propaganda arm. I would recommend a watch, little details were pretty stark about the back end running of the club (i.e. being run out of a pub and with no proper offices to speak of).
There also seems to be a large amount of bitterness from North Melbourne in general about the situation, so i appreciate what you're saying, but given as i wasn't actually old enough to understand the situation in full, i can't comment. Regardless, they did run out of money, owed a significant amount to Naaru, had receivers take over the club and then events unfolded resulting in the Bears essentially buying the rights to be the Lions, and took on the debt.
 
Nickimus Rex said:
(i.e. being run out of a pub and with no proper offices to speak of).
Click to expand...

They didn't run it from the bar and the bistro. The Fitzroy Club Hotel (pictured below) was a three story building with the offices on the top floor.

8146585644_13dac74544_b.jpg

Nickimus Rex said:
Regardless, they did run out of money,
Click to expand...

Made small profits in 1993, 1994 and 1995.

Nickimus Rex said:
owed a significant amount to Naaru,
Click to expand...

$1.2 million, the payment of which was due in 2001.

Nickimus Rex said:
had receivers take over the club
Click to expand...

Do you know why? It wasn't because Fitzroy ran out of money. It was to recover the Nauru debt as North and the AFL didn't guarantee the Nauru debt would be settled out of the $6 million merger monies. Nauru struck first. This suited the AFL down to the ground.

Nickimus Rex said:
and then events unfolded resulting in the Bears essentially buying the rights to be the Lions, and took on the debt.
Click to expand...

The Bears rebranded.
 
Collingwood can own their name and logo and black and white stripes

Port are after black stripes and thin white bars - not black and white stripes as the stripes are not even in size

Heck 3 teams in the Brazilian Serie A have black and white stripes as their home strips and they don't give a hoot (check if you don't believe me)

Wear what you like Port. Pies get off the sauce and the high horse.
 
El_Scorcho said:
This isn't a gotcha.

We want control over when we wear our own playing uniform at home, just like every other major sports team in the world has.
Click to expand...
It's really amazing the arguments put forward by the Power People. Your uniform is not black and white stripes. It is not prison bars either. Waffle on all you like, but your argument has been rejected. Just as well, as the AFL understood the next step was the courts.
Suggestion to Power People: just embrace your current jumper and move forward.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Barrybran said:
Collingwood don't own black and white but they do own the rights to black and white stripes. So work around it. As I posted in the Jumper Ideas 2022 thread, slim the bars. The jumper below is a predominantly black jumper with white elements that cannot be confused with a Collingwood jumper. I personally like Scorch's version that FT posted the other day but I can't see Port Adelaide going for that otherwise we wouldn't be here.

m6MKJyk.png
Click to expand...
Collingwood would never agree to this jumper. Neither would its supporters.
 
Heardy_101 said:
Using that same logic:

Sydney has no right to use the South Melbourne jumper as the SM jumper was a VFL jumper.

Brisbane have no rights to the Fitzroy jumper, using the above example.

Heck, Western Bulldogs can't call themselves Footscray, either.

Oh and since Port is being singled out about it's heritage and being told we have no claim to it, let's cancel, null and void all Premierships and seasons prior to 1990 when the AFL started.

So that means.... Collingwood have no flags prior to 1990.

Because that's how it works, right?
Click to expand...
Rubbish argument. Brisbane and Sydney didn't try to steal another club's colours and logo. They were relocated clubs. Port Power was a newly created entity. It has a Power logo, although it seems to be disappearing. Strange that. It has teal as it predominant colour, but that seems to be disappearing too. It's just so obvious what Port Adelaide is up to. All very underhanded and sly. It has no hope at all of succeeding. Best to embrace your future and move on.
 
In light of the "proud" report and 2 of their previous 3 presidents perhaps Collingwood ditch the black entirely? ;)
 
Apples said:
It's really amazing the arguments put forward by the Power People. Your uniform is not black and white stripes. It is not prison bars either. Waffle on all you like, but your argument has been rejected. Just as well, as the AFL understood the next step was the courts.
Suggestion to Power People: just embrace your current jumper and move forward.
Click to expand...

It's "really amazing" that Port want to wear their preferred playing uniform, just like every other major sporting team in the world does. Okay.

Settle in, this isn't going away until it's resolved in our favour.
 
I think it should be worn in all games only involving SA clubs (worded this way for a time a 3rd SA club comes into the comp)

I have no issue with it being worn in both as I think prison Bars with white shorts (Yes they wear white shorts all the time in showdowns) really separates the two clubs.
 
David Koch has conned Port fans to think the club has a right to wear black and white stripes. The club has no such right and this was clearly established last week. Port is not permitted to wear a jumper just because it wants to. You're right that the matter isn't going away though; Koch keeps bleating about it. Both sides will need a compromise and as much as it sticks in my throat, once a year in Port's home Showdown should do the trick. This establishes the historical perspective, which is already clearly evident to anybody with a pair of eyes. When Port rejects this compromise, it will expose the club's real motives; to wear the black and white stripes whenever it feels like it. It's never going to happen.
 
Apples said:
Rubbish argument. Brisbane and Sydney didn't try to steal another club's colours and logo. They were relocated clubs. Port Power was a newly created entity. It has a Power logo, although it seems to be disappearing. Strange that. It has teal as it predominant colour, but that seems to be disappearing too. It's just so obvious what Port Adelaide is up to. All very underhanded and sly. It has no hope at all of succeeding. Best to embrace your future and move on.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you're wrong. There is no such thing as Port Power, nor have we tried to steal another teams identity.

This was explained in another post that you have deliberately ignored. Why, I don't know. But I'll repeat it here again and will continue to do so.

Port Adelaide was established in 1870. At the end of 1996 we left the SANFL and joined the AFL. Yes, this involved a new nickname and new colours. No one is denying that, nor are we trying to.

To replace us in the SANFL, a "new" Port Adelaide was created. This club was called the Port Adelaide Magpies FC and was based out of Ethelton for a few years as the two clubs had to remain separate. Eventually the PAMFC was allowed to he based out of Alberton.

In 2010 the two clubs merged under the One Club moniker and in 2013 they became our reserves side.

We are not trying to underhand Collingwood or become the Magpies again. Heck, our Reserves side doesn't even use the Magpies logo anymore. There is nothing sly about it. It's a universal logo used across-the-board instead of having a logo for one team and another logo for another.

Whether you like it or not, our Prison Bars jumper or Wharf Pylons, are our heritage and our best known uniform. Yes we also have others which we have worn in the past as well.

All we want to do is wear the PB once or twice a year. There is no push to wear them full time (yes I acknowledge that as much as the fans would love this, they also know it won't happen).
 
Apples said:
David Koch has conned Port fans to think the club has a right to wear black and white stripes. The club has no such right and this was clearly established last week. Port is not permitted to wear a jumper just because it wants to. You're right that the matter isn't going away though; Koch keeps bleating about it. Both sides will need a compromise and as much as it sticks in my throat, once a year in Port's home Showdown should do the trick. This establishes the historical perspective, which is already clearly evident to anybody with a pair of eyes. When Port rejects this compromise, it will expose the club's real motives; to wear the black and white stripes whenever it feels like it. It's never going to happen.
Click to expand...
Enough of the trolling, you clearly have a gripe with Port and it's clearly clouding your better judgement.

Koch isn't conning Port into anything other than the right to celebrate our history and heritage like any other club.

There is no push to wear them full time and you have no proof otherwise - it's a lie.

And yes, all we want is once or twice a year in Showdowns. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Stop being a troll, get your facts right and move on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sam Hall
Discussion Port Adelaide (SANFL) guernsey history
Replies
1
Views
919
Mero
Mero
Back
Top