nah, nah nah, You are not wiping you slate clean of 26 wooden spoons that easy sonny jim. They stay!!!!
Part of the history of league records whether you like it or not.
Discussion The VFA premierships debate - should they be recognised as elite level premierships?
- Thread starter Jimmy Russell
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Part of the history of league records whether you like it or not.
VFL/AFL .... one and the same league, only those flags should count
Sorry, Lose count you got so many 27 it is as of 2014.nah, nah nah, You are not wiping you slate clean of 26 wooden spoons that easy sonny jim. They stay!!!!
Part of the history of league records whether you like it or not.
Clubs Leading Total Wooden Spoons
St Kilda 27
North Melbourne 13
Melbourne 12
Hawthorn 11
South Melbourne/Sydney 11
Fitzroy 8
Richmond 7
Just to rub salt into the wounds of those that get upset by this reality of league premierships since 1897.
Update from October where it stood.
Interestingly Melbourne has as many wooden spoons as premierships on 12 each.
Update from October where it stood.
Interestingly Melbourne has as many wooden spoons as premierships on 12 each.
The league premiership tally is a record of which clubs have won the league's offering of a premiership prize in every season since its inception, of which there 119 so far. The league itself has undergone numerous changes over the years, some teams joining, others leaving, merging or relocating, going national, but it's still the same league; whereas the VFA was a different comp altogether. If clubs want to count premierships they won in other leagues, as a club oriented record, then go for it, but that shouldn't be included in this league's official records.
- Moderator
- #156
Brisbane's situation is quite simple. The Brisbane Bears and the Brisbane Lions are the same club. Entered the competition in 1987. They have three premierships.
- Banned
- #157
IF the comp radically changed so that it was suddenly much more professional and there were many new teams (maybe international teams), then yes we should start again (again). You don't seem to be getting this whole 'the AFL is more than a name change' thing.
You mean Inspector Gadget thank you.
- Banned
- #160
And yet flags from 1897 still count. What else have you got?
- Jan 5, 2013
- 13,405
- 23,871
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
All VFL flags should not be counted towards the afl flag tally. Acknowledge and be proud of them (like we do with SANFL flags), but shouldn't count towards the offical tally.
The VFL was a state competition and the AFL is a national competition. You can't count a state league premiership from the 1920s as a premiership in the national comp. Just doesn't make sense
The VFL was a state competition and the AFL is a national competition. You can't count a state league premiership from the 1920s as a premiership in the national comp. Just doesn't make sense
Magnus McFysh
Debutant
So you're completely ignoring the Fitzroy part of the history of the club? Interesting.
Given your avatar and your name, that is truly surprising.
Last edited:
- Apr 29, 2009
- 2,379
- 2,579
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
No-one is claiming that a 1920s premiership was won in a then-national competition, but what is factually true is that it was won in a competition which is now national - that is, it forms part of the history of that competition. What muddies the waters is when people try to assert that premierships "count" or "don't count" based on subjective and arbitrary criteria like "when the league became a national competition" (1982? 1987? 1990? 1991? Later?) or "whether the competition was elite"... the competition that was known as the VFL became known as the AFL, and in that competition, there are clubs who won premierships dating back to 1897. Quibble about the qualitative relevance of those premierships all you like - that's a subjective matter - but they are, quantitatively, part of the history of one continuous league, and should be recognised as such.
- Sep 19, 2007
- 19,053
- 17,608
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Anaheim Ducks, PSV Eindhoven
Prepare for a world of hurt.
It is a summation of two different quantities. Presumably if you look at Geelong's trophy cabinet you will see 9 similar premiership cups displayed therein. If however you look at what is written on the cups, six will include the acronym "VFL" and three will have the acronym "AFL" in that same position instead. The cups are not all the same. Likewise if you look at the commemorative flags, 6 will have VFL on them and 3 will have AFL on them. The flags also are not the same.
Hence the total of 9 is made up of two groups (not one), 6 in the VFL group and 3 in the AFL group. This is a plain, straightforward fact. I can't imagine why many Victorians get so upset about it and try to deny these facts.
We happen to be in agreement here. I have not said at any point that VFL premierships should not count, or do not deserve recognition. All I have said is that they are not AFL premierships, which they simply aren't. If you tried to claim that the Hawks in 1989 won an AFL premiership I would say that you are guilty of history revisionism. But I fully recognise that they won a VFL premiership in that year, and I agree that they deserve whatever recognition is due to them for that historical feat.
The 1989 VFL Grand Final was an Australian rules football game contested between the Hawthorn Football Club and the Geelong Football Club, held at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in Melbourne on 30 September 1989. It was the 93rd annual Grand Final of the Victorian Football League, staged to determine the premiers for the 1989 VFL season.
{Edit}: It turns out I can be even a bit more helpful. Here is a picture featuring the 1954 VFL premiership cup, and another picture of the 2012 AFL premiership cup. You will see that they are similar, but not the same.
So, in the case of Geelong, what exactly is wrong with saying that they have won 6 VFL and 3 AFL premierships? There are no premierships won in this competition that are not recognised by the statement. It is more representative of their history than saying they have won 9 VFL/AFL premierships because it relates more of the story.
Last edited:
- Apr 29, 2009
- 2,379
- 2,579
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
If someone who is now 25 changes their name from "X" to "Y" the day after they turn eighteen, and also keeps the card they receive from their mother every year (on which their name at the time is written), how would you describe that collection of cards? There are 18 in the X group, 7 in the Y group, but surely the more salient fact in most contexts will be that there are 25 cards addressed to the same person, and so you'd want to choose a phrase that accurately conveys that, rather than insisting upon separating them because the person in question reached 18 at about the same time they changed their name?
Likewise here - you could phrase it the way you insist upon phrasing it (it's factually accurate), but it's apt to ignore the salient fact (these are all premierships won in the same continuing competition) in favour of a trivial one (the VFL changed its name to the AFL prior to the 1990 season), and potentially also apt to confuse. Why favour that phrasing, then?
I contend exactly the reverse is true. People are confused about the actual meaning of the construct "VFL/AFL premierships", as has been amply demonstrated in this thread.
As I said before, here is a picture featuring the 1954 VFL premiership cup, and another picture of the 2012 AFL premiership cup. You will see that they are similar, but not the same.
Yet there are many on this thread who are trying to insist that they are the same, and what is worse they are getting extremely precious about insisting that everybody conforms to their skewed view of it.
What exactly is wrong with being accurate and factual?
Well there is a clear distinction here. Port Adelaide joined the VFL/AFL on the basis that the VFL/AFL was the premier competition, was raiding the SANFL of players (in fact the SANFL business model centred around transfer fees) and the best South Australian players had enough of playing against Glenelg before 4000 at the Parade.
The SANFL thing is completely different to the VFL/AFL it was a competition that was run like a suburban chook raffle.
- Jul 15, 2014
- 21,798
- 41,954
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
I agree, there is nothing wrong with saying that they have 6 VFL Premierships and 3 AFL Premierships as this is reality. It is less vague than saying 9 VFL/AFL Premierships.
Likewise, Richmond have 10 VFL Premierships and 0 AFL Premierships.
- Apr 29, 2009
- 2,379
- 2,579
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
What do the cups have to do with it? How is anyone here insisting they are "the same", beyond that they were both won in the same competition, which is the salient point here?
You know as well as I do, I would hope, that "accurate and factual" information can be contextually misleading. "9 VFL/AFL premierships" emphasises a salient fact (the VFL and AFL are one and the same competition) at the expense of a trivial one (flags pre-1990 bear the acronym "VFL", the rest "AFL"); "6 VFL premierships and 3 AFL premierships" does the reverse, favouring the trivial truth of the name change over the more relevant truth of the league's continuity. Neither is "wrong" per se, but there is no clarity in selectively emphasises the name on the flags, especially not at the expense of emphasising league continuity.
- Jul 15, 2014
- 21,798
- 41,954
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
It is the same league, regardless of how much it has developed or what its name is. If the AFL was a new competition to the VFL and all teams in the VFL left to join the AFL then yes, VFL Premierships would have been irrelevant to the competition (like how the VFA Premierships are irrelevant to the current league because it is a breakaway league that teams joined). Because it is not a breakaway league but merely a name change to be inclusive of interstate sides, VFL Premierships are still relevant
SANFL flags are not relevant to this league because they were not won in this league.
That there were two categories of premierships won in the same competition is indeed conveyed by the statement "6 VFL and 3 AFL premierships". It is obscured by the statement "9 VFL/AFL premierships", as has been comprehensively demonstrated by the views expressed in this thread.
- Apr 29, 2009
- 2,379
- 2,579
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
"Two categories" in what sense, beyond name? The question that is relevant is why the categories ought to be separated out - given there is evidence in this thread that even VFL/AFL is insufficient to indicate to some that they are the same competition, I can hardly accept that greater separation will convey that. A better choice of phrase, if seeking factual accuracy and clarity, might be "9 AFL premierships, 6 of which were won when it was called the VFL". It may be accurate to say "North Melbourne have 2 VFL and 1 AFL premiership, and Kangaroos have 1 AFL premiership", but an important connection is missed; similarly with "6 VFL and 3 AFL premierships", which is only more informative (and only marginally so in any case) when knowledge of league continuity is presumed.
