What the heck? Why have sponsor's logos replaced club badges on guernseys?

Remove this Banner Ad

Epl is not as bad as AFL, no flashing fence crap there.The jumpers aren't as covered in crap like ours.The Afl draws the biggest crowds in the world, with people who pay to get in.We don't need to go down the American path of adds on virtually everything.
Ummm, the Premier League has even more electronic advertising boards than the AFL does. Every single stadium in the Premier League has electronic advertising boards. EPL shirts have 2 sponsors on them, the same amount as AFL guernseys do.
 
Epl is not as bad as AFL, no flashing fence crap there.The jumpers aren't as covered in crap like ours.The Afl draws the biggest crowds in the world, with people who pay to get in.We don't need to go down the American path of adds on virtually everything.
You mean the sport where the name of major sponsor covers the entire front of the players jerseys.

Funnily enough American sports have less sponsorship in your face than EPL
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ummm, the Premier League has even more electronic advertising boards than the AFL does. Every single stadium in the Premier League has electronic advertising boards. EPL shirts have 2 sponsors on them, the same amount as AFL guernseys do.
How can they have more electronic adds when the field is half the size? They also move infrequently, unlike the AFL.Why are you defending this? Are you a man of the people or a poo baby for the multi-national companies.
 
Epl is not as bad as AFL, no flashing fence crap there.The jumpers aren't as covered in crap like ours.The Afl draws the biggest crowds in the world, with people who pay to get in.We don't need to go down the American path of adds on virtually everything.

EPL not as bad?

Look at the jersey of perhaps one of the most iconic clubs in world sport and tell me what you notice first - the big Chevrolet badge or the Manchester United crest
 
EPL not as bad?

Look at the jersey of perhaps one of the most iconic clubs in world sport and tell me what you notice first - the big Chevrolet badge or the Manchester United crest
The Afl jumper has 7 different logos on front and back and they're not always in the team colours.
 
The Afl jumper has 7 different logos on front and back and they're not always in the team colours.

Bulldogs - small sponsor logo, afl logo and guernsey manufacturer logo on front. Sponsor logo on back.

Richmond - ditto.

And that's just our two clubs.
 
Bulldogs - small sponsor logo, afl logo and guernsey manufacturer logo on front. Sponsor logo on back.

Richmond - ditto.

And that's just our two clubs.
There's 3 up top 2 down botton left and right and a massive one in different colours on the back, plus the fence, goalposts, sherrin,umpires, runners ,wings on the ground, scoreboard, boots, run through banner, cheersquad,doctor, intercherchange bench ,coaches box, score review and the purchase ticket.
 
I've noticed plenty of teams now have sponsors logos on the left where the club badge should be. What is going on? In my view it's a disgrace.


What sponsors/advertising/banners ?


A9-BFDEDB-1602-4991-80-CD-C89-F95-BBD986.jpg
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Epl is not as bad as AFL, no flashing fence crap there.The jumpers aren't as covered in crap like ours.The Afl draws the biggest crowds in the world, with people who pay to get in.We don't need to go down the American path of adds on virtually everything.
Your posts are so unbelievably clueless I now suspect you are taking the piss.

First of all, that guy didn't say he liked advertising, he said he was fine with it which is different, then all this hyperbole about advertising being evil and unnecessary , the former being outdated and the latter being naive, then finally this ridiculous claim about the EPL.

If you're referring to the Euchuca Pétanque League I'll have to take your word for it, but if you're referring to the Barclays Premier League whose link to sponsorship preceded the AFL's - as did their use of LED fences - then I'd very much like to see you attempt to justify this absurd statement, along with the nonsense about AFL having the biggest crowds. Every week the bigger football matches around the world get as many through the gates as the average AFL final.

You have taken ignorance to a higher level and congratulations for reeling me in but I simply couldn't let such delusion pass on the off chance you are serious. Wake up!

EDIT: well I guess I'm a sucker. Nice trolling, don't usually get taken in so easily.
 
Last edited:
Your posts are so unbelievably clueless I now suspect you are taking the piss.

First of all, that guy didn't say he liked advertising, he said he was fine with it which is different, then all this hyperbole about advertising being evil and unnecessary , the former being outdated and the latter being naive, then finally this ridiculous claim about the EPL.

If you're referring to the Euchuca Pétanque League I'll have to take your word for it, but if you're referring to the Barclays Premier League whose link to sponsorship preceded the AFL's - as did their use of LED fences - then I'd very much like to see you attempt to justify this absurd statement, along with the nonsense about AFL having the biggest crowds. Every week the bigger football matches around the world get as many through the gates as the average AFL final.

You have taken ignorance to a higher level and congratulations for reeling me in but I simply couldn't let such delusion pass on the off chance you are serious. Wake up!

EDIT: well I guess I'm a sucker. Nice trolling, don't usually get taken in so easily.
Settle down lady bump, you are another who accepts saturation advertising as normal.It is an issue to be discussed ,because there are no boundaries to where the advertising will end. When advertising was first put on the sherrin, most people were not happy.Is it really worth the $50,000 to put a McDonalds add on the football.Where's the line for you? Sounds like it's all good in your book.
 
Settle down lady bump, you are another who accepts saturation advertising as normal.It is an issue to be discussed ,because there are no boundaries to where the advertising will end. When advertising was first put on the sherrin, most people were not happy.Is it really worth the $50,000 to put a McDonalds add on the football.Where's the line for you? Sounds like it's all good in your book.
Lady bump? That's creative at least, I suppose.

I guess my 'limit' is constantly refering to the scoreboard/stats/betting odds sponsor on broadcasts ie: "time to look at the Dan Murphy's scoreboard and get the Mitre 10 ruck statistics from our McDonald's boundary rider Damien Monkhorst" etc

Apart from that? My limit is facial tattoos, sponsored contact lenses, superimposing ads onto crowds like they proposed doing about 10 years ago. Certainly when the football is flying through the air I don't moan because I can vaguely see a blurred golden arches logo on it.

Listen I'm no fan of McDonald's or corporate infiltration of sport, but sorry to break the 30-year old news to you but that ship has sailed. Every pro sport in current existence has corporate sponsorship dependent on visibility and to rail against it, as was suggested by another poster - is like trying to ban the internet. It's not even that bad, it brings more money into the game which filters down to the clubs allowing them to spend more on recruiting, conditioning, becoming more professional in general. Also improves the technology that allows us to watch the game. It's easy to dismiss HD video until you look at blurry footage of footy games from even the early 2000s, all possible because of sponsors money.

If you want a totally pure incarnation of sport, go follow an ammos league or watch videos of the good old days.

The genie is out of the bottle, the bottle has disintegrated back to sand and the genie started a family and now has 62 great great grandchildren.

Still not entirely convinced you're serious by the way, you come off like a big pisstake and frankly a bit of a flesh hammer.
 
Last edited:
Lady bump? That's creative at least, I suppose.

I guess my 'limit' is constantly refering to the scoreboard/stats/betting odds sponsor on broadcasts ie: "time to look at the Dan Murphy's scoreboard and get the Mitre 10 ruck statistics from our McDonald's boundary rider Damien Monkhorst" etc

Apart from that? My limit is facial tattoos, sponsored contact lenses, superimposing ads onto crowds like they proposed doing about 10 years ago. Certainly when the football is flying through the air I don't moan because I can vaguely see a blurred golden arches logo on it.

Listen I'm no fan of McDonald's or corporate infiltration of sport, but sorry to break the 30-year old news to you but that ship has sailed. Every pro sport in current existence has corporate sponsorship dependent on visibility and to rail against it, as was suggested by another poster - is like trying to ban the internet. It's not even that bad, it brings more money into the game which filters down to the clubs allowing them to spend more on recruiting, conditioning, becoming more professional in general. Also improves the technology that allows us to watch the game. It's easy to dismiss HD video until you look at blurry footage of footy games from even the early 2000s, all possible because of sponsors money.

If you want a totally pure incarnation of sport, go follow an ammos league or watch videos of the good old days.

The genie is out of the bottle, the bottle has disintegrated back to sand and the genie started a family and now has 62 great great grandchildren.

Still not entirely convinced you're serious by the way, you come off like a big pisstake and frankly a bit of a flesh hammer.
Would it matter that much if there were 6 specialist coaches instead of 10? The argument that clubs desperately need more money so we need to create more revenue streams is not valid because there is no end.Clubs would employ 15 more recruiters if they had enough money.If every club does the same, it's just more unproductive money. My point basically is ,why can't the world's highest attended game get by ,without an increasing barrage of corporate branding.I think it's gone too far.You won't hear anyone in the media bring it up apart from Caroline Wilson for obvious reasons. I say take that crap off the back off AFL jumpers and just have a small add on the front, eg not on the yellow tiger stripe. Also get adds off the ball , goalposts and umpires, and no motion video on the fence during play.The sky wont fall in, and the game will keep some dignity and tradition.
 
Would it matter that much if there were 6 specialist coaches instead of 10? The argument that clubs desperately need more money so we need to create more revenue streams is not valid because there is no end.Clubs would employ 15 more recruiters if they had enough money.If every club does the same, it's just more unproductive money. My point basically is ,why can't the world's highest attended game get by ,without an increasing barrage of corporate branding.I think it's gone too far.You won't hear anyone in the media bring it up apart from Caroline Wilson for obvious reasons. I say take that crap off the back off AFL jumpers and just have a small add on the front, eg not on the yellow tiger stripe. Also get adds off the ball , goalposts and umpires, and no motion video on the fence during play.The sky wont fall in, and the game will keep some dignity and tradition.

1. It's not the world's highest attended game.
2. In a highly competitive industry you are suggesting we go backwards? Never going to happen.
3. You are about 30 years too late and basically tilting against windmills.

I get that you don't like ads, but like it or not, advertising and sponsorship is a permanent part of professional sports and has been for at least a generation. Unless you want everything run by the state, that's the way it will stay. Just ignore it like everybody else does and focus on the footy.
 
Would it matter that much if there were 6 specialist coaches instead of 10? The argument that clubs desperately need more money so we need to create more revenue streams is not valid because there is no end.Clubs would employ 15 more recruiters if they had enough money.If every club does the same, it's just more unproductive money. My point basically is ,why can't the world's highest attended game get by ,without an increasing barrage of corporate branding.I think it's gone too far.You won't hear anyone in the media bring it up apart from Caroline Wilson for obvious reasons. I say take that crap off the back off AFL jumpers and just have a small add on the front, eg not on the yellow tiger stripe. Also get adds off the ball , goalposts and umpires, and no motion video on the fence during play.The sky wont fall in, and the game will keep some dignity and tradition.

The game won’t have dignity and tradition, because there won’t be a game to watch.

Move with the times old man.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
The game won’t have dignity and tradition, because there won’t be a game to watch.

Move with the times old man.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Rubbish,those adds i mentioned would be only about 10% of revenue.There's already a naming rights sponsor and gate receipts, club merchandise and tv rights money.Young man , what's next? Maybe we could paint the entire ground into a logo or have hologram adds on the ground after goals.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top