Discussion Round 2, 2020 - Photos and Discussion

[Red Crow]

Thursday, June 11
Collingwood v Richmond (MCG) N

Friday, June 12
Geelong v Hawthorn (GMHBA) N

Saturday, June 13
Brisbane Lions v Fremantle (Gabba)
Carlton v Melbourne (Marvel) T
Port Adelaide v Adelaide (AO) N
Gold Coast v West Coast (MS) N

Sunday, June 14
Greater Western Sydney v North Melbourne (GS)
Sydney v Essendon (SCG)
St Kilda v Western Bulldogs (Marvel) N

 

[Red Crow]

My takeaways from the weekend:

Geelong in navy shorts in all home games will probably be a thing again. Prior to last year when their white shorts policy went out the window, the last time they wore navy shorts against Hawthorn was 2014 - which was also the last year prior to 2019 that they wore navy more often than not at home. Their home game against Carlton next week will be interesting. Hawthorn is actually one of those teams that I see no issue with Geelong wearing navy shorts against, but I'd prefer to see Hawks in brown as well. The colours would pop against each other enough that there would be no clash.

North in home/white was weird. When you consider that they've had plenty of opportunities before to wear that combo but never have, I do wonder whether it was simply a case of the wrong jumper being packed, or perhaps the additional sponsor hadn't been applied to their white jumpers yet. Will be interesting to see if that continues throughout the year. There was no clash, but I thought the Roos uniform as a whole looked a bit messy. Maybe it was just me not being used to it.

Not a fan of the above number sponsors. Really hope they don't stick around post-2020. Just adds extra clutter. Saints in particular seemed huge compared to some other teams like Adelaide and West Coast.

The bars were immense. Only good thing about the game Saturday night Seemed to be a groundswell of support from some of the media too, which was great to see.

 

[Red Crow]

My GF asked me if the Crows were playing Collingwood which sums up why Port can't wear it full time

It is an identity clash, unfortunately

The thing to remember here is that this was a one-off, and the first time they've worn it at AFL level for 5.5 years. If it gets worn regularly, everyone will get to know it and be able to tell the difference.

 

[Prison bar Pete]

Anyone got any pics from in the reserves matches over the weekend?

 

[Andonis1997]

Haven't been on the board for a while, but was the new sponsor above the numbers a thing people had picked up on here during the hiatus? Or did it come by surprise?

From what I saw, I think Blues, Bulldogs, Swans, Giants, Power, Demons were teams without a sponsor above the numbers.

St Kilda meanwhile with Dare, deliveroo, RSEA and Pepper Money all on the one guernsey. Yikes. Good on them for doing it given their financial position, but I dread to think that this is the future of guernsies.

We all knew about it. To sum up the thread about it, we didn't like the idea of it but some posters thought it didn't look as bad as they expected.

Hopefully it is only for this year only.

 

[Bwillow11]

The thing to remember here is that this was a one-off, and the first time they've worn it at AFL level for 5.5 years. If it gets worn regularly, everyone will get to know it and be able to tell the difference.

To be honest, I don't think that is the point. Yes, if they consistenly wear it then casual fans will be able to tell the difference. However, those new to the game from overseas may not, and that's the contentious part.

Lets face it. The designs are eerily similar. They're both stripe based, and both black and white. If they wore the prison bars in another colour, there would be no issue. If they wore another distinct design in black and white, there would be no issue. Together though, there are rightly some issues.

 

[SFgiant]

Not a fan of the above number sponsors. Really hope they don't stick around post-2020. Just adds extra clutter. Saints in particular seemed huge compared to some other teams like Adelaide and West Coast.

I think the numbers on the back were even lower than usual to account for the large RSEA sponsor logo.

 

[caloschwaby]

Magpie? CFC? it could just be the rep number, who cares! shinboner was an unofficial name before kangaroos came along that's why it's big to us, it doesn't matter what it says it's just a nice touch to note the player number.

Woodsman probably the best choice

 

[justlookingaround]

Does anyone else feel like Port are actively trying to distance themselves from the Power moniker? The only reference to it on their website is through a community program they run. Also on their webstore the 2020 scarves just say 1870 rather than power - anything that does say power also features the old logo and is on discount, with the exception of a youth hoodie.
Is this just to do with the anniversary year or do you think they're quietly dropping it with their soft rebrand?

 

[Andonis1997]

Does anyone else feel like Port are actively trying to distance themselves from the Power moniker? The only reference to it on their website is through a community program they run. Also on their webstore the 2020 scarves just say 1870 rather than power - anything that does say power also features the old logo and is on discount, with the exception of a youth hoodie.
Is this just to do with the anniversary year or do you think they're quietly dropping it with their soft rebrand?

They'd be intending to drop 'Power' so they have the 'One Club' moniker, which as we know I don't agree with.

Edit (a more in-depth response after work) : If Collingwood weren't already the Magpies, no doubt Port would take that nickname. But, they can't do anything for as long as Collingwood is in the AFL. Vertical striped designs, no other colours involved - it's not quite 'black and white'* between the two designs.

* - I hate myself for this