Richmond "clash" jumper

[Marlowe]

If the argument is that all teams should have home and away jumpers, that's a different story, but that's not what we are arguing here. We are arguing about a real clash.

Away strip/clash strip. Semantics. Technically they may not clash but a navy team vs. black team leaves such little contrast one wonders what for when there's an easy fix available.

And all clubs should have an away strip that involves more than wearing white shorts, a traditions that's practically archaic.

 

[Dazzler9]

One has a giant bright yellow sash, you fool. Kind of makes it stand out. If Richmonds was all black then you would have a point. Buuuut you dont.
I was at the game and had 0 issues. I watched the highlights and had 0 issues.


Zoomed out view and poor quality and I still can easily tell which team each player plays for.
Just look at the left most player, you can barely tell its a person and you can still see the yellow.

But sure its a primary case for a clash jumper. Lmao.
If you can't instantly see the difference, then there is a problem with your eyes. Go buy some glasses.

Nope. You're wrong

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Away strip/clash strip. Semantics. Technically they may not clash but a navy team vs. black team leaves such little contrast one wonders what for when there's an easy fix available.

And all clubs should have an away strip that involves more than wearing white shorts, a traditions that's practically archaic.

FFS, all traditions become archaic. Just by definition alone!

Until the AFL signal that there should be an official away jumper, then we can wear what we did on Thursday. It's not semantics. It's the rules. There is no clash as there is no confusion between the two teams. That's what the rule is for.

 

[Dazzler9]

Are you serious? Even the white shorts made it bloody obvious. There was no clash whatsoever on Thursday night. None.

If someone has difficulty in differentiating, even for a split second, then there is a clash. Just because there isn't for you, doesn't mean there isn't for others. It's an individual perception thing.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

I remember Conca handballing it straight to Murphy. Jumper issue or Conca just being s**t?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

I remember Conca handballing it straight to Murphy. Jumper issue or Conca just being s**t?

It was Lloyd and he was s**t on Thursday.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

If someone has difficulty in differentiating, even for a split second, then there is a clash. Just because there isn't for you, doesn't mean there isn't for others. It's an individual perception thing.

Is this you?

 

[Dazzler9]

Notice how it's only Richmond fans claiming there was no clash, plus the occasional fan from another Big 4.

 

[Dazzler9]

Is this you?

Where did you get that pic of me? Did you hack my laptop??

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I don't watch soccer. I watch AFL. I don't care what other sports do. We are not copy cats and we never should be. We are a unique sport in a unique country.

Haha!!! Just about every contemporary innovation in Austraian Rules has been stolen from other sports. Who are you trying to kid other than yourself?

 

[TiggerMan22]

Nope. You're wrong

In what way?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Haha!!! Just about every contemporary innovation in Austraian Rules has been stolen from other sports. Who are you trying to kid other than yourself?

And do you think every contemporary innovation has been good? LMAO.

 

[Marlowe]

It's the rules. There is no clash as there is no confusion between the two teams. That's what the rule is for.

The problem is the rule is left to interpretation and it impacts each club differently. Richmond wear their clash against Port and they wore it last last year against Freo. By that logic, they clash with Carlton and Collingwood as well because they either clash with all or they clash with none. Same applies with Essendon. They have a red clash now and they wore fairly liberally last season but I don't think they have worn it/will wear it against Carlton and Collingwood. Freo on the other hand wear their white jumper at almost every opportunity they get to show it off, even in the Grand Final against in a team in a supposed 'light' jumper.

You're never going to see Gold Coast and Sydney play in all red just as you're unlikely to see North and the Bulldogs play in all royal blue. The same should apply to the big Victorian clubs. Hawthron wore a power rangers outfit for two seasons to avoid certain clashes and they're arguably a bigger club than Richmond and Carlton are right now. There really shouldn't be any excuse for those clubs to not be wearing clash jumpers when they play each other.

 

[TiggerMan22]

God, I love this excuse.

http://www.ibtimes.com.au/aihw-repo...asses-contact-lenses-due-eye-problems-1492776



http://www.visionaustralia.org/learn-more/newly-diagnosed/blindness-and-vision-loss



So, "F*** 'em" is the official stance, rather than wearing the perfectly functional clash jumper that Richmond has? Not to mention, of course, the millions of neutrals that would simply find it easier on the eyes to watch an all-navy team against a team with yellow jumpers?

For anyone that still feels this way in 2017, without being able to take a look around and see that any other contact sport in the world would make the away team wear a change uniform if similar primary colours were in play as Thursday night, well, I sincerely hope that your team loses the next game where it stupidly wears its regular jumper, when a clash is clearly called for, through an inexplicable turnover by one of your players.

In fairness to the stubborness demonstrated by the aforementioned Victorian 'big 4', I've noticed that Port Adelaide and Adelaide are more than happy to wear their clash guernsey against anyone...except each other. The AFL seriously needs to put the foot down on this issue.

God, I love that excuse.

Where in those articles does it say those people struggle with AFL jumpers?
Great lots of people don't have perfect eyesight. In what way does that prove they struggle with telling the difference?
Lots of people wear contacts or glasses? Well that helps their vision so they shouldn't have a problem, should they? And if they're not wearing them, then that's on them.
I don't have perfect vision, I had to wear glasses as a kid. I still don't have a any trouble.
Seriously what a garbage argument.

Holy s**t what is wrong with you. How are the colours simair.
One is all navy blue, the other is 60% black and 40% yellow. Very, very easy to tell the difference.

You know what we should have one team where 100% white and one team wear 100% black. Problem solved eh?

 

[TiggerMan22]

Haha!!! Just about every contemporary innovation in Austraian Rules has been stolen from other sports. Who are you trying to kid other than yourself?

And bringing them together makes a unique sport, doesn't it?
You think all the rules have to be made up out of the blue for it be unique? Hahahah

 

[Ancient Tiger]

The problem is the rule is left to interpretation and it impacts each club differently. Richmond wear their clash against Port and they wore it last last year against Freo. By that logic, they clash with Carlton and Collingwood as well because they either clash with all or they clash with none. Same applies with Essendon. They have a red clash now and they wore fairly liberally last season but I don't think they have worn it/will wear it against Carlton and Collingwood. Freo on the other hand wear their white jumper at almost every opportunity they get to show it off, even in the Grand Final against in a team in a supposed 'light' jumper.

You're never going to see Gold Coast and Sydney play in all red just as you're unlikely to see North and the Bulldogs play in all royal blue. The same should apply to the big Victorian clubs. Hawthron wore a power rangers outfit for two seasons to avoid certain clashes and they're arguably a bigger club than Richmond and Carlton are right now. There really shouldn't be any excuse for those clubs to not be wearing clash jumpers when they play each other.

I'm not sure what you are arguing? You seem to be going from jumpers clashing to rules for some and rules for others.

I think there should be clear rules which everyone can understand when it comes to jumpers clashing. We only have 18 teams and they play each other as pairs, so it can't be that hard for a list to be made of which jumpers clash with which and have that list published. The list should be agreed upon by all clubs. Simple.

 

[Underarm]

Notice how it's only Richmond fans claiming there was no clash, plus the occasional fan from another Big 4.

Well doesn't our (and Carlton) opinion matter more in this scenario? We're the ones who are watching our club week in week out.

There wasn't any confusion on the field. I feel like their opinion matters most.

 

[underthestars]

i hate clubs wearing clash jumpers, and thought richmond v carlton was fine, even in the pre-clash days of black & white tele.
that said - if the afl make up stupid rules they need to either keep them consistent or abolish them. so its dark v light. oh, and get rid of essendons horrid all red, and collingwoods home away from home mockery.

 

[wing it]

I'm not sure what you are arguing? You seem to be going from jumpers clashing to rules for some and rules for others.

I think there should be clear rules which everyone can understand when it comes to jumpers clashing. We only have 18 teams and they play each other as pairs, so it can't be that hard for a list to be made of which jumpers clash with which and have that list published. The list should be agreed upon by all clubs. Simple.

Agreed. With Richmond vs Carlton vs Collingwood vs Essendon on said list.

 

[Marlowe]

I'm not sure what you are arguing? You seem to be going from jumpers clashing to rules for some and rules for others.

I think there should be clear rules which everyone can understand when it comes to jumpers clashing. We only have 18 teams and they play each other as pairs, so it can't be that hard for a list to be made of which jumpers clash with which and have that list published. The list should be agreed upon by all clubs. Simple.

I am trying to say the way the AFL's rules work now is that they are only applicable for some and not others, often resulting illogical inconsistencies. If a club has a clash/away jumper they should wear it as frequently as possible to avoid anything remotely resembling a clash at all costs.

I am with you in that there should be a clear set rules, ideally they could dictate when clubs should wear clash/away jumpers and organised it in accordance with the fixture. They do this in other codes, especially in America where some teams have 'third jersey fixtures'.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

God, I love that excuse.

Where in those articles does it say those people struggle with AFL jumpers?
Great lots of people don't have perfect eyesight. In what way does that prove they struggle with telling the difference?
Lots of people wear contacts or glasses? Well that helps their vision so they shouldn't have a problem, should they? And if they're not wearing them, then that's on them.
I don't have perfect vision, I had to wear glasses as a kid. I still don't have a any trouble.
Seriously what a garbage argument.

Holy s**t what is wrong with you. How are the colours simair.
One is all navy blue, the other is 60% black and 40% yellow. Very, very easy to tell the difference.

You know what we should have one team where 100% white and one team wear 100% black. Problem solved eh?

Keep changing the argument as much as you like. Many people in this thread are saying that they found it pretty tough to distinguish the teams. They are also saying that Richmond would wear the clash jumper every time in an away game against Port Adelaide or Fremantle and that therefore an issue must logically also exist with Carlton.

And Richmond's jumper is 40% yellow? You have to be kidding. Making ridiculous exaggerations doesn't exactly help your position.

 

[Killer Kowalski]

They should only use original jumpers. If the players can't tell the difference too bad they will soon learn

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I don't watch soccer. I watch AFL. I don't care what other sports do. We are not copy cats and we never should be. We are a unique sport in a unique country.

If you can't tell the difference between the two teams I suggest you go and get your eyes checked. If my old eyes can see the difference you should too. The definition of a clash is where you get the two confused. That's when teams should change to a clash jumper, when there is a chance of confusion. These two teams have played each other for over a hundred years without any confusion. FACT. If that's not good enough proof to you, you are just trolling.

Yes, they've been playing since just after Federation. My guess is it wasn't a billion dollar industry back then.

Every other professional sport in the world uses a clash when a primarily navy team plays a primarily black team. Every other professional Australian sport would do the same. Even the second tier, amateur and suburban Aussie Rules leagues around the country would. Many people in this thread have said that it would have been easier viewing with Richmond in yellow, or expressing surprise that they weren't wearing yellow, including some Richmond supporters.

The counter argument?

1. I was at the game and I had no problem telling the navy team with white numbers and the black team with a yellow sash and white numbers apart. By the way, I'm not biased at all.
2. Get your eyes checked!!
3. Something, something, tradition something...

Rinse and repeat.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Keep changing the argument as much as you like. Many people in this thread are saying that they found it pretty tough to distinguish the teams. They are also saying that Richmond would wear the clash jumper every time in an away game against Port Adelaide or Fremantle and that therefore an issue must logically also exist with Carlton.

And Richmond's jumper is 40% yellow? You have to be kidding. Making ridiculous exaggerations doesn't exactly help your position.

Who has actually said they found it difficult? The arguments have been theoretical i.e. navy blue is close to black so that must mean clash. I really can't see how anyone can really confuse the two. FWIW, watching St Kilda and Melbourne is much harder. The darker blue front of the Melbourne jumper is very close to the black of the back of the St Kilda jumper so if someone is facing you while the other has their back to you, momentarily you have a hard time telling the difference. Melbourne's clash jumper is poor. Should be mostly red with blue upper in the front.

So the clash jumper of Melbourne is much closer to St Kilda than the traditional jumpers of Richmond and Carltons' are to each other. LMAO.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Yes, they've been playing since just after Federation. My guess is it wasn't a billion dollar industry back then.

Every other professional sport in the world uses a clash when a primarily navy team plays a primarily black team. Every other professional Australian sport would do the same. Even the second tier, amateur and suburban Aussie Rules leagues around the country would. Many people in this thread have said that it would have been easier viewing with Richmond in yellow, or expressing surprise that they weren't wearing yellow, including some Richmond supporters.

The counter argument?

1. I was at the game and I had no problem telling the navy team with white numbers and the black team with a yellow sash and white numbers apart. By the way, I'm not biased at all.
2. Get your eyes checked!!
3. Something, something, tradition something...

Rinse and repeat.

Who really found it difficult to tell the difference? Come on, they are trolls or liars or both.