Jog on sport. It's pretty clear who doesn't get it.
Swans have ten premierships
- Thread starter Dazzler9
- Start date
- Tagged users None
If people don't think VFA premierships/pre 1897 premierships should be included, then they should at least take a moment to understand the very well thought out arguments that have been put forward by its proponents. Arguments by very well credentialed people, which have been presented to the AFL commission for consideration and have resulted in a book being published. You may not agree that they should be counted. No one is asking you to, but when people compare those Premierships (which were officially recognised up until around 1920) with AFLW, state league and reserve grade flags etc., it's lazy at best.
Never really understood the argument that premierships won in the “amateur era” are insignificant compared to those won today.
This was when players worked 6-day, 70 hour hard labouring work weeks then went to training and played on the weekends. Would not have been easy to front up and play great footy compared to those who play and train for the game all day every day.
This was when players worked 6-day, 70 hour hard labouring work weeks then went to training and played on the weekends. Would not have been easy to front up and play great footy compared to those who play and train for the game all day every day.
- Apr 17, 2007
- 5,341
- 6,273
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Probably because 16 flags compared to 3 looks a lot shinier.
???
I figure that’s some shot at me because I’m a Collingwood supporter, but it doesn’t make great sense.
I don’t really give a rats about Collingwood successes that came before my living memory. I certainly don’t use it as a trump card in debates like some supporters. That said, I appreciate my club’s history and embrace it within my own supporter group. Every club’s supporters should.
everyone knows centenary = 100, so North have 103 flags (3 regular flags and one centenary flag). Sorry everyone else
Elixuh
See you on the 9th green at 9
It’s this way because certain clubs, and I won’t name names, but Carlton and Essendon, need to count flags they won when half the country was fighting in world wars.
- Nov 28, 2017
- 5,782
- 11,815
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Tasmania Devils
VFA was whole different competition to count them with VFL/AFL would be like counting SANFL flags with VFL/AFL.
- Apr 17, 2007
- 5,341
- 6,273
- AFL Club
- Sydney
It's a shot at all the big clubs prior to 1990 who think they're king shit by lording all their country league premierships over everyone.
Then again, I'm a swans supporter, so I also have a bias.
- Apr 17, 2007
- 5,341
- 6,273
- AFL Club
- Sydney
I think there's a good argument to count VFA flags. Otherwise you should discount VFL flags.
VFA was footballs top flight until 1896 and you could argue VFA was comparable to VFL for a while.
No competition was ever officially Australian footballs top flight until the creation of the AFL.
- Nov 28, 2017
- 5,782
- 11,815
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Tasmania Devils
It doesn't matter if it was comparable it was a completely different competition you need to understand that. You can say it became a lot more professional when it became the AFL sure & that's fair sure.
But VFA flags should be counted as that VFA flags & not VFL/AFL flags.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
Eight specific clubs left one competition and formed a new one. There are still clubs in existence, specifically Williamstown and Port Melbourne, that were playing with the big boys in 1896, and weren't invited to their competition. Put yourself in the shoes of those two clubs, for example. Is it fair that premierships that they (theoretically) could have won pre-1897 get counted alongside a competiton that they were not able to join, because they weren't invited in it? From their perspective it's two different competitions. One they could play in, one they couldn't.
I understand a million things have changed since then, not least the AFL themselves taking over organisation of the VFA in the 90's. But Geelong and Geelong associated people should not get the historical benefit from counting statistics from before a competitiont that they deliberately broke away from and prevented other teams from accessing for sporting reasons. If the continuation of league premierships was so important, then the Geelong of 1897 should not have broken away to form a new competition.
There's no disagreement Geelong wasn't the premier Victorian teams in those years, or that Geelong can't count or organise their own club premierships in whatever grouping or hierarchy they see fit. But there is no arguments Carter can make that makes the obvious delineations of specific competitions formation and continuing nature, well, obvious delineations.
- Feb 13, 2011
- 11,571
- 14,570
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Weird take considering your team won just as many in those periods....
Elixuh
See you on the 9th green at 9
The difference is we don’t set them up in the centre circle pregame
It's not the same at all. The SANFL is/was an entirely separate comp made up with with entirely different teams. The VFA was the Premier comp in the country at the time, with all the foundation clubs competing (plus a few others). Those flags were counted in club's official club tallies up until the 1920s until the revisionists removed them. Whether you think they should be counted or not, you're comparing apples with oranges comparing SANFL and old VFA flags.
The difference is the old VFL and the AFL are same competition just renamed at the time it occurred it was barely noticeable. The VFA on the otherhand was a different competition it's pretty simple really, clubs can count the VFA flags for what they were, VFA flags.
On SM-N950F using BigFooty.com mobile app
This rubbish comes up all the time. Of course Sydney can count all of the premierships they won across their history, no matter the competition, in their own records.
That's completely separate to the record books of the VFL/AFL which obviously should not include records from a different competition (VFL/VFA), nor should they need to scrap older premierships from before 1990 which were won in the same competition because some people subjectively don't consider them as important. A record book is an objective list of facts, people attaching 'worth' to it is completely irrelevant.
That's completely separate to the record books of the VFL/AFL which obviously should not include records from a different competition (VFL/VFA), nor should they need to scrap older premierships from before 1990 which were won in the same competition because some people subjectively don't consider them as important. A record book is an objective list of facts, people attaching 'worth' to it is completely irrelevant.
They can still be counted in the clubs tallies and should be, like all VFA flags won by what are now AFL clubs, just not in the VFL/AFL tally, the concept of counting flags from a different competition is ridiculous.
SANFL and VFA flags are similar in one way, they are both not VFL/AFL flags.
Such an arrogant stance. Footy was being played all over the country in the late 1800's yet with no way of means testing you label Victoria as the best so there they should get AFL premiership status. This is like the NBA declaring themselves World Champions.
Exactly. People, for some stupid reason want the VFL/AFL to count things in the history of that competition that didn’t occur in the history of that competition. Next they’ll be wanting the AFL to recognise the LA Lakers 17 NBA championships.
No - only premierships won at the elite level count. Melbourne wouldn't count a Reserves, Casey (or Sandringham in the past) Premiership.
Colonial
Premium Gold
- Apr 12, 2012
- 48,166
- 45,383
- AFL Club
- GWS
But it was anll elite when there was no national comp. It was all state until the 90’s.
It has always been the elite comp.
Nobody decided to leave the VFL to test themself in the great leagues of SA and WA. A few went for money or to go home, but the VFL was where interstate players came if they wanted to play against the best.
Everyone knows that, but the AFL over the last couple of decades has pandered to the WA and SA supporters by including second-rate players in the Hall of Fame and pretending that those comps were anywhere close to the VFL. Nobody with a brain believes it, but it's about the cash for the AFL so they don't want to upset the fragile egos west of The Grampians.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
This is probably true from about the late 60's onward, intensifying over time. It isn't necessarily true before then.
Keep in mind that the VFA, to varying amounts over time, also took away some of the talent pool in Victoria.
They were counted for about 30 years in the same way as VFL flags were. It's not like Carter and others just came up with this with no merit whatsoever.
