Discussion The VFA premierships debate - should they be recognised as elite level premierships?

[SilentHunter_]

Who cares who won last weekend?

A lot of people

Who cares who won last year?

A lot of people

Who cares who won in the 1990s?

Majority of the fans

Who cares who won in the 1930s?

Not many

Who cares who won in the 1890s?

Not many

Who cares who won in the 1850s?

If anyone cares about this 'era' then wowee.

Whoever chooses to.

This argument just became stupid, perhaps I should've put it better. The only premierships that truly reflect the success of a club in the National Competition are the flags after 1990. Of course this argument is redundant since officially the flags dating back to 1897 are all considered and hence we can go back and forth on this all day.

 

[barmy44]

dont care in the slightest.

i get personal enjoyment out of watching geelong play, even in seasons when they dont 'win it all'. i enjoyed the 3 recent premiership wins a lot, and the other 6 or 13 of geelongs mean absolutely zero to me. others are different about this.

but it seems like a very BF fascination with determining exactly what a person can or cannot 'count'. usually, so it can be thrown childishly at others in arguments between strangers, eg 9 >>>>>> 1, which we are all familiar with on here (unfortunately). its a tad embarrassing.

count whatever the hell you want, as a supporter. if that's ports 35+ SANFL flags, good luck to them. if you enjoy them, enjoy them. if you want to count 16 flags for geelong, count them. if you enjoy them, enjoy them.

if you take exception to a supporter doing this or not doing this... grow up. its only BF.

 

[The_Reaper]

They should be recognised as elite first class premierships but not as VFL/AFL Premierships.

Collingwood for instance should be recognised as having 15 VFL/AFl premierships and 1 VFA Premierships.

Similarly Port Adelaide's SANFL premierships and indeed any currently SANFL/WAFL/VFL club should be recognised as first class premierships.

It's like how in cricket James Faulkner scored a century for Lancashire so has a first class century but has not yet scored a sheffield shield century

 

[SJ]

This argument just became stupid, perhaps I should've put it better. The only premierships that truly reflect the success of a club in the National Competition are the flags after 1990. Of course this argument is redundant since officially the flags dating back to 1897 and we will go back and forth on this all day.

Your problem is that you see the "national competition" in 1990 as something more important than the "state competition" in 1989, when in reality they only differ to the same extent as season 2016 does to season 2015.

When many follow a club that has been participating in the same competition for 120 years, and against many of the same clubs for almost 150 years, the concept of the "national competition" doesn't really mean anything significant.

 

[RUNVS]

Why?

Because VFL was a state competition, while AFL is national. They are two very different beasts.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

Because VFL was a state competition, while AFL is national. They are two very different beasts.

Except they weren't. The same teams that competed in 1989 under the VFL banner competed in 1990 under the AFL banner.

 

[SJ]

Because VFL was a state competition, while AFL is national. They are two very different beasts.

Tell me how they were different in 1989 and 1990 except for a change in name and logo.

 

[SilentHunter_]

Your problem is that you see the "national competition" in 1990 as something more important than the "state competition" in 1989, when in reality they only differ to the same extent as season 2016 does to season 2015.

When many follow a club that has been participating in the same competition for 120 years, and against many of the same clubs for almost 150 years, the concept of the "national competition" doesn't really mean anything significant.

Okay then if we were truly to stand by the idea of a true national competition should we only count the premierships post 1997? Because ultimately speaking that's when it became a 16 team competition. But when the official listed year of the 'AFL' was 1990 then the tally should've been reset right there and then, regardless of whether by design it was the same as 1989 or not.

 

[RUNVS]

Except they weren't. The same teams that competed in 1989 under the VFL banner competed in 1990 under the AFL banner.

There has to be a cut-off somewhere, and the point where the VFL changed and acknowledged that they are now a national competition seems like a good place to start.

 

[The_Reaper]

Tell me how they were different in 1989 and 1990 except for a change in name and logo.

Rather than 1990 the best points for division are 1986 and 1991

 

[The_Reaper]

Okay then if we were truly to stand by the idea of a true national competition should we only count the premierships post 1997? Because ultimately speaking that's when it became a 16 team competition. But when the official listed year of the 'AFL' was 1990 then the tally should've been reset right there and then, regardless of whether by design it was the same as 1989 or not.

No. Because the 16 team competition is irrelevant to a national competition.

The WAFL and SANFL officially going from theoretically equal leagues to feeder leagues is the best marking point in terms of 'national' league

 

[Rusty Brookes]

There has to be a cut-off somewhere, and the point where the VFL changed and acknowledged that they are now a national competition seems like a good place to start.

But it's totally arbitrary. They had already acknowledged it was a national competition by moving South Melbourne up to Sydney and later introducing West Coast and Brisbane. I'm happy for the records to stand as they are - the competition started back in 1987.

 

[RUNVS]

Rather than 1990 the best points for division are 1986 and 1991

1991 makes sense as well as the introduction of the Crows signifies a turning point as it meant every major state in the country now had an AFL team.

 

[Mofra]

1897 to the present only.

One league. No Sanfl no Wafl no VFA.

The VFA was (arguably) equal if not better in some year than the VFL pre-25.
VFA premiers beat the VFL "premiers" (no VFL Grand Final was played in 1924) for the 1924 Champions of Victoria trophy, and players were regularly traded between the two competitions.

 

[SJ]

Or, you forget about when the VFL/AFL became a "national competition" because it has happened gradually, and any delineation is completely arbitrary and meaningless. And you just take the history of the sport on face value for what it is.

 

[SilentHunter_]

Rather than 1990 the best points for division are 1986 and 1991

Agree there are a few points which make sense to separate the VFL from the AFL flags but 1987 is going way too far back imo.

 

[The_Reaper]

The VFA was (arguably) equal if not better in some year than the VFL pre-25.
VFA premiers beat the VFL "premiers" (no VFL Grand Final was played in 1924) for the 1924 Champions of Victoria trophy, and players were regularly traded between the two competitions.

And before world war I the SANFL premiers regularly beat the VFL premiers.
Sure maybe the VFL teams didn't care but the very fact that they played off indicates that the SANFL was considered equal at the time

 

[The_Reaper]

Agree there are a few points which make sense to separate the VFL from the AFL flags but 1987 is going way too far back imo.

The draft was also introduced in 1986 so if someone wanted to draw an arbitrary line that time period would be the best point.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Do you think that VFA premierships should be recognised as tier 1 premierships?

Who gives a **** what "tier" they are in, I only care about flags won in this league.

 

[barmy44]

amateur league clubs sometimes change leagues, and fairly regularly change divisions. they would all count each premiership, with a notation as to which league and which division it was one in. I doubt anyone here cares about 'rules' of doing that, because BF tribalism isnt attached to it.

simply do the same here. count whatever the hell you want.

in most cases, these BF arguments about 'what counts' or 'what doesnt count' are purely for ammunition online.

my own personal 'geelong premiership tally' stands at 3.

outside of maybe 2 or 3 players I remember from my very young days, i have zero emotional resonance with the '89 GF loss. it means nothing to me. rewatched it for the experience a few years back, and it did nothing for me. its out of my generation. i didnt experience it, and I have no emotional investment to anyone involved. overall, '89 means nothing to me.

if you want to count it, count it - its that simple.

trying to establish a BF consensus on 'what counts' is impossible. it also doesnt matter. if the 1891 VFA flag means something to you 'cause the games history is really your thing - fantastic!

if 'sweet_drop_punt' or 'up_the_guts' or 'any_other_random_username' on BF says 'you cant count that!'... who really cares?

 

[SJ]

Who gives a **** what "tier" they are in, I only care about flags won in this league.

People that care about the history of the code and the relative important of historical events.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Why it is even a debate? Of course clubs recognise and celebrate the achievements, they're part of their history.

Clubs in plenty of sports change leagues all the time.

This league began in 1897 though and has been going since. Other happenings aren't part of its history.

Essendon has won something like 40 flags (VFA, VFL, AFL, reserves, under 19s, night series), they were all celebrated to some extent at the time and are part of the club history. It has no relevance to this league or the other clubs in it though.

 

[Murraj1966]

The VFA was (arguably) equal if not better in some year than the VFL pre-25.
VFA premiers beat the VFL "premiers" (no VFL Grand Final was played in 1924) for the 1924 Champions of Victoria trophy, and players were regularly traded between the two competitions.

And La Liga is better then the Premier League but they are different leagues.

Its not a matter of how many you win. The club could say in our rooms St Kilda went for a threepeat of screw up off seasons all we want but i can't go screaming to the AFL to acknowledge it. The AFL/VFL should only worry about their organisation.

 

[footyfan1978]

Geelong's bid to the AFL to count VFA premierships with VFL/AFL premierships was officially knocked back yesterday.

Of course. There is no debate.
That was a different league. It is not a part of this league's history. However it is a part of Geelong's history as a club.
No sure why you feel it is up for debate. Clearly flags from a different league. Very straight forward.

 

[Adelaide Docker]

1991 makes sense as well as the introduction of the Crows signifies a turning point as it meant every major state in the country now had an AFL team.

"major state" lmao, what does that even mean