News New jumpers for 2012

[hitthepost]

LOL, clash socks! What is the world coming to!

Collingwood sometimes wear black & white striped socks with clash kit
Melbourne wore red & navy striped socks against Gold Coast as both teams have fully red socks
But Collingwood v North, it's black vs royal blue, no problem there.

 

[Silent Alarm]

LOL, clash socks! What is the world coming to!

Don't they wear clash socks in the NRL? Granted, I care/know next to nothing about the game, but I've seen some weird socks.

 

[Hank93]

Don't they wear clash socks in the NRL? Granted, I care/know next to nothing about the game, but I've seen some weird socks.

I agree with the premise of clash jumpers, but there is zero chance a clash would be avoided because a team wears special socks.

 

[Marlowe]

The socks should match the rest of the ensemble, not prevent a clash.

 

[hitthepost]

North vs West Coast yesterday, North wore hooped socks as WCE have fully royal blue socks with gold tops. I think a good idea. Same if both teams have fully black socks normally (Collingwood and Port)

 

[Cory]

Collingwood sometimes wear black & white striped socks with clash kit
Melbourne wore red & navy striped socks against Gold Coast as both teams have fully red socks
But Collingwood v North, it's black vs royal blue, no problem there.

Um no we don't.

There is socks we have for training that have one white hoop on them if that is what your reffering too.

 

[hitthepost]

Um no we don't.

There is socks we have for training that have one white hoop on them if that is what your reffering too.

Very frustrated that I can't find it but I'm pretty sure I remember seeing Carlton v Collingwood and Port v Collingwood with clash kits containing hooped socks in the past few years. Sometimes worn and sometimes not. Thought it was very effective, would help determine who kicked balls in tight situations etc. Closest I can find now are these one-hoop designs: (apologies for the bad quality)

 

[Cory]

Ah we no longer wear them with our clash think the last time was 2007??

You see the players wear them at training.Infact they seem to be on the Bob Rose statue that is outside Westpac Centre.

 

[hitthepost]

Ok. Still have memories of actual hooped socks but my google image searching is proving me over-imaginative
From memory they looked very good, although I like the all-black socks too but against Port and Carlton who have solid dark socks they were effective

 

[henness]

Not the striped Collingwood jumper, but a time where they did wear hooped socks.
This could be why you thought they wore hooped socks with the stripes

 

[millsy29gopies]

Not the striped Collingwood jumper, but a time where they did wear hooped socks.
This could be why you thought they wore hooped socks with the stripes

MY EYES! I know that was the Escort Championship, anyone know why we were the home side at VFL Park but had to wear that jumper, and the reasoning?

 

[Smeagle]

Ah we no longer wear them with our clash think the last time was 2007??

Correct; somehow Collingwood continue to get away with this, forcing the home teams to wear alternate socks (PRE-2012), when sock clashes are otherwise avoided at seemingly all costs. For instance, Melbourne with Sydney (now GC); Carlton with NM, WC, Port, Freo; and of course the newer 'white-topped' socks of Geelong and St Kilda that have been now integrated into a complete alternate kit.
I don't think North and West Coast has been an issue since we went navy in 1995. Most games in Melbourne/Canberra involved the Eagles full home uniform or a variant thereof. Admittedly, that game on the weekend was a positive out of the new policies regarding white shorts. Incidentally, I also don't think West Coast have an 'alternate sponsors' set of home or away jumpers since BW has come on this season. Chris or cammania?
Interestingly, Carlton have had the same set of clash socks since at least 2005 - see the old style monogram.

Back on the Magpies, they did experiment with these beauties against Carlton in round 6 2006:

Before reverting to the tradtional style away to Port in round 20:

Note that socks are almost purely for the benefit of the players identifying teammates in a scrimmage, as opposed to how it looks on TV. Hence, clash socks have been around for a lot longer.
They are of course imperative for soccer - the referee's call on a foul can depend on it. The territorial nature of rugby means that shorts and socks colours are irrelevant and often 'clash'.

 

[Macca_]

Long sleeved version of the GWS clash looks awesome

 

[Silent Alarm]

That GWS jumper has way too much white in my opinion. I don't mind it sleeveless, but it looks a bit soft with the longeys.

Smeagle, your knowledge is immense.

 

[Cory]

That GWS jumper has way too much white in my opinion. I don't mind it sleeveless, but it looks a bit soft with the longeys.

Smeagle, your knowledge is immense.

Agreed way too much white.

 

[No BS!!]

Only just saw this but
Sydney v Brisbane last night - Red vs maroon. Red with a largely white front vs maroon with white shorts.
Seriously? That's against the "clash" rules as both teams have similar colours AND against the "more white gets white shorts" rules.

I think Sydney's home kit is deemed "light" by the AFL, and Brisbane's away/clash kits are both light. Brisbane could worn their white jumper for the first time this season, but that wouldn't have an affect against Sydney.

As a point of interest: when was the last game Brisbane wore their white jumper? Sometime last season, no doubt. They'll certainly wear it in two.weeks @ Gold Coast.
And I can't remember if the Swans have worn their clash at all since round 1 vs. Melbourne last year, but they, too, will no doubt be wearing it vs. GC three weeks from now.

The AFL's dark vs light guidelines are a crock. Friday night saw COL & CAR wearing their first-choice guernseys.....both dark.

Furthermore, are you saying that they classify the colour red as a dark colour for ESS, but red for SYD as a light colour? And what about SYD vs GWS? Does that mean both wore a light guernsey in their match?That'll do me. The AFL clearly haven't got a clue with this issue.

They'd be better off pissing off their dark & light classifications which they can't even apply properly or consistently, as well as the generic shorts policy - is white for the away team or for the team that has white in their strip?? - and focus on the similarities of strips instead. Maroon and red are similar colours; Orange & Red are similar colours; Black and black are similar colours; Black and navy are similar colours; Black & white stripes vs Navy and white hoops are similar colours.

After 115 years without having a clue, the VFL/AFL need to realise that the objective of match-day strips is to differentiate the two match-day teams. Better policy design is required in order to regulate the area to achieve effective outcomes. These must pertain to both the design of individual club playing strips, as well as provisions which reduce or eliminate the similarities and possible confusion between the two match-day strips. I've got ideas but I really don't get paid what AA does. On his salary, he should be able to recognise that the appearance of, and lack of effective differentiation between two match-day strips, particularly on broadcasts, has significant effects on the presentation of the game, telecast and the league. The AFL should have control of this.

 

[Andonis1997]

I agree 100% this. No bullshitting

The AFL I believe have to sort out either which shades of (e.g.) Red are light and which are dark. Every club needs clash guernseys, no doubt about it, but they need to "not clash" and use them when required. Being a Sturt supporter in the SANFL, I love the Carlton clash so much I bought it, and don't understand how some people hate it, but Carlton needs to use it when we need it. Last friday was an example of this. We needed it. Simple as that. I'm all for tradition, but that's unfortunately where I have to draw the line. Either put a majority-white clash to use against teams or use the Sturt guernsey. I know which one everyone on here would be choosing.Essendon's clash. That would be deemed dark in my honest opinion. Lighter shade of grey would be just fine.
AFL definitely need a lot of time and effort to sort this out, but it won't happen, Demetriou's on a holiday for 6 weeks!

 

[Silent Alarm]

AFL definitely need a lot of time and effort to sort this out, but it won't happen, Demetriou's on a holiday for 6 weeks!

They don't. All clash issues can be resolved with common sense. You don't even need a rule book, just vague continuity within guidelines and a regular eye.

 

[Mero]

They don't. All clash issues can be resolved with common sense. You don't even need a rule book, just vague continuity within guidelines and a regular eye.

Agree.
Problem is it's the AFL, there is no common sense.
The policy itself is vauge and the application of it inconsistent based on subjective wording.
Whereas other aspects, such the fixture and the Match Review Panel are somewhat vague in their structure and inconsistent in the application of any direction, based on subjective wording.
Actually, if there was one thing the AFL do consistently, it's be inconsistent.

 

[Cory]

Looking at Mero's colour guide i'm assuming Essendon used PMS 430 where PMS 428 would have made the clash alot lighter and the same colour as their training shirt.

 

[grimface_87]

Long sleeved version of the GWS clash looks awesome

Needs some orange sleeves!

 

[No BS!!]

They don't. All clash issues can be resolved with common sense. You don't even need a rule book, just vague continuity within guidelines and a regular eye.

Agree.
Problem is it's the AFL, there is no common sense.
The policy itself is vauge and the application of it inconsistent based on subjective wording.
Whereas other aspects, such the fixture and the Match Review Panel are somewhat vague in their structure and inconsistent in the application of any direction, based on subjective wording.
Actually, if there was one thing the AFL do consistently, it's be inconsistent.

If common sense were the criteria for anything, then there would be anarchy. There will always be one person or organisation claiming that their interpretation is common sense.

With regard to this issue, common sense has resulted in reactionary responses rather than consistently applied processes delivering an effective outcome.

Was COL vs CAR common sense? The match-day appearance featured two teams with basically the two same colours.

Was STK vs ESS common sense? The match-day appearance featured two teams with largely similar colours.

One match involved a traditional match-day appearance between the two clubs. The other involved one of the club's introducing a new strip for that particular match-day. Both were poor at differentiating the two match-day teams, particularly in their respective broadcasts.

Mero has hit the nail on the head. Before any effective policies, provisions and policies can be introduced regulating both the individual club strips, and also, the similarities of strips on match-days, the AFL need to admit that the problem is bigger than they accept at present, and they need to be realistic about the actual similarities between any two match-day strips.

I can understand that the clubs and supporters of some match-day teams want to face off wearing the guernseys they've been wearing for over a century - well, COL have been wearing it for just over a decade - and the AFL want to maintain some sort of heritage and tradition with these 'rivalry' matches, but the presentation as a whole is extremely poor with differentiation ineffective.

In the case of the COL guernsey and the current AFL way of classifying it, their guernsey is one of the biggest problems in the league. It is classified as dark because it is predominantly black-backed and sided, but the front of it is predominantly white. The front of it has a contrasting appearance to the back and the white front makes it considerably similar to that of NM & GEE first-choice guernseys.

Under revised regulations, I would ensure that the predominant colour on one side of the guernsey is the predominant colour on the other. By predominant, I mean that colour must make up at least half the guernsey on both sides. This would effect half the number of guernseys in the AFL, such as COL (first), STK, WCE (home), SYD (first), BL, ADE, & GWS which all either have one predominant colour or several minor colours on the front, and one predominant colour on the back. The guernseys of the clubs I've mentioned can give the appearance of a 3rd team on the field. When two of these are the match-day teams, it gives the appearance of 4 teams. From the outset, this is not an ideal or effective approach of preventing the clashing of colours/strips of two match-day teams.

Any regulations need to ensure that the primary objective has been achieved - two match-day teams are effectively differentiated. The AFL however, need to get real on what is an effective differentiation.

 

[Mero]

If they're going to do it, they need to tell Essendon their jumper can't be Black, Red, Yellow, Teal, White or Navy. Because these are the colours of teams they clash with.
Richmond, you can't wear Black, Red, Teal, White, Navy etc. (But it can be Yellow)
and so on.
But it won't happen because the AFL cares less about the clash than it does the retail sales of those jumpers, and no-one is going to buy an Essendon jumper that doesn't have Red & Black on it.
The problem then exists as it does in Rugby, that you can turn on a game on the TV and not know who is playing because all the jumpers have ended up looking the same.

 

[Mr Eagle]

Needs some orange sleeves!

Maybe not... but extending the pattern somewhat onto the sleeve would be a massive help.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Agree about the Collingwood lack of clash sock issue.

I remember a couple of seasons ago having to wear our clash socks at home because Collingwood didn't have any. There are plenty of easy solutions from going all out hoop socks to just having a thick white band. It's crazy that they don't have them given the usual solid dark coloured socks of the teams they clash with