Port Adelaide's plan to use jumpers similar to Collingwood

[OnlyPowerForever]

It was read out by Cranky kornes on the footy show. The PB's can be worn in Heritage Round each year. Singular. And if there is no heritage round the clause is null and void, ie no PBs at all. Unless the pies agree to ait as a one-off. That doesnt seem likely to ever happen again after all this kerfuffle.
Kornes was arguing showdown was heritage round. Its clearly not, and of course Showdown happens twice a year.

And yes i agree the 2007 agreement does say no PB merch. I thought it extended to the magpie. Fair enough really, Power arent magpies so why brand merch with the Collingwood mascot? Im assuming PAFC are going to say the b&w and magpies stuff is SANFL merch. Cheekily pushing the envelope. Like donning the PBs for the song. Stirring the pot to keep the fans happy. Effectively alienating HQ, not sure thats good long term strategic planning.

Seems to work for Collingwood.

 

[Outback Footy]

See thats the thing, there is nothing in that agreement that says that Port won't wear its guernsey on more than that one specific occasion.

And fans of the PAFC, and the PAFC itself will keep pushing for the Port Adelaide's right to wear what (non-clashing) guernsey it wants in its games. And we'll keep pushing until the AFL realises that this is a discussion between just two parties, the AFL and Port Adelaide.


It wasn't Collingwood Mascot though. That was gear specifically branded with the SANFL Port Adelaide Magpies logo. And most of the merchandise that Eddie is complaining about is all things owned by people.
The NTUA scarfes had both the SANFL and AFL team logos on them. And the whole NTUA thing about the club bringing both of the teams together and that we're not going to let them be torn apart again.

We've now moved on to a single logo used in both the SANFL and AFL. While its good in one way, it now means the AFL now have a say in our SANFL merchandise, because the club logo we put on it is the one they own.

Is the joint logo the interlinked PA? I like that one. It incorporates the PB's as well. What do the fans think of it?

Personally (no skin in the game as a dogs fan) I never saw any issue with PA playing in B&W in every non clashing game and in something different against Cwood. But a contract is a contract (and the letter signed by AFL, PA & Cwood is a contract) and this one does say the PBs can be worn in "Heritage Round". That rules out wearing it at any other time. Clearly requests have been made (and agreed to) in the past, but as exceptions, agreed in advance. And in keeping with the spirit of the 2007 agreement, once per year.

The 2007 agreement does clearly only allow 1 game/year.

BTW you should adopt my avatar, PB's and Teal . I might need to change it after saturday!! Heres hoping for a good game and no injuries to either team.

 

[Outback Footy]

It doesn't matter the AFL have no intention of letting us wear the prison bars so there is nothing to lose. The AFL will fold to Collingwood every time and this whole thing is just saying to the AFL there are more clubs in the AFL than the big 4 Melbourne clubs who get everything to maximise their income and then have the gall to turn around and say we economically support you.

Youre forgetting the contract signed in 2007? PA chose (at the time) to agree to something thats limiting current choices. Hind sight is a wonderful thing, but if it was a choice today of wearing the PB's and leaving the AFL, only playing SANFL, or agreeing to not wear the PBs in order to join (or stay in) the AFL with the second team would you and the fans agree to that?

I personally dont see an issue except for Cwoods ego, but the contract pretty effectively kills the argument and ties you to not wearing PB's

Heres to a good game sat.

 

[melanChronic]

... And in keeping with the spirit of the 2007 agreement...

Lol.

The only 'spirit' in that agreement was that of a bully boy and his squattocrat mate offering a club lost in an identity wilderness a little avenue into the promised land, which Port agreed to in good faith and with no small concessions of their own, only for bully boy and toff man to immediately pull the rug out with 'lol sucked in heritage round doesn't exist, should've seen that coming, idiots!'.

It's been the same bullshit since 1990. Port keep coming to the table in good faith to try and set up something fair and reasonable that is important not just to the club and its people, but to the code of Australian Rules and its rich history.
Time and again they are met with skullduggery and mucking about from VFL buffoons who really just don't give a shit about anything outside their little fiefdom.

 

[bomberclifford]

Kornes was arguing showdown was heritage round.

Kane wasn't arguing this, this is what Port had presented to the AFL as a compromise. Since there was no problem with us wearing it in Heritage Rounds from 2007 onwards, we were proposing that the AFL consider Showdowns (either one or both) as a way of celebrating SA Football heritage, because there are no longer any league wide Heritage rounds for the agreement to be of any value.

It was a request to the AFL to enable that agreement to be valid.

 

[Papa G]

Who knew there were so many contract law specialists on bigfooty? Da Contract! Youse signed it! Written on little more than a beer mat. Eddie can go **** himself. As far as I know he has no official role at a club or the AFL. Who gives a **** what he thinks? In theory he has no power and no sway. Unless of course the AFL is inherently corrupt? That couldn't be it? Could it? Surely? This is the country of the fair go isn't it?

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Is the joint logo the interlinked PA? I like that one. It incorporates the PB's as well. What do the fans think of it?

Yes it is that one. I like it, it could be improved a bit. Not a whole sale changes, but tweaks, the design of the PA could be better, better line weightings etc.

The 2007 agreement does clearly only allow 1 game/year.

Its an agreement that Port can wear the top in one game, without the need to be going and asking permission.

It doesn't say anything that Port can no longer request to wear the PBs in any other game.

 

[Outback Footy]

Its an agreement that Port can wear the top in one game, without the need to be going and asking permission.

It doesn't say anything that Port can no longer request to wear the PBs in any other game.

I misunderstood you. Thought you were suggesting PBS could be worn anytime/more than once.

 

[Alesana]

They don't.


Yes.


They don't.


With the same colours, yes.


Different colours.


Not as far as I know.


Eddie can't do anything. The AFL made the decision.

Geelong and Carlton don't have the same colours?




And Collingwood's 2020 and North Melbourne's 2019 guernseys look like a pretty ****ing similar design to me.

But based on what you're saying this would be ok then:

 

[Outback Footy]

Kane wasn't arguing this, this is what Port had presented to the AFL as a compromise. Since there was no problem with us wearing it in Heritage Rounds from 2007 onwards, we were proposing that the AFL consider Showdowns (either one or both) as a way of celebrating SA Football heritage, because there are no longer any league wide Heritage rounds for the agreement to be of any value.

It was a request to the AFL to enable that agreement to be valid.

He was arguing showdown rounds (2 each year) were all about heritage and therefore port should be able to wear the PBs. I agree with you. Showdown rounds aren’t heritage rounds so not covered.
He also was arguing the PBs should be worn in both showdowns, ie twice a year.That’s totally contrary to the agreement. Move on or Cwood will stop agreeing to anything. You’ll all feel martyred then. For no valid reason.

 

[sprockets]

He was arguing showdown rounds (2 each year) were all about heritage and therefore port should be able to wear the PBs. I agree with you. Showdown rounds aren’t heritage rounds so not covered.
He also was arguing the PBs should be worn in both showdowns, ie twice a year.That’s totally contrary to the agreement. Move on or Cwood will stop agreeing to anything. You’ll all feel martyred then. For no valid reason.

Biden also has the prison bars??? And is there some teal in there as well?

 

[bomberclifford]

He was arguing showdown rounds (2 each year) were all about heritage and therefore port should be able to wear the PBs. I agree with you. Showdown rounds aren’t heritage rounds so not covered.
He also was arguing the PBs should be worn in both showdowns, ie twice a year.That’s totally contrary to the agreement. Move on or Cwood will stop agreeing to anything. You’ll all feel martyred then. For no valid reason.

Jesus Christ. We’ve got another one who struggles to read.

 

[Billys Back]

Why the fu** does Collingwood (Eddie) even get a say on what another team wears? Do they own the stripes? Why have North Melbourne been able to have an identical guernsey to Collingwood? Is it because they have a different colour? If that's the case then why can Geelong and Carlton use the same colours? Or is it because the design of Port's is arguably somewhat vaguely similar to Collingwood? If that's the case then why can Richmond and Essendon have identical designs?
Did Melbourne have to get clearance from Carlton to use their guernsey with a monogram? Surely Carlton can stop other teams from using a monogram if Eddie can stop teams from using something that is not even close to Collingwood's.

Two very thick black stripes on a white background =/= 6 thin white stripes on a black background which only go 60% of the way up, with a horizontal bar across the top. Sure, you wouldn't wear them against each other but it's a far cry to say this is too similar to Collingwood's, especially for a couple of games a year. Pure greed from Eddie.

They look the same. Both are black and white stripes. Every example you have made is flawed.
North have blue and white stripes. Not black and white stripes.
Carlton are completely navy blue. Geelong are navy blue and white horizontal panels.
Richmond are black with a yellow sash. Essendon are black with a red sash.

And again, Collingwood have black and white stripes. Port want to use black and white stripes.

It’s not difficult.

It’s like watching international soccer. You see a team with black and white stripes and you think it’s Juventus, even though it may be Newcastle.

Why does Port want everyone outside of Port Adelaide to think they are Collingwood?

Makes no sense. They can always go back to their original jumper. I’m sure it doesn’t look like any other AFL club.

 

[Billys Back]

If a club joined the AFL wearing all black with a yellow sash, I would argue to same point. A club already exists in the AFL with those colours and design and so no other club can look similar.

Each AFL club needs to be identifiable.

 

[Papa G]

Where did Eddie Spluge?

On Billy's Back.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

I can't wait to see the real prison bars in the AFLW.

I mean imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but the real prison bars are so much better than Collingwoods AFLW faux prison bars.

On SM-G960F using
BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[joy division]

Why dont Port just leave the AFL. I seriously don't get it, they join as an AFL club and they want to be anything but and insult everyone else along the way. According to their WIKI they backstabbed the SANFL too back in the day.

 

[Papa G]

Why dont Port just leave the AFL. I seriously don't get it, they join as an AFL club and they want to be anything but and insult everyone else along the way. According to their WIKI they backstabbed the SANFL too back in the day.

If you don't get it....according to WIKI you are stupid.

 

[Outback Footy]

If you don't get it....according to WIKI you are stupid.

No hes right. If you guys hate the agreement you made to enter into another comp so much, then leave it. Just play SANFL where you can wear what you want and be who you want, I mean, shit you'll never be the magpies in the AFL and if it means that much then leave.

 

[Outback Footy]

Jesus Christ. We’ve got another one who struggles to read.

You mean Kochie?

The 2007 agreement is clear, what Kornes was advocating for was clearly in breach. AFL and Pies are entirely in their rights to deny you any future use of the PB's. Unless a "Heritage" round returns. Pissing them off to fire up your own fans does not seem wise.

 

[Tim Evans Beard]

No hes right. If you guys hate the agreement you made to enter into another comp so much, then leave it. Just play SANFL where you can wear what you want and be who you want, I mean, sh*t you'll never be the magpies in the AFL and if it means that much then leave.

We don’t want to be the magpies in the AFL - we want to be the PAFC in the AFL.

 

[Tim Evans Beard]

Why dont Port just leave the AFL. I seriously don't get it, they join as an AFL club and they want to be anything but and insult everyone else along the way. According to their WIKI they backstabbed the SANFL too back in the day.

Every club should be doing what is in best interest of its own club. Indeed Essendon stabbed the rest of the competition in the back by enacting a ‘black ops, off site, document shy, supplements program’ completely backstabbing the AFL, the AFLPA, the footballing public and every club that is an advocate of clean sport. If Essendon don’t want to play by the rules they agreed to, Essendon should just leave!

 

[melanChronic]

I see we've reached the 'IF YOU DONT LOVE IT, LEAVE' stage of the cycle again. Fantastic.

 

[Papa G]

No hes right. If you guys hate the agreement you made to enter into another comp so much, then leave it. Just play SANFL where you can wear what you want and be who you want, I mean, sh*t you'll never be the magpies in the AFL and if it means that much then leave.

Dont mind the Dogs. Of the 4 Vic legacy teams that are only in the league due to incumbancy them and St Kilda probably serve a purpose. Go Dogs.

 

[longdonkey]

Where's Kerry Packer with a chequebook and a broom to sweep through this shitshow.