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

[ok.crows]

They're not ex-VFL clubs they are VFL/AFL clubs, they never left the (old) VFL. the (old) VFL is the AFL they are the same competition.

Same comp so their counted.

As I said before:

supporters of ex-VFL clubs, many of whom do not seem to realise that the virgule character "/" in "VFL/AFL" separates two distinct acronyms (VFL and AFL), they instead seem to think that "VFL/AFL" is an expanded name for the one thing, which it is not.

Virgule: a short oblique stroke (/) between two words indicating that whichever is appropriate may be chosen to complete the sense of the text in which they occur.

They are indeed ex-VFL clubs. The only thing that survives of the VFL is the AFL's insistence on keeping the VFL records as part of the official statistics. They did this to pander to the Victorian public. It isn't a big deal, but I am somewhat surprised that the ex-VFL club supporters still fall for this cheap PR trick.

 

[ok.crows]

Fiztroy still exist, they just no longer field a team in the VFL/AFL competition just like University.

Fitzroy did indeed participate in some AFL games. University did not.

 

[Hoops]

Only premierships won with channel 10 broadcasting the grand final should count

 

[Jay-Z]

All clubs should absolutely "count" all their flags. Any supporter that thinks that number means anything or uses it to try and compare their club to other clubs (aka dick measuring) is an idiot. Plain and simple

 

[Magnus McFysh]

You can only win the competitions you enter - and they should be celebrated accordingly.

Geelong won 7 VFA premierships, 6 VFL Premierships and 3 AFL Premierships

Now you can also say they have won 9 VFL/AFL premierships but not 16 VFA/VFL/AFL premierships because the VFL was a completely separate competition to the VFA, the VFA continued for many years as a parallel competition - whereas the VFL became the AFL, it wasn't a breakaway, there is a direct lineage between the two.

Now if Geelong or any other club wants to celebrate and count the premierships they have won in other competitions there's absolutely nothing the AFL can do about it - because it is club history, not league history and in most cases, the club exists beyond the league.

And what is "tier 1" anyway. There will always be a debate about the VFL vs SANFL vs WAFL for primacy, and it can be argued that at certain parts of their histories, all three could claim to be the strongest league - and at one point in time the VFA could claim to be the strongest league. It doesn't really matter and it certainly has no bearing on this debate. The premierships were won and nobody can say otherwise.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

As I said before:

supporters of ex-VFL clubs, many of whom do not seem to realise that the virgule character "/" in "VFL/AFL" separates two distinct acronyms (VFL and AFL), they instead seem to think that "VFL/AFL" is an expanded name for the one thing, which it is not.

Virgule: a short oblique stroke (/) between two words indicating that whichever is appropriate may be chosen to complete the sense of the text in which they occur.

They are indeed ex-VFL clubs. The only thing that survives of the VFL is the AFL's insistence on keeping the VFL records as part of the official statistics. They did this to pander to the Victorian public. It isn't a big deal, but I am somewhat surprised that the ex-VFL club supporters still fall for this cheap PR trick.

They are the same entity! The VFL is the AFL is the VFL! There is no difference.

FFS the SANFL has changed it's name over they years is it a different competition each time?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

You can only win the competitions you enter - and they should be celebrated accordingly.

Geelong won 7 VFA premierships, 6 VFL Premierships and 3 AFL Premierships

It's 10 VFA/VFL premierships btw, you've won 3 more in the rebranded VFA.

 

[Lsta062]

To answer the OP, no.

There is a distinction between the VFA in those days and the VFL/AFL league. Essendon and co. formed a breakaway league that started in 1897 separate from the VFA league. Since it is a breakaway league, it makes sense that the flags reset to 0. Or else, why can't Port Adelaide count their SANFL flags that they got before joining the AFL?

The reason why it makes sense why the VFL flags count is because the current league is essentially still the VFL but with a different name; it is not a breakaway league to the VFL. So, it makes sense as it is right now.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Or else, why can't Port Adelaide count their SANFL flags that they got before joining the AFL?

They can but not as VFL/AFL league records. The SANFL and the club can record them but the AFL as a competition can not.

 

[hcd199]

The short form "9 VFL/AFL premierships" hides the information concerning the split between the VFL premierships (those for which the club got a flag with "VFL premiers" written on it) versus the AFL premierships (those for which the club got a flag with "AFL premiers" written on it).

There is no reason to obscure this data other than to pander to the sensibilities of supporters of ex-VFL clubs, many of whom do not seem to realise that the virgule character "/" in "VFL/AFL" separates two distinct acronyms (VFL and AFL), they instead seem to think that "VFL/AFL" is an expanded name for the one thing, which it is not.

Virgule: a short oblique stroke (/) between two words indicating that whichever is appropriate may be chosen to complete the sense of the text in which they occur.

"VFL/AFL" is not obscuring the fact that some flags read "VFL premiers" and some read "AFL premiers" - it contains both the term "VFL" and the term "AFL", does it not? In what sense is "VFL/AFL" not a name applicable to the one continuing entity? If you'd prefer that people refer to it as "VFL-AFL" or "VFL-cum-AFL" or suchlike to reserve the virgule for where distinct entities are referred to, that's an immensely trivial point to be making in the context of this thread; if you're instead claiming (as you seem to be) that the VFL of 1989 and the AFL of 1990 were separate entities, on what basis do you make that claim? What they print on the premiership flags makes no difference to that question.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

What they print on the premiership flags makes no difference to that question.

Yeah some of Sydney's say South Melbourne and some say Sydney Swans they were still awarded to the same club by the same competition.

 

[Blue1980]

To answer the OP, no.

There is a distinction between the VFA in those days and the VFL/AFL league. Essendon and co. formed a breakaway league that started in 1897 separate from the VFA league. Since it is a breakaway league, it makes sense that the flags reset to 0. Or else, why can't Port Adelaide count their SANFL flags that they got before joining the AFL?

The reason why it makes sense why the VFL flags count is because the current league is essentially still the VFL but with a different name; it is not a breakaway league to the VFL. So, it makes sense as it is right now.

Exactly some non Victorians like to cry about it but their clubs joined our competition instead of creating a new one.

They may not like it but it's what happened.

VFA flags can't can't as part of it as it was a different competition.

If Carlton joined the WAFL next year we would have 0 flags in the WAFL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ok.crows]

They are the same entity! The VFL is the AFL is the VFL! There is no difference.

Indeed the AFL is a new name for what once was the VFL and which has since been expanded to the national competition. However, the AFL and the VFL are not the same thing. At no time was there ever an entity called "VFL/AFL". There was never a single "AFL/VFL" flag ever awarded ... all flags were either "AFL flags" or "VFL flags". The construct "VFL/AFL" consists of two distinct acronyms separated by a virgule (/) which, in this context, means "or".

Therefore the construct "VFL/AFL premierships" refers to the addition of two distinct totals: (1) the number of VFL premierships won, plus (2) the number of AFL premierships won.

This is plain, straightforward English.

 

[Hawker81]

Whether they are counted or not, a VFA flag won in 1896 should have the same significance as a VFL flag won in 1897.

VFA flags won by Footscray, North et al after 1897 aren't the equivalent of VFL/AFL premierships.

 

[Blue1980]

Mumbai used to be called Bombay, does this mean it is a brand new city?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gibbke]

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.

Every what...?!?

Tasmania was a major state in Australian football, in clear fourth place, until the football programmes of NSW and Qld, through no ability or initiative of their own, were bestowed constant riches and attention in an attempt to create extra talent for drafting, these days with expensive academies and fully subsidised state leagues, and a fan base for the new franchises, all based around the need to attract tv money. That these places have picked up the ball and run with it is a credit to the hardworking local footy people, and it is good for the game because of the sheer numbers involved, but no Tasmanian admits this without severely gritted teeth. Tasmania, on the other hand, provided 300+ players to the VFL before the national comp through their own sweat and culture, and as a reward for their efforts were bent over the table and *******ed. Before divine AFL intervention, all of the non Big 3 states and territories were utterly and unquestionably Tasmania's bitches. Afterwards, though, we became the carcass the worms fed off. Without that assistance, Tasmania would still be annually handing these states their arses on a platter in draft numbers, junior carnivals, interest and winning margins in state games. If anyone wants to bring up status, as far as I'm concerned if anyone says that SA's introduction into footy completes the circle, then Tasmania's introduction is just as important, and because they aren't there, the circle is not complete...

Also worth noting that the NFL in America has never had a state representation greater than the 28 states it has now, out of fifty, and it has never called itself anything other than the National Football League...even in the early days when there were no teams past the midwest...

 

[Gibbke]

Mumbai used to be called Bombay, does this mean it is a brand new city?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting here that cricket records always use the name of the city as it was when the match was played...so the Bombay test of 1975 is always referred to as Bombay and not Mumbai...

 

[Ice-Wolf]

However, the AFL and the VFL are not the same thing.

They are the same ****ing thing! No amount of mental gymnastics you try to do will change that.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

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.

LOL South Australia isn't a major state, WA barely qualifies.

 

[Magnus McFysh]

It's 10 VFA/VFL premierships btw, you've won 3 more in the rebranded VFA.

???? Rebranded VFA?

VFA - 1878, 1879, 1880, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886 = 7
VFL - 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963 = 6
AFL - 2007, 2009, 2011 = 3
VFL/AFL = 9

And as I said you can't say VFA/VFL/AFL because there is no direct lineage between the VFA and the VFL.

Not sure where you're coming from with the above post - care to elaborate?

 

[Blue1980]

Interesting here that cricket records always use the name of the city as it was when the match was played...so the Bombay test of 1975 is always referred to as Bombay and not Mumbai...

Maybe true but when their taking about records at the ground I am sure they don't only count it after the name change


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ice-Wolf]

???? Rebranded VFA?

VFA - 1878, 1879, 1880, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886 = 7
VFL - 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963 = 6
AFL - 2007, 2009, 2011 = 3
VFL/AFL = 9

And as I said you can't say VFA/VFL/AFL because there is no direct lineage between the VFA and the VFL.

Not sure where you're coming from with the above post - care to elaborate?

You've won 3 Premierships in the current VFL (2002, 2007, 2012) which is the rebranded VFA. thus 10 VFA/VFL Premierships

 

[Blue1980]

So theoretically then if West Coast won a flag in say 1988 that wouldn't count? Or if Sydney won in 1986? Both no go?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blue1980]

You've won 3 Premierships in the current VFL which is the rebranded VFA. thus 10 VFA/VFL Premierships

Rebranded when they competitions both existed at the same time?

Afl is rebranded, vfl was a new camp as distinct from the vfa

Your either trolling or just very dim


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Magnus McFysh]

They are the same ******* thing! No amount of mental gymnastics you try to do will change that.

They are and they aren't. They are very different entities, but there is a direct lineage between the two. The AFL was not created by a merger, or by a breakaway. It was a name change of a single organisation. You, however seem to underestimate the power of a name change. You dismiss it. You can't.

The VFL is not the AFL and though the AFL was once the VFL it is no longer. The heritage is there, the lineage is there, but don't ever think that they are simply the same thing. They are not.