Swans have ten premierships

[threenewpadlocks]

They were counted for about 30 years in the same way as VFL flags were. It's not like Carter and others just came up with this with no merit whatsoever.

Just because Carter and co can present some old documentation doesn't make it correct. The six clubs (including Geelong) that instigated the breakaway, at the time, effectively committed treason against the football organising of the time because they were unhappy they weren't making enough money from it. That was it. They wanted to provide legitimacy to their new competition, and claiming a continuous history was part of that. The VFA had a very difficult relationship at times with the VFL and other bodies such as the ANFC at times. They wanted to justify their decision they made by claiming continuous history to the past. Associated journalists and the like at the time combining the two records also fall under that banner - they wanted to provide that same legitimisation.

It's a good thing that the in the last 90 years the VFL/AFL didn't need to bother finding a reason to defend the breakaway decision, and over time, everyone can accept that they wanted to make more money and formed a new competition to do so. As I stated above, it left still-existing teams like Williamstown and Port Melbourne in their wake (who presumably wouldn't be happy with the decision to combine statistics in a competition they were, and then weren't in).

 

[MF]

VFA was whole different competition to count them with VFL/AFL would be like counting SANFL flags with VFL/AFL.

You could argue the VFL is a completely different competition to the AFL today.

 

[Obeanie1]

The Swans will soon if the AFL keeps shoveling assistance their way as they have been every year for how long?

Wonder how many flags they need to win before AFL House stops and thinks they actually don't need it.

Lol. AFL stopping and thinking. How silly of us.

 

[rapidfire7]

Such an arrogant stance. Footy was being played all over the country in the late 1800's yet with no way of means testing you label Victoria as the best so there they should get AFL premiership status. This is like the NBA declaring themselves World Champions.

How about the VFL? Do you think we could say that was the premier comp in Australia post 1896?

If so, why should the old VFA (which had all the VFL foundation teams) be thought of in such a different light, in regards to being the best comp or not?

If not, do you think it's right/fair for Victorian clubs to be able to include their VFL flags in their AFL totals, when clubs like Port Adelaide are not allowed to include their SANFL flags? Are VFL flags truly worthy of national Premiership status?

When do you think we should start the premiership tally for AFL teams to be the most true and fair to everyone?

 

[threenewpadlocks]

How about the VFL? Do you think we could say that was the premier comp in Australia post 1896?

Yes. But it didn't necessarily produce the premier team.

Championship of Australia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If so, why should the old VFA (which had all the VFL foundation teams) be thought of in such a different light, in regards to being the best comp or not?

It isn't thought of differently as being the best comp. But it should be thought of as differently because Port Melbourne and Williamston still exist, and it should be thought of differently because there was an active decision to form a new competition.

If not, do you think it's right/fair for Victorian clubs to be able to include their VFL flags in their AFL totals

Yes, because legally speaking there the VFL/AFL was formed in 1897 and has operated ever since. The Brownlow medal is still the Brownlow medal whether it was awarded in 1931 or 2001.

There is no suggestion that a given VFL/AFL flag is anything but exactly that - just a VFL/AFL flag. Nobody is suggesting that that automatically declares that team to be the 'champion' team of all football or whatever. You're strawmanning by suggesting there's some group of people that say it is. The Western Bulldogs doesn't try to take away Essendon's 1924 VFL/AFL flag, even though Footscray literally defeated Essendon in a champion-of-Victoria match. We can claim we are champions of Victoria. I have never heard a Bulldogs person in my life suggest that we have a premiership in the VFL/AFL in 1924 and Essendon don't. Because we understand that the VFL/AFL is a distinct competition from the VFA.

when clubs like Port Adelaide are not allowed to include their SANFL flags?

Because they are SANFL flags. It's a different competition.

Are VFL flags truly worthy of national Premiership status?

Nobody's claiming that they are. Port Adelaide can claim that they were the best team in Australia in 1914. Absolutely nobody would disagree for that year, and maybe some others. There can be some healthy historical debate for some other years. One would expect the Victorian team to be the best Australian team in the majority of, but not all years historically.

When do you think we should start the premiership tally for AFL teams to be the most true and fair to everyone?

Why is this important? The AFL has two jobs. It runs a competition, and it is the custodian of the sport itself. Declaring VFL/AFL premiers is in keeping with that first goal. You can argue that in order to more effectively achieve the second goal, it can declare 'champion teams' for every year, like the example I gave above. That may be impossible or up to speculation because teams from different competitions did not always play each other.

 

[Sentinel]

Exactly. People, for some stupid reason want the VFL/AFL to count things in the history of that competition that didn’t occur in the history of that competition. Next they’ll be wanting the AFL to recognise the LA Lakers 17 NBA championships.

I'm also interested to know if we are to count all of the other records from the pre-1897 years in the official Australian Football League records, or do we only update the records for premierships? Do the likes of Williamstown, Albert Park, Ballarat Imperial, Hotham and Port Melbourne now join University as former clubs? Do we update the list of wooden spooners to include Williamstown alongside the other VFL/AFL teams to have finished last? What about games and goal kicking records?

The idea gets more and more ridiculous the further you think about it. It's completely moronic.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

The AFL should count AFL flags separately, using that as a delineation for when the game became a properly national, properly professional game, even though it isn't that simple.

It's not perfect, but it's certainly better than pretending amateur flags won in separate and even divided state leagues 120 years ago are worth jack sh*t.

The VFL didn't even have a monoply on top talent in Victoria let alone Australia for decades.

 

[Sentinel]

How about the VFL? Do you think we could say that was the premier comp in Australia post 1896?

If so, why should the old VFA (which had all the VFL foundation teams) be thought of in such a different light, in regards to being the best comp or not?

If not, do you think it's right/fair for Victorian clubs to be able to include their VFL flags in their AFL totals, when clubs like Port Adelaide are not allowed to include their SANFL flags? Are VFL flags truly worthy of national Premiership status?

When do you think we should start the premiership tally for AFL teams to be the most true and fair to everyone?

The AFL record books do not show "national Premiership status", that's something you've made up entirely. They show the record list of the continuous competition from 1897 to today. This is not the 'Australian rules football top flight premiers' list we are talking about, it's the VFL/AFL premiers list.

Whether the SANFL, WAFL or South Broome Football League was stronger than the VFL in 1934 is actually irrelevant.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

It's not perfect, but it's certainly better than pretending amateur flags won in separate and even divided state leagues 120 years ago are worth jack sh*t.

They aren't, in the same way that is isn't jack s**t to put Kevin Bartlett, Michael Tuck, Dustin Fletcher, Brent Harvey and Shaun Burgoyne in a category together for the same reason.

Nobody has to tally up the flags or consider the premierships equal, other than as a pure statistical fact that it is, just like the statistical fact I posted above.

The VFL didn't even have a monoply on top talent in Victoria let alone Australia for decades.

Nobody claims that it ever did.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

It has always been the elite comp.

Nobody decided to leave the VFL to test themself in the great leagues of SA and WA. A few went for money or to go home, but the VFL was where interstate players came if they wanted to play against the best.

Everyone knows that, but the AFL over the last couple of decades has pandered to the WA and SA supporters by including second-rate players in the Hall of Fame and pretending that those comps were anywhere close to the VFL. Nobody with a brain believes it, but it's about the cash for the AFL so they don't want to upset the fragile egos west of The Grampians.

No they went to the VFL for money.

Or because they'd moved to Victoria for non-football work.

 

[rapidfire7]

The AFL record books do not show "national Premiership status", that's something you've made up entirely. They show the record list of the continuous competition from 1897 to today. This is not the 'Australian rules football top flight premiers' list we are talking about, it's the VFL/AFL premiers list.

Whether the SANFL, WAFL or South Broome Football League was stronger than the VFL in 1934 is actually irrelevant.

A previous poster seemed to make the point that VFA flags should not be counted in AFL tallies because there was no way of verifying it was the the premier comp in the country at the time. I was asking if they felt similarly about the VFL /VFL Premierships, not claiming that national premeiship status was actually a thing. Guess I should have been clearer.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

They aren't, in the same way that is isn't jack s**t to put Kevin Bartlett, Michael Tuck, Dustin Fletcher, Brent Harvey and Shaun Burgoyne in a category together for the same reason.

Nobody has to tally up the flags or consider the premierships equal, other than as a pure statistical fact that it is, just like the statistical fact I posted above.

Nobody claims that it ever did.

There's nothing inherently objective about it. It's just a choice that an authoritative institution has made and they could easily change it for perfectly legitimate reasons, as they have in the past.

The benefits of drawing a dinstinction between AFL and VFL/SANFL/VFA/WAFL flags is simply because it provides a way of giving a more honest account of the history of 'top-flight' football. The AFL was a rebrand for a reason.

The continuum of VFL/AFL serves to diminish the other state league flags, give unwarranted status to certain VFL-era flags and basically serves to distort history in people's minds, even if that is not the intent (although it is).

 

[Purple Suit]

How about the VFL? Do you think we could say that was the premier comp in Australia post 1896?

If so, why should the old VFA (which had all the VFL foundation teams) be thought of in such a different light, in regards to being the best comp or not?

If not, do you think it's right/fair for Victorian clubs to be able to include their VFL flags in their AFL totals, when clubs like Port Adelaide are not allowed to include their SANFL flags? Are VFL flags truly worthy of national Premiership status?

When do you think we should start the premiership tally for AFL teams to be the most true and fair to everyone?

AFL flags start in 1990 which is the true tally of AFL flags, the only thing that should matter.

Local amateur competitions are probably at a higher standard than the footy back in the 1800's. They really can't be compared as anywhere near the same value.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

There's nothing inherently objective about it. It's just a choice that an authoritative institution has made and they could easily change it for perfectly legitimate reasons, as they have in the past.

The benefits of drawing a dinstinction between AFL and VFL/SANFL/VFA/WAFL flags is simply because it provides a way of giving a more honest account of the history of 'top-flight' football. The AFL was a rebrand for a reason.

The continuum of VFL/AFL serves to diminish the other state league flags, give unwarranted status to certain VFL-era flags and basically serves to distort history in people's minds, even if that is not the intent (although it is).

The VFL/AFL also used to play 18-game seasons. It doesn't change record game holders. Players like Ted Whitten had just as much longevity as a player as the 22-game era 400 game players. Should we count game record holders differently because there is 'distorted history in people's minds'?

 

[GWT6]

No they went to the VFL for money.

Or because they'd moved to Victoria for non-football work.

Hahahaha. And I choose not to sleep with Scarlett Johansson because I don't want to travel.

That's probably the stupidest comment I've seen on BigFooty - congrats.

 

[Boyohboywowwee]

Swans might have 11 come the end of September

 

[Taper]

I'm also interested to know if we are to count all of the other records from the pre-1897 years in the official Australian Football League records, or do we only update the records for premierships? Do the likes of Williamstown, Albert Park, Ballarat Imperial, Hotham and Port Melbourne now join University as former clubs? Do we update the list of wooden spooners to include Williamstown alongside the other VFL/AFL teams to have finished last? What about games and goal kicking records?

The idea gets more and more ridiculous the further you think about it. It's completely moronic.

I'd be interested to see how much St Kilda's wooden spoon tally increases by when including all records from 1870 onwards.

 

[Sentinel]

I'd be interested to see how much St Kilda's wooden spoon tally increases by when including all records from 1870 onwards.

They would add a few to the tally, but I feel like they were stitched up a little in 1878 and 1875 when they weren't given quite as many games as the competition (assuming 'St Kilda cum University' is the Saints?). But who could forget Geelong's dominant 4 game 1878 premiership season, or 17 games total when you include matches against intercolonial, up-country and junior clubs.




Of course their 1875 spoon can be partly blamed on the form of their junior and "odds" teams, which all formed part of the season's ladder:




A quick gander at the wikipedia pages of the pre-1897 VFA seasons shows just how legitimate Colin Carter's attempt to rewrite history and bump up his beloved Geelong's VFL/AFL premiership tally really is by including selective records from a completely different competition from 1870 onwards (and of course ignoring every other record that is not 'premier as decided by press consensus' from those years). It's completely laughable.

 

[Captain_Bender]

They would add a few to the tally, but I feel like they were stitched up a little in 1878 and 1875 when they weren't given quite as many games as the competition (assuming 'St Kilda cum University' is the Saints?). But who could forget Geelong's dominant 4 game 1878 premiership season, or 17 games total when you include matches against intercolonial, up-country and junior clubs.

View attachment 1939537
View attachment 1939513

Of course their 1875 spoon can be partly blamed on the form of their junior and "odds" teams, which all formed part of the season's ladder:

View attachment 1939530
View attachment 1939535

A quick gander at the wikipedia pages of the pre-1897 VFA seasons shows just how legitimate Colin Carter's attempt to rewrite history and bump up his beloved Geelong's VFL/AFL premiership tally really is by including selective records from a completely different competition from 1870 onwards (and of course ignoring every other record that is not 'premier as decided by press consensus' from those years). It's completely laughable.

There wasn't even a official VFA premiership rewarded until 1888, Geelong actually have zero

 

[Ed_Gein]

I think they should be counted. VFA was the sports top level competition in Victoria until a majority of the clubs formed the VFL. Even then, 3 or 4 of the clubs that didn't initially join the VFL like Hawthorn, Bulldogs, etc ended up joining the VFL later, anyway.

The situation kinda has an air of English Premier League about it. Every club there still counts their titles from pre-1992.

 

[Cyclops]

So if the Pies form a merger with North King Island Bulldogs we'll have a gazllion flags? Waow.

Carter's sorry cope strategies for Geelongs mediocre silverware problem is a sad exercise in intellectual dishonesty. No one "forgot" Geelong had VFA flags, and IIRC all of those he claims were award post facto by journalists. Even by his own shabby illogic he adds nothing to the cupboard.

All clubs should be proud of all flags they have won, but we contest the Big League, the AFL which was formerly the VFL. Its a lovely troll to claim journo-guessed non flags from a different league and gets a rise, but you're making a laughing stock of this Carter bloke who hasn't got two brain cells to rub together these days. Its borderline elder abuse to let him disgrace himself in this way.

 

[Sentinel]

I think they should be counted. VFA was the sports top level competition in Victoria until a majority of the clubs formed the VFL. Even then, 3 or 4 of the clubs that didn't initially join the VFL like Hawthorn, Bulldogs, etc ended up joining the VFL later, anyway.

The situation kinda has an air of English Premier League about it. Every club there still counts their titles from pre-1992.

There is no argument about what clubs can or cannot count in their own history books. Very different to the history books of this specific league (the VFL/AFL).

 

[glengowan]

It’s pretty simple. It’s either VFA, VFL, SANFL or AFL or you can do VFL/AFL, VFA/VFL/AFL or SANFL/AFL. Whatever floats your boat. Certainly an AFL premiership is much more significant post 1990 when the best from all over Australia started competing with each other.

 

[i am a logo]

The AFL should count AFL flags separately, using that as a delineation for when the game became a properly national, properly professional game, even though it isn't that simple.

It's not perfect, but it's certainly better than pretending amateur flags won in separate and even divided state leagues 120 years ago are worth jack sh*t.

The VFL didn't even have a monoply on top talent in Victoria let alone Australia for decades.

If they did it would hurt their business. They want people watching old VFL videos, buying old guernseys etc

At the end of the day, whether pre-1990 premierships are actually AFL premierships is just a matter of personal opinion, and not something that has a definitive answer. It's like how some people think the history of Port Power and the Brisbane Lions started in the late 90s, while others say 1987 / 1870. With the Lions in particular, the AFL has contradicted themselves on multiple occasions as to whether the club formed in the 80s or the 90s. They've been more consistent over how many premierships teams have won, for the reason I previously outlined.

 

[Ed_Gein]

There is no argument about what clubs can or cannot count in their own history books. Very different to the history books of this specific league (the VFL/AFL).

Yeah, I get it. It's the same deal with the English Premier League. You go to their official site or the wikipedia page and they only include records or acknowledge the top flight of English football from 1992 onwards. But try and tell a Liverpool fan they've only won 1 title instead of 19, for example.

It’s pretty simple. It’s either VFA, VFL, SANFL or AFL or you can do VFL/AFL, VFA/VFL/AFL or SANFL/AFL. Whatever floats your boat. Certainly an AFL premiership is much more significant post 1990 when the best from all over Australia started competing with each other.

SANFL is an entirely seperate league with different teams in a different state that didn't evolve into the national competition the VFA/VFL/AFL did. Not sure why they should be included here.