Proposal to include premierships dating back to 1870 gathering pace

[MelbourneGWS]

Colin Carter has proposed in his book launch (where attendees included the AFL Chairman and the AFL CEO) that the premiership tally be recalculated to include VFA and Victorian premierships from 1870 (Debate raging over ‘wrong’ AFL date that’s shortchanged Geelong and Sydney’s flags)

 

[Sully90]

Can we include the Premierships I've won for Freo on AFL Live 2004? They're just as relevant.

 

[STPer18]

17 flags.

 

[CrowToon]

He's gone the wrong direction. Vics are so cute and funny.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Sure, as long as all drug and salary cap cheating assisted premierships are removed too.

 

[CURVE]

St Kilda fans will be excited, their premiership tally skyrockets to... whoops.

 

[White Dogg]

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?

 

[STPer18]

Yes.

 

[RUNVS]

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.

 

[White Dogg]

Daily Mail wrote an article about this as well.

Carlton could have more premierships than Essendon with radical change

The former AFL commissioner and Geelong president argues the start date of the then-VFL should be moved to include the Victorian Football Association years back to 1870.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Interesting to see they list Fitzroy and Brisbane premierships together. I've always seen Fitzroy and Brisbane as two clubs with two histories including two separate premiership tallies.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yes.

Two time Threepeaters.

 

[Danw0w]

Why aren't they including Port's premierships then? Both vfa and sanfl were different comps.

 

[Captain_Bender]

Only the official VFA premierships from 1888 onwards should count

 

[WillHayward]

"Gathering pace"

It's just one single Geelong bloke pushing for it.

Hardly a tidal wave.

 

[Roylion]

Interesting to see they list Fitzroy and Brisbane premierships together. I've always seen Fitzroy and Brisbane as two clubs with two histories including two separate premiership tallies.

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.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

St Kilda fans will be excited, their premiership tally skyrockets to... whoops.

Although I don’t support Port Adelaide, I would imagine they will be happy with the counting of pre-VFL premierships, as long as their SANFL premierships are included too?

 

[RUNVS]

"Gathering pace"

It's just one single Geelong bloke pushing for it.

Hardly a tidal wave.

The thing is all it takes is one or two journalists in the Victorian media to pick it up and suddenly there will be a "huge" wave of support.

 

[Sherrinator]

Sounds like it’s not enough for clubs to be proud of their own past achievements - they really need validation from everyone else. News flash - no one cares past the current season!

 

[PrinceCharles]

Interesting thread, White Dog. I personally think we should just recognise the reigning premier. With the rules changing each year it's basically another sport each time.

 

[RUNVS]

Sounds like it’s not enough for clubs to be proud of their own past achievements - they really need validation from everyone else. News flash - no one cares past the current season!

An under 16's team would beat both the 1909 Carlton and South Melbourne sides. I mean the skills are awful.

 

[Kickit2brown]

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?

What is the relevance of comparing Carlton's 22 premierships to the younger interstate teams?

I could show you data where a 100 year old man has been on more holidays than a 14 year old - How is that insightful in anyway? All it tells us is that a 100 year old man has had far more opportunities to travel overseas and otherwise it is all rather pointless.

 

[Sherrinator]

An under 16's team would beat both the 1909 Carlton and South Melbourne sides. I mean the skills are awful.

I’ve seen porcelain at Inskip Point less of a shitshow

 

[jim boy]

Included in what?

Geelong has won 17 premierships in the premier competition of the time that was a possibility for them to compete in, Carlton has won 22 -thats not something the AFL can argue - or are arguing. Collingwood wasn't around for the first six of Geelong's wins - so what? We still won. Collingwood fans no doubt dont give a shit, and why should they?

I dont really have a problem with the AFL only counting premierships from 1897, why should they care about what happened in a different league? Much like why I dont care about a competition like the SANFL or WAFL - not to say they aren't worthy or even better comps than the old VFL/VFA - but Geelong was never going to compete in them (and vice-versa) so they're just not meaningful to me.

 

[Sentinel]

So surprising to see this stupid idea from a former Geelong president rear its head again. Unsurprisingly, the club which gains most from this change would be... Geelong.

Dumb for a number of reasons, not least because it was an entirely different competition (rather than a continue on of the existing competition as occured when the VFL changed its name to the AFL in 1990). Do we now get to also put Port Melbourne, Williamstown etc (who played in this league prior to 1897) in the same category as University as former clubs? Do other records count from that time or only premierships?

 

[STPer18]

+7