Remove this Banner Ad

The return of number 42.

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

As a younger fan, I do not know much about the legacy of Millane. I know about the finals series he played through with a broken thumb and the tragic death, is there more to the legacy that someone could share?

One of the nicest blokes you'd ever want to meet (off the footy field anyway). The typical lovable larrikan that lit up a room when he entered. In the social club after a game he'd take the time to talk to anyone, and always made them feel important to him. It's unheralded but he was also known to spend a lot of time doing after hours community work at RCH and such like.
 
The club was going to bring the 42 back on the 20th anniversary of Pants' passing. The memory of Millane throwing the ball above his head when the siren went in the 1990 GF, then only to hear he played that whole finals series with a broken thumb, makes the 42 continue the story and memory of Darren Millane. I couldn't see anyother player wearing it.

Was quite amazing that 20 years later, same pocket was Didak holding the ball up and he’d played through with a torn pectoral muscle hehe
 
The number on his back is a legacy of what it means to be a Collingwood player.. tough hard courageous skillful loyal.

I don't think it should be reintroduced. It should be used to inspire new and old players at the club.

I'd also retire the 1 Guernsey.. for us supporters. Love the idea. Won't happen though.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

No need also puts a potential target on players back.

Eg. Not worthy of the number etc.
You wouldn’t just issue it to a player randomly, ideally the player would have reached a certain bench mark in his career, as well as have some Millane like traits. It could be seen as the ultimate honour.
I don’t see how it can heap any more pressure on someone that say numbers 5 or 35. Buckley and Daicos were pretty exceptional players.
 
You wouldn’t just issue it to a player randomly, ideally the player would have reached a certain bench mark in his career, as well as have some Millane like traits. It could be seen as the ultimate honour.
I don’t see how it can heap any more pressure on someone that say numbers 5 or 35. Buckley and Daicos were pretty exceptional players.
They were but anyone taken before their time and in such tragic circumstances has an extra aura that‘s difficult to invade. I’d think most of the older Collingwood players or staff would want it still retired.
If I would have been fortunate enough to take the 35 from the master or 5 from our champion it would be a dream come true but the 42 isn’t for mortal man.
 
You wouldn’t just issue it to a player randomly, ideally the player would have reached a certain bench mark in his career, as well as have some Millane like traits. It could be seen as the ultimate honour.
I don’t see how it can heap any more pressure on someone that say numbers 5 or 35. Buckley and Daicos were pretty exceptional players.
42 has been elevated beyond other numbers due to the circumstances of Millane passing and what it subsequently represents.

I understand it would be given to a chosen player, but I think at this stage it is a cross to bear.

Maynard costs us games with a bone headed error, or gets shirtfronted and put on his arse once again by Ryan.

"Pants would have never.. " etc.
 
42 has been elevated beyond other numbers due to the circumstances of Millane passing and what it subsequently represents.

I understand it would be given to a chosen player, but I think at this stage it is a cross to bear.

Maynard costs us games with a bone headed error, or gets shirtfronted and put on his arse once again by Ryan.

"Pants would have never.. " etc.
Definitely, Millane’s awareness was second to none. Maynard is more of a Doug Barwick with attitude.
 
My most prized piece of Collingwood memorabilia. I wore it to the 1990 Grand Final as an 18 year old.
I also went to that GF and wore my 42 jumper. After he passed away I picked the number off. Don’t remember why, probably a bit upset. Point is, bringing the number back doesn’t bring him back. I get where you are coming from but IMO it’s best to leave it buried with Pants.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Definitely, Millane’s awareness was second to none. Maynard is more of a Doug Barwick with attitude.
No Maynard is closer to Pants than Dougie and for all his awareness he made plenty of blues, always gave everything to make up for them though and never took a backward step. Bruzzy is the same but legends are best left alone.
 
No Maynard is closer to Pants than Dougie and for all his awareness he made plenty of blues, always gave everything to make up for them though and never took a backward step. Bruzzy is the same but legends are best left alone.
Odd fact - Barwick played the same number of games as Millane (147) albeit just more than half for the Roys.
 
The question still evokes such emotion. I feel as a club that we have demonstrated our respect for the man "Pants" was and for his surviving family members but I still have trouble with the permanent retirement of a number. Did we retire the numbers of the players lost in the Wars? Why not? Did we retire Wayne Gordon's number 13 when he died of cancer or John Greening's 22 when he was lost to us all in 1972?
I know he didn't die (but he almost did and was never the same again).

Did they retire Ron Todd's number or Des Tuddenham's or Bobby Rose's when they shook the club to it's foundations and left for greener pastures? No....but in Pant's case we have done so for the sake of his mum. Many have spoken of Pant's own wishes would have been to see it play on...but we continue to look at the empty locker, the blank spot on the list and we wonder who else may have made that famous number proud.

So many players look back on their numbers running around with pride. SOME even get to hand on their numbers to chosen successors. Supporters keep the numbers alive on their own supporter garb and the club has lists of the famous players to have worn those numbers.

Surely Pants and Mrs. Millane would like to see it run around again. It's been long enough.
 
The question still evokes such emotion. I feel as a club that we have demonstrated our respect for the man "Pants" was and for his surviving family members but I still have trouble with the permanent retirement of a number. Did we retire the numbers of the players lost in the Wars? Why not? Did we retire Wayne Gordon's number 13 when he died of cancer or John Greening's 22 when he was lost to us all in 1972?
I know he didn't die (but he almost did and was never the same again).

Did they retire Ron Todd's number or Des Tuddenham's or Bobby Rose's when they shook the club to it's foundations and left for greener pastures? No....but in Pant's case we have done so for the sake of his mum. Many have spoken of Pant's own wishes would have been to see it play on...but we continue to look at the empty locker, the blank spot on the list and we wonder who else may have made that famous number proud.

So many players look back on their numbers running around with pride. SOME even get to hand on their numbers to chosen successors. Supporters keep the numbers alive on their own supporter garb and the club has lists of the famous players to have worn those numbers.

Surely Pants and Mrs. Millane would like to see it run around again. It's been long enough.
Pants is dead, so he couldn’t give a shit. His mum is alive and doesn’t want the number worn.
It’s retired, end of story.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Should never have retired the number in the first place. Yes he was a good player and losing him was tragic but considering how he died and the fact that he put other at risk makes me not want this to be commemorated. Remember him sure but yes the number should be in play it’s not as if he was Gordon Coventry an absolute star of the club and the league.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The return of number 42.

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top