Proposal to include premierships dating back to 1870 gathering pace

[crows dude]

It’s ridiculous.

Why is it so difficult to just divide the premierships up per comp.

Eg
Collingwood 1 VFA, 13 VFL, 2 AFL

 

[crows dude]

Discussed in a news article today.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/new-book-aims-to-change-the-start-date-of-the-afl-to-include-vfa/news-story/427eecb163534721b6e8f6338a969b02

Interesting to see the premiership tally with premierships dating back to 1870 included.

Carlton - 22 premierships
Essendon - 20 premierships
Geelong - 17 premierships
Collingwood - 16 premierships
Melbourne - 16 premierships
Hawthorn - 13 premierships
Richmond - 13 premierships
Sydney - 10 premierships
Fitzroy - 9 premierships
North Melbourne - 4 premierships
Brisbane - 3 premierships
West Coast - 4 premierships
Adelaide - 2 premierships
Western Bulldogs - 2 premierships
St Kilda - 1 premiership
Port Adelaide - 1 premiership
Fremantle - 0 premierships
Gold Coast - 0 premierships
GWS - 0 premierships
University - 0 premierships

The main thing for me is this means we were the first club to win 4 premierships in a row but on the flip side it means Carlton have won more premierships than us.

What do footy fans think about this? Ye or neigh?

If you do that then you need to count ports 36 sanfk premierships. Total 37

 

[BigVic]

This would mean Sydney would have a threepeat as South Melbourne

 

[Wargreymon90]

 

[Rich01]

It’s ridiculous.

Why is it so difficult to just divide the premierships up per comp.

Eg
Collingwood 1 VFA, 13 VFL, 2 AFL

Like this idea. Allows other clubs to acknowledge the flags they won in comps prior to joining the AFL.

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

It in theory has no less merit than the current system. I'm not just saying this because it puts Carlton clear on top. Premier club of the strongest state comp simply changed hands from the VFA winner to the VFL winner in 86-87. But as a realist, it undermines the bedrock claim that the VFL/AFL transition means all premierships are considered equal as it was one continuous competition. Which as a byeline makes me laugh when people say 'oh, only flags from 1990 onward count as that was when it became the AFL. Nothing material changed. Same clubs as 89, different moniker.

The big material change if you really want to claim 'national league flags' was in 1987 when the Eagles and Bears were added to the existing 12 clubs. That was when the national competition was born. Yes South moved north in 1982 but no new clubs were added.

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

Yep. They are.

And no, the VFA and the VFL-AFL should not have their records merged. They were two different leagues.

Each club can count their VFA premierships in their individual club records.

I find it on one hand comical how it's like a batman style 'Roylion signal' appears when misnomers about the so-called 'merger' appear, but on the same token I really appreciate it. So many people have wacky ideas about how things went down, and you arrive and deliver the irrefutable facts on every point possible. If only everyone took it in. Love your work.

 

[Tackle Bag]

Ridiculous idea. It was a completely different comp. Why not give Richmond their two VFA flags as well. And Port Adelaide should be recognised if we’re including non VFL/AFL flags.

I’d be happy enough to draw a line at 1990 or perhaps 1987 when the eagles and bears joined and it became “national”.

It doesn’t devalue any clubs older flags, they just are not Premierships in the current national comp.

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

Dumb idea. Most of those "premierships" happened when the competition was entirely amateur.

Premierships should really only be counted from 1990 onwards, and even then I am not sure as the game was not really professional then either since a lot of players needed second jobs to make a living.

A premiership in 1934 where every player trained once a week and got drunk before the games is hardly worth the same as a modern professional premiership.

If we use that logic only flags from roughly the turn of the 21st century should be listed. Only then were lists fully professional.

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

Ridiculous idea. It was a completely different comp. Why not give Richmond their two VFA flags as well. And Port Adelaide should be recognised if we’re including non VFL/AFL flags.

I’d be happy enough to draw a line at 1990 or perhaps 1987 when the eagles and bears joined and it became “national”.

It doesn’t devalue any clubs older flags, they just are not Premierships in the current national comp.

As mentioned, 1990 means nothing aside from a name change. No new clubs. Just a rebrand. 1987, as you mentioned is the beginning of the national competition.

 

[RUNVS]

If we use that logic only flags from roughly the turn of the 21st century should be listed. Only then were lists fully professional.

I would be fine with that logic. The sport is a very different one as a fully professional league to the completely amateur version it was for decades and decades and then the semi-professional league we had for the next 60 years or so.

Only count the flags after the lowest paid player was given a wage big enough to live on.

 

[Arr0w]

Dumb idea. Most of those "premierships" happened when the competition was entirely amateur.

Premierships should really only be counted from 1990 onwards, and even then I am not sure as the game was not really professional then either since a lot of players needed second jobs to make a living.

A premiership in 1934 where every player trained once a week and got drunk before the games is hardly worth the same as a modern professional premiership.

All relative I guess, just like any sport that has evolved over time, say like cricket

Otherwise, where do you draw a line, reset after each expansion side?

 

[RUNVS]

All relative I guess, just like any sport that has evolved over time, say like cricket

Otherwise, where do you draw a line, reset after each expansion side?

The problem is that is the 1913 premiership really worth that much considering it was completely amateur and not really above what a random bush league team would be today in terms of professionalism and even skill. How can the 1913 premiership be worth the same amount as the 2013 premiership.

 

[jim boy]

Why not give Richmond their two VFA flags as well.

Because the VFA was not the best comp going in Melbourne when the tiges won

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

I would be fine with that logic. The sport is a very different one as a fully professional league to the completely amateur version it was for decades and decades and then the semi-professional league we had for the next 60 years or so.

Only count the flags after the lowest paid player was given a wage big enough to live on.

I'm not, really. Any other sport around the world had a tipping point where it went from semi-pro to fully pro (maybe aside the yank sports). Good luck stripping say any English 1st div soccer players from the 60s their champ status, or Celtic's historical European Cup win. Or for that matter any cricketing achievement prior to WSC. The notion that Lillee's wickets pre WSC don't count, but his wickets post do for example is absurd.

 

[Arr0w]

The problem is that is the 1913 premiership really worth that much considering it was completely amateur and not really above what a random bush league team would be today in terms of professionalism and even skill. How can the 1913 premiership be worth the same amount as the 2013 premiership.

The game was considered amateur in the 80s

As I stated earlier, it's relative for each era

 

[kane249]

If the VFA had merged with the VFL in 1897 and stopped operating this might have merit to it.

Otherwise it's just a desperate attempt by Geelong to boost their flag tally.

If Geelong gets this recognised, Port deserve their 36 SANFL flags to also be recognised under the same principles.

 

[jim boy]

The problem is that is the 1913 premiership really worth that much considering it was completely amateur and not really above what a random bush league team would be today in terms of professionalism and even skill. How can the 1913 premiership be worth the same amount as the 2013 premiership.

You could make a similar argument about 1993 and 2013 or about 2023 and 2013. The competition is what it is and if there is no better team at the time, then you get the chocolates - it is quite binary (and utterly pointless)

 

[RUNVS]

I remember a story from when Goldstein was newly drafted to North and how he was falling asleep in team meetings. His coach got annoyed about that before finding out Goldstein was working a second job to make ends meet. Now North got Goldstein a better job but to me that is not professional. If you need to work a second job that is not a professional league. It is only fully professional when all players are able to spend 100% of their work time actually working on being the best player they can be.

 

[jim boy]

If Geelong gets this recognised, Port deserve their 36 SANFL flags to also be recognised under the same principles.

Does such a thought bring out your insecurities? Why would you care otherwise?

 

[Frank Grimes]

Not including the VFA premierships is the same reason as not including SANFL or WAFL premierships. They are from a separate competition/league.

 

[_Cerberus_]

I disagree with the suggestion, because at the time the VFA was still considered the leading league in the state/country at the time. The VFL was a split, formed by teams who were not happy with the admin side of things with the VFA. How could you argue their Premiers from 1897 to 1910 for example, had any more value than the VFA Premiers? The one time they ever faced each other, the VFA team won by 5 goals in the "state championship", but on current terms it is not counted as a Premiership.

Yes the VFL with money behind it eventually over took the VFA as the leading league in the state/country. If you're going to include the VFA Premierships before the VFL was formed, you may as well include the other VFA Premierships up towards 1925. 1925 was where the VFL officially became the number one stand alone league in the state, with a few more teams jumping across from the VFA, to make the VFL as we know it across the next few decades, leading to the formation of the AFL.

My personal opinion is that 1925 was the year the VFL truly became what it is today. Both leagues should be recognized equally prior to 1925, given both have reasonable debate for being the leading state/national league at the time.

Of cause every time this debate comes up, it is by supporters of teams who will benefit most from having their totals inflated.

 

[STPer18]

The season hasn't even started and we just added 7 premierships to our tally. Good one, Colin.

 

[Sentinel]

The English Premier League is a good point of comparison for this stupid idea. It was founded in 1992 when all 22 of the existing Football League First Division decided to break away into a different competition, unlike the VFL where only certain clubs moved from the VFA on its establishment.

There is, rightly, no recognition in the English Premier League table for titles won in the previous top flight league prior to the EPL's establishment, because it was a different league entirely (despite having the exact same teams the year prior).

Individual clubs can still happily claim titles won in any other league they have competed in, but they aren't shown in EPL records for obvious reasons.

 

[kane249]

Does such a thought bring out your insecurities? Why would you care otherwise?

It's called fairness Jim, if you are going to claim irrelevant stuff then others deserve the same treatment.

For the record no I don't think Port should get theirs added in, the SANFL and the VFA are different competitions to the VFL/AFL. That's where this argument should end, with common sense.