Toast #BringBackTheBars - Our Heritage, Our History, Our Right! Part 1

[Dylan8]

Someone on the jumpers board guessing it could be a 1997 jumper, since it’s been 25 years since joining the AFL.

Really feel like we've gotta keep the '97-'10 era stuff in the locker before we get a permanent PB fixture

 

[JimmyBC]

Someone on the jumpers board guessing it could be a 1997 jumper, since it’s been 25 years since joining the AFL.

Dear god kill it with fire

 

[JimmyBC]

Really feel like we've gotta keep the '97-'10 era stuff in the locker before we get a permanent PB fixture

Lock it in we exist to muddy the waters.

 

[Grave Danger]

Someone on the jumpers board guessing it could be a 1997 jumper, since it’s been 25 years since joining the AFL.

Already done that in our 20th AFL season:

 

[Jonts]

What about our 1996 guernsey?
And our 1914 guernsey in the Anzac game

 

[El_Scorcho]

We should be celebrating 30 years since the droughtbreaking 1992 premiership.

 

[Prison bar Pete]

We should be celebrating 30 years since the droughtbreaking 1992 premiership.

You're right; 2 years without a premiership was a drought for us back in those days (sigh).
I'm hopeful they'll do PBs for the special occasion one, but it'll probably end up being the SBS

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Here is my theory on the mystery guernsey.

Are we playing the long game with the PB knowing Goyder and Gill are too piss weak to let us wear it now?

If the answer is yes, then I reckon we will be wearing the 1897 guernsey to celebrate our 125th anniversary and celebrate Harry 'Tick' Phillips and his teammates.

But that's before 1902, so it will be a Magenta guernsey, you say. Indeed it will be.

So why wear that and not the PB?? If we wear that and get approval to celebrate our history, then how can the AFL keep denying our history and not let us wear another premiership guernsey to celebrate another significant anniversary in 2023, say the 1903 flag, or the 1913 flag or the 1963 flag? At some point the AFL will get a leader that says this is a farce that we are too scared of Collingwood.

We shove it down everyone's throat we are celebrating our 125th anniversary, nobody else has done that, and tell the AFL we want to keep celebrating other significant premiership anniversaries if you won't let us wear the PBs in the showdowns, you are cutting distributions to clubs, and you know the guernsey is a revenue winner.

How many of our draftees in the past have said they knew almost nothing about Port Adelaide, yet the last 2 or 3 drafts our draftees or potential draftees have talked about being a very successful, traditional, 150 year old club?? It's been a bit of a revelation hearing these non SA kids talk about our long history.

The magenta jumper promoting a 125th anniversary reminds everyone how old a club we are, not just a new club on entering the AFL.

Keep launching the artillery at the AFL and footy public, if we can't drive down the commonsense road.

 

[Dylan8]

Here is my theory on the mystery guernsey.

Are we playing the long game with the PB knowing Goyder and Gill are too piss weak to let us wear it now?

If the answer is yes, then I reckon we will be wearing the 1897 guernsey to celebrate our 125th anniversary and celebrate Harry 'Tick' Phillips and his teammates.

But that's before 1902, so it will be a Magenta guernsey, you say. Indeed it will be.

So why wear that and not the PB?? If we wear that and get approval to celebrate our history, then how can the AFL keep denying our history and not let us wear another premiership guernsey to celebrate another significant anniversary in 2023, say the 1903 flag, or the 1913 flag or the 1963 flag? At some point the AFL will get a leader that says this is a farce that we are too scared of Collingwood.

We shove it down everyone's throat we are celebrating our 125th anniversary, nobody else has done that, and tell the AFL we want to keep celebrating other significant premiership anniversaries if you won't let us wear the PBs in the showdowns, you are cutting distributions to clubs, and you know the guernsey is a revenue winner.

How many of our draftees in the past have said they knew almost nothing about Port Adelaide, yet the last 2 or 3 drafts our draftees or potential draftees have talked about being a very successful, traditional, 150 year old club?? It's been a bit of a revelation hearing these non SA kids talk about our long history.

The magenta jumper promoting a 125th anniversary reminds everyone how old a club we are, not just a new club on entering the AFL.

Keep launching the artillery at the AFL and footy public, if we can't drive down the commonsense road.

Sorry, not a good idea. Total water-muddier.

 

[TeeKray]

Sorry, not a good idea. Total water-muddier.

Yep.

'Oh, you've got another traditional guernsey Port? Why don't you just wear that and not the prison bars!'

 

[VineValerian]

Here is my theory on the mystery guernsey.

Are we playing the long game with the PB knowing Goyder and Gill are too piss weak to let us wear it now?

If the answer is yes, then I reckon we will be wearing the 1897 guernsey to celebrate our 125th anniversary and celebrate Harry 'Tick' Phillips and his teammates.

But that's before 1902, so it will be a Magenta guernsey, you say. Indeed it will be.

So why wear that and not the PB?? If we wear that and get approval to celebrate our history, then how can the AFL keep denying our history and not let us wear another premiership guernsey to celebrate another significant anniversary in 2023, say the 1903 flag, or the 1913 flag or the 1963 flag? At some point the AFL will get a leader that says this is a farce that we are too scared of Collingwood.

We shove it down everyone's throat we are celebrating our 125th anniversary, nobody else has done that, and tell the AFL we want to keep celebrating other significant premiership anniversaries if you won't let us wear the PBs in the showdowns, you are cutting distributions to clubs, and you know the guernsey is a revenue winner.

How many of our draftees in the past have said they knew almost nothing about Port Adelaide, yet the last 2 or 3 drafts our draftees or potential draftees have talked about being a very successful, traditional, 150 year old club?? It's been a bit of a revelation hearing these non SA kids talk about our long history.

The magenta jumper promoting a 125th anniversary reminds everyone how old a club we are, not just a new club on entering the AFL.

Keep launching the artillery at the AFL and footy public, if we can't drive down the commonsense road.

Love your passion.
My only query is that we have already worn magenta and blue and white hoops kits in past Heritage rounds.

So we've already signposted our history.

And the AFL acknowledged our 150th year celebrations, so they have given a nod to our past.

This is just the AFL being s*** scared of the Wobblers and potential Court action.

We should threaten them with same, and see if it gets results.

 

[bomberclifford]

Keep launching the artillery at the AFL and footy public, if we can't drive down the commonsense road.

The footy public is still at the "hurdurr ur guernsey is pink lol that's gay bros" maturity level.

To me the strategy is as simple is this:
1. Wear our chevron guernsey, black, grey and white, in all games except, those in which we get permission to wear PBs.
2. Every year we ask to wear the PBs in significant games (not just Showdowns FFS) regardless of the attitude or competience of the current AFL admin.
3. Keep selling the PBs

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Love your passion.
My only query is that we have already worn magenta and blue and white hoops kits in past Heritage rounds.

So we've already signposted our history.

And the AFL acknowledged our 150th year celebrations, so they have given a nod to our past.

This is just the AFL being s*** scared of the Wobblers and potential Court action.

We should threaten them with same, and see if it gets results.

So what if we have already worn it before.

We wore the baby blue hoops in 2005 heritage round and that didn't stop us coming up with a design for 2020, which was pulled because the season was shutdown when our 150th anniversary occurred and couldn't wear it for that occasion.

Court action isn't going to happen. The AFL will do everything to stop it. Plus, what section, of what act, of which parliament, do you think has been breached??

I keep hearing take it to court, but nobody knows what law has supposedly been broken.

Or which legal principle established by a common law case, has been breached?

You come out and say we are prepared to wear this one in 2022 to celebrate our 125th anniversary, this other one here to celebrate our 120th anniversary in 1903, and this third here in 2024 to celebrate our 110th anniversary.

You put it out there to pressure and even embarrass the AFL. They can't sanction you for a thought and an idea that hasn't broken any AFL rule.

That's why we have to ****en piss off Hinkley and win some flags and fight from a position of on field strength not from a position of failure when the crunch comes.

 

[Lockhart Road]

So what if we have already worn it before.

We wore the baby blue hoops in 2005 heritage round and that didn't stop us coming up with a design for 2020, which was pulled because the season was shutdown when our 150th anniversary occurred and couldn't wear it for that occasion.

Court action isn't going to happen. The AFL will do everything to stop it. Plus, what section, of what act, of which parliament, do you think has been breached??

I keep hearing take it to court, but nobody knows what law has supposedly been broken.

Or which legal principle established by a common law case, has been breached?

You come out and say we are prepared to wear this one in 2022 to celebrate our 125th anniversary, this other one here to celebrate our 120th anniversary in 1903, and this third here in 2024 to celebrate our 110th anniversary.

You put it out there to pressure and even embarrass the AFL. They can't sanction you for a thought and an idea that hasn't broken any AFL rule.

That's why we have to fu**en piss off Hinkley and win some flags and fight from a position of on field strength not from a position of failure when the crunch comes.

Restraint of trade.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The footy public is still at the "hurdurr ur guernsey is pink lol that's gay bros" maturity level.

To me the strategy is as simple is this:
1. Wear our chevron guernsey, black, grey and white, in all games except, those in which we get permission to wear PBs.
2. Every year we ask to wear the PBs in significant games (not just Showdowns FFS) regardless of the attitude or competience of the current AFL admin.
3. Keep selling the PBs

Why worry about what ****.wits think?

There are ****.wits who actually think they represent real prison bars? Do we concern ourselves with them?

There are ****.wits who think Never Tear Us Apart means we can't argue within our own community. Do we concern ourselves with them?

 

[TeeKray]

So what if we have already worn it before.

We wore the baby blue hoops in 2005 heritage round and that didn't stop us coming up with a design for 2020, which was pulled because the season was shutdown when our 150th anniversary occurred and couldn't wear it for that occasion.

Court action isn't going to happen. The AFL will do everything to stop it. Plus, what section, of what act, of which parliament, do you think has been breached??

I keep hearing take it to court, but nobody knows what law has supposedly been broken.

Or which legal principle established by a common law case, has been breached?

You come out and say we are prepared to wear this one in 2022 to celebrate our 125th anniversary, this other one here to celebrate our 120th anniversary in 1903, and this third here in 2024 to celebrate our 110th anniversary.

You put it out there to pressure and even embarrass the AFL. They can't sanction you for a thought and an idea that hasn't broken any AFL rule.

That's why we have to fu**en piss off Hinkley and win some flags and fight from a position of on field strength not from a position of failure when the crunch comes.

What if we just wear them? What law are we breaching then? The law of the AFL being provincial cry babies who want to be the only sporting organisation in the world to stop a team wearing a perfectly harmless uniform for no good reason whatsoever.

1) We obviously aren't getting kicked out of the league over this.

2) We obviously aren't going to be fined into oblivion. Even if we were, so what? Just don't pay. They aren't the government. Refer point 1.

3) We lose premiership points. This would obviously only be a short term measure because you can't indefinitely have a club that can't earn premiership points, it's an embarrassment, especially for a reason as trivial as this.

This request and ask nicely bullshit is not going to get us anywhere. You don't get given power from a position of weakness, you go and take it. The absolute cream on the cake here is that we would have almost universal public support, especially if the AFL took any sort of heavy handed approach.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Restraint of trade.

Restraint of Trade would be near impossible to win, unless we get a very liberal judge and then probably need a majority of liberal judges to hear the appeal, because the AFL will keep appealing.

Port's main trade is playing football. The AFL haven't restrained that. Port have signed up to an effective cartel and to play by the rules that the AFL make.

Major restraint of trade cases in Australian sports, that have made it to a serious court level ie Supreme Courts or the Federal Court, have been about an individuals or groups of individuals ie in the NSW Rugby League draft case in 1992, having their personal trade, restricted by a sports rule.

It is rare that it is one sports organisation taking another one to court arguing a restraint of trade.

The one I know of, is when the NRL kicked South Sydney out of the comp and South Sydney took the NRL to court over a few years and then in 2003 the High Court - a majority - rejected South's restraint of trade argument under the then Trades Practices Act. I think it's now all covered by The Australian Competition and Consumer Act.

But, and this is an important but, South Sydney won the first court case and a huge PR battle over 3 years and the NRL ie News Ltd who had the real veto power, said this is all too disruptive and too messy and we will let Souths back into the comp before the final judgement. Think it was a full season before the final ruling. The Full bench of the Federal Court said it was a restraint of trade, but the High Court said it wasn't.

Now if that is the court strategy, there is no guarantee the AFL will react the same way the NRL did. The Super League War and its massive fallout out over many years is different to a battle over a guernsey design.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

What if we just wear them? What law are we breaching then? The law of the AFL being provincial cry babies who want to be the only sporting organisation in the world to stop a team wearing a perfectly harmless uniform for no good reason whatsoever.

1) We obviously aren't getting kicked out of the league over this.

2) We obviously aren't going to be fined into oblivion. Even if we were, so what? Just don't pay. They aren't the government. Refer point 1.

3) We lose premiership points. This would obviously only be a short term measure because you can't indefinitely have a club that can't earn premiership points, it's an embarrassment, especially for a reason as trivial as this.

This request and ask nicely bullshit is not going to get us anywhere. You don't get given power from a position of weakness, you go and take it. The absolute cream on the cake here is that we would have almost universal public support, especially if the AFL took any sort of heavy handed approach.

We are governed by the AFL rules. Unless we dispute their rules in court, we don't have to break a law of the land, to breach one of their rules.

I wouldn't put it past the AFL to suspend us if it became a real embarrassing shit fight for them. Tassie in, Port out keeps it at 18 teams for a few years. They can make it as untenable for us as they like. And they are vindictive enough to do so for a long period.

You want to spend another decade or two fighting the AFL and going nowhere? **** if we can't even win a home PF, with everything going for us, what the hell happens to us when we are wasting so much time and resources battling head office for a decade or two?

I want us to use a thermonuclear weapon option from a position of strength - ie we have a couple consecutive premierships under our belt - not when we are easybeats in a home PF.

Until then, we need some tough negotiators who keep chipping away, with a bit of embarrassing the AFL thrown into the mix.

 

[Lockhart Road]

Restraint of Trade would be near impossible to win, unless we get a very liberal judge and then probably need a majority of liberal judges to hear the appeal, because the AFL will keep appealing.

Port's main trade is playing football. The AFL haven't restrained that. Port have signed up to an effective cartel and to play by the rules that the AFL make.

Major restraint of trade cases in Australian sports, that have made it to a serious court level ie Supreme Courts or the Federal Court, have been about an individuals or groups of individuals ie in the NSW Rugby League draft case in 1992, having their personal trade, restricted by a sports rule.

It is rare that it is one sports organisation taking another one to court arguing a restraint of trade.

The one I know of, is when the NRL kicked South Sydney out of the comp and South Sydney took the NRL to court over a few years and then in 2003 the High Court - a majority - rejected South's restraint of trade argument under the then Trades Practices Act. I think it's now all covered by The Australian Competition and Consumer Act.

But, and this is an important but, South Sydney won the first case and a huge PR battle over 3 years and the NRL ie News Ltd who had the real veto power, said this is all too disruptive and too messy and we will let Souths back into the comp before the final judgement. Think it was a full season before the final ruling. The Full bench of the Federal Court said it was a restraint of trade, but the High Court said it wasn't.

Now if that is the court strategy, there is no guarantee the AFL will react the same way the NRL did. The Super League War and its massive fallout out over many years is different to a battle over a guernsey design.

The AFL have indeed restrained our trade - by preventing us from regularly if not excessively wearing and promoting the Bars, the most successful revenue producing merchandise item in recent times.

The AFL tells us to go out and find our own revenue streams, then treats us as an inferior member of the league in which, so they preach, all clubs are equal.

The AFL has not made public why they favour Collingwood with this restraint of trade, nor have they been challenged to do so.

I’ve been in touch with Richo about making this challenge via a concerted media campaign led by such prominent and supportive journalists as Chip Le Grand.

What do I hear back? Not a peep. If you hear nothing, assume nothing is happening.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The AFL have indeed restrained our trade - by preventing us from regularly if not excessively wearing and promoting the Bars, the most successful revenue producing merchandise item in recent times.

The AFL tells us to go out and find our own revenue streams, then treats us as an inferior member of the league in which, so they preach, all clubs are equal.

The AFL has not made public why they favour Collingwood with this restraint of trade, nor have they been challenged to do so.

I’ve been in touch with Richo about making this challenge via a concerted media campaign led by such prominent and supportive journalists as Chip Le Grand.

What do I hear back? Not a peep. If you hear nothing, assume nothing is happening.

A practical restraint of trade and a legal restraint of trade, unfortunately aren't the same thing, unless a majority of judges in the last court in the process say so.

I'd love nothing more than blow up the AFL. But they have bigger and more lethal bombs than us. So when we fire ours, we can't afford to miss.

 

[chiwigi]

Here is my theory on the mystery guernsey.

Are we playing the long game with the PB knowing Goyder and Gill are too piss weak to let us wear it now?

If the answer is yes, then I reckon we will be wearing the 1897 guernsey to celebrate our 125th anniversary and celebrate Harry 'Tick' Phillips and his teammates.

But that's before 1902, so it will be a Magenta guernsey, you say. Indeed it will be.

So why wear that and not the PB?? If we wear that and get approval to celebrate our history, then how can the AFL keep denying our history and not let us wear another premiership guernsey to celebrate another significant anniversary in 2023, say the 1903 flag, or the 1913 flag or the 1963 flag? At some point the AFL will get a leader that says this is a farce that we are too scared of Collingwood.

We shove it down everyone's throat we are celebrating our 125th anniversary, nobody else has done that, and tell the AFL we want to keep celebrating other significant premiership anniversaries if you won't let us wear the PBs in the showdowns, you are cutting distributions to clubs, and you know the guernsey is a revenue winner.

How many of our draftees in the past have said they knew almost nothing about Port Adelaide, yet the last 2 or 3 drafts our draftees or potential draftees have talked about being a very successful, traditional, 150 year old club?? It's been a bit of a revelation hearing these non SA kids talk about our long history.

The magenta jumper promoting a 125th anniversary reminds everyone how old a club we are, not just a new club on entering the AFL.

Keep launching the artillery at the AFL and footy public, if we can't drive down the commonsense road.

That wouldn’t be long game, it would be pussying out and missing the point.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

That wouldn’t be long game, it would be pussying out and missing the point.

Bullshit. You miss the point. You announce you are celebrating anniversary premierships and you start with the oldest one at the moment, which happens to be least controversial one and say you want to lock in one every year and the anniversaries flow post 1902 flags.

But we can't, because we have stupidly locked ourselves into only showdowns.

 

[JimmyBC]

Briefly worn kits that no one alive now ever saw Port play in are pretty irrelevant & muddy the waters in my eyes.

 

[Festerz]

The AFL have indeed restrained our trade

The Port Adelaide Football Club is a company limited by guarantee under the Corporations Act, owned by the AFL with each of its Directors (including the 2 nominated by a vote of members) appointed by the AFL. The Directors appoint the Chief Executive and have effective control over all decisions taken by the Club on behalf of its members.

The AFL also owns the assets and trademarks of the PAFC.

So the notion of a restraint of trade issue between the AFL and the PAFC in relation to anything it does on and off field including what jumpers it wears is non sensical.

 

[Lockhart Road]

The Port Adelaide Football Club is a company limited by guarantee under the Corporations Act, owned by the AFL with each of its Directors (including the 2 nominated by a vote of members) appointed by the AFL. The Directors appoint the Chief Executive and have effective control over all decisions taken by the Club on behalf of its members.

The AFL also owns the assets and trademarks of the PAFC.

So the notion of a restraint of trade issue between the AFL and the PAFC in relation to anything it does on and off field including what jumpers it wears is non sensical.

I agree. It is indeed nonsense for there to exist a restraint of trade issue between our Club and the AFL.