When will the AFL and Vic clubs abolish VFL premierships as AFL achievements?

[mediumsizered]

I see there is still an inferiority complex suffered by supporters of non-Victorian clubs. AFL = VFL in much the same way Elton John = Reggie Dwight or Meatloaf = Marvin Lee Aday.

BTW, didn't the Sydney Swans celebrate the end of a 72 year premiership drought in 2005?

 

[mediumsizered]

1. The policy of the Australian Football League is that all Premierships and other records from 1897 are Australian Football League Premierships and records. No distinction is made in the official Australian Football League, Football Record Season Guide between Premierships from different eras between 1897 and the present day, nor are gradations of status assigned to Premierships from different years.

You are entitled to the opinion that this should not be so but you are not entitled to your own facts, even if politicians have duped you into believing that such a position is tenable.

2. It is ultimately a meaningless a fruitless enterprise to try and weight the value of Premierships from different eras or years - the permutations are endless. Someone here suggested lesser value of the Premiership of 1908 to that of 2008, without probably stopping to think that Carlton in 1908 had to play all other opponents twice, (including once on the opponent's dedicated home ground) and two of the other top four teams three times. How do you weight those factors? A League Premiership is a League Premiership.

3. The League doesn't and never has had an official competition or award for who has won the most Premierships. The list is maintained for the entertainment of and to satisfy the curiosity of football supporters. The number of Premierships won does however give supporters a relative measure of the success that their club during its time in the competition. (It is interesting to note that before the advent of the Premiership Cup, the League used to present the Premiers with the E.L. Wilson Shield, a perpetual trophy that was only held by the club until another team won the Premiership.)

4. As many have pointed out in reply to the notion of abolishing "VFL" Premierships, historical and practical factors weigh against it.

Excellent post. I hope everyone who wishes to debate this issue reads this post with an open mind.

 

[boncer34]

So does this mean no player has every kicked 1000 goals in the AFL?

 

[wedgetail]

what if WCE had have won a flag in 1989? Would that be counted in your flags?

You know damn well it would.

If we won a flag in 1989 then we would have 4 AFL/VFL flags... but only 3 AFL flags.

I dont feel the need to lie about simple things like this. We have 3 AFL cups, its basic maths.

Essendon only have 2 AFL flags. That must rile you given your staunch commitment to change the wording on ancient VFL flags, but its an undeniable fact. Wiki even says so.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

So does this mean no player has every kicked 1000 goals in the AFL?

Great question!

Does this mean that things such as games played and the like restart at 1990?

 

[andypie]

It is all irrelevant really.
The only important premiership is the next one.
And I suppose the last one if you are the reigning premier.

 

[azza29]

Great question!

Does this mean that things such as games played and the like restart at 1990?

Or should we restart every time a team is added/merged/moved? So that would mean that each team will start 2012 having won exactly zero premierships...

Of course not. Duh.

 

[Max zero]

Probably the most interesting thing about the modern AFL is that the 'traditional powerhouse' VFL teams are not nearly as dominant.

Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton aren't nearly so flash when they can't buy all the best players.

 

[Ron The Bear]

If we won a flag in 1989 then we would have 4 AFL/VFL flags... but only 3 AFL flags.

Yet confoundingly, the cup would look the same.

 

[Father Jack]

Or should we restart every time a team is added/merged/moved? So that would mean that each team will start 2012 having won exactly zero premierships...

Of course not. Duh.

No, not at all. But considering that the comp dramatically changed about 20 years ago, going with the time whereby the name changed would be a good place to do it.

But again, it is purely academic. No one is trying to take anyone's flags off anyone, but to compare, say, West Coast and Geelong it is a bit fairer to use the AFL era as a standalone concept.

But, I'd like to emphasize, as a purely academic exercise for comparisons sake.

 

[Bender571]

If it's the same league why isn't the all Australian team made up of players from the WAFL and SANFL like it used to be?

 

[Lord Nicholson]

Probably the most interesting thing about the modern AFL is that the 'traditional powerhouse' VFL teams are not nearly as dominant.

Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton aren't nearly so flash when they can't buy all the best players.

On the other hand, expansion teams are engineered to win flags, in order to guarantee the success of the club.

For all the talk of the competition being fairer now that every team is equalised, we've got 3 flags, the equal most, won in a three year period by a team with an expanded salary cap.

Furthermore, the argument seems to be that Footscray's 54 flag would be a lesser accomplishment than winning a flag now, despite back then being one of the poorer clubs in a competition where the big clubs could just buy who they wanted, whereas now the clubs that struggle get the cream of the draft, in the interest of equalisation.

Which one is really the greater effort? Since the whole argument seems to be a pissing contest about "State league flags aren't as good as national league flags."

And for all the talk of equalisation, teams that traditionally struggled in the VFL, Footscray, and St Kilda, are still yet to fill their trophy cabinets. Richmond's and Melbourne's VFL premiership droughts have persisted. Collingwood and Essendon have won two of these super-dooper-special "AFL flags," which is one whole flag off the pace of the supposed "AFL champions." Big deficit.

My advice to fans of the expansion teams who get all sooky-la-la about a foundation team talking about gunning for its "17th flag" is to really not give a continental. It does not concern you; why you should be so worried about it is beyond me.

 

[Max zero]

On the other hand, expansion teams are engineered to win flags, in order to guarantee the success of the club.

For all the talk of the competition being fairer now that every team is equalised, we've got 3 flags, the equal most, won in a three year period by a team with an expanded salary cap.

Furthermore, the argument seems to be that Footscray's 54 flag would be a lesser accomplishment than winning a flag now, despite back then being one of the poorer clubs in a competition where the big clubs could just buy who they wanted, whereas now the clubs that struggle get the cream of the draft, in the interest of equalisation.

Which one is really the greater effort? Since the whole argument seems to be a pissing contest about "State league flags aren't as good as national league flags."

And for all the talk of equalisation, teams that traditionally struggled in the VFL, Footscray, and St Kilda, are still yet to fill their trophy cabinets. Richmond's and Melbourne's VFL premiership droughts have persisted. Collingwood and Essendon have won two of these super-dooper-special "AFL flags," which is one whole flag off the pace of the supposed "AFL champions." Big deficit.

My advice to fans of the expansion teams who get all sooky-la-la about a foundation team talking about gunning for its "17th flag" is to really not give a continental. It does not concern you; why you should be so worried about it is beyond me.

How has WC, Port, Adelaide been engineered for success?

Brisbane's flags were won with an expanded cap although the Bombers and Carlton also won flags with expanded caps. Albeit illegally .

So if you don't care why are you in this thread?

 

[DalSainter]

when will the interstate "franchise" supporters realise their "franchises" are playing in our league???? what a geeza the OP is!! you should worry about ro$$ lyin trading off your 1st round picks for spuds for the next few years

 

[wedgetail]

Yet confoundingly, the cup would look the same.

Superficially, yes. But as always the devil is in the details, and the details say they dont look the same.

If you look closely, the VFL cups are engraved Victorian Football League, awarded pre 1990 and from a state league.

The AFL cups are national league cups, engraved Australian Football League and awarded post 1990. They are all I choose to count as I believe the national league is all that matters, given that i didnt really give a tuppeny stuff for the VFL.

There is a tally for people who like to over inflate thier tyres and combine the two totals, its called "AFL/VFL premierships". If you choose to do it this way, good luck to you. Although even blind Freddy can see that there is a slash in that title and two component parts that can be seperated if desired.

The major fallacy here is claiming that Richmond has won any AFL flags when its plainly obvious that they havent.

 

[Ron The Bear]

There is a tally for people who like to over inflate thier tyres and combine the two totals, its called "AFL/VFL premierships". If you choose to do it this way, good luck to you. Although even blind Freddy can see that there is a slash in that title and two component parts that can be seperated if desired.

The major fallacy here is claiming that Richmond has won any AFL flags when its plainly obvious that they havent.

There's only one Big League and the notion of discerning between VFL and AFL is nonsense since, as already proven, there is no logical point of demarcation (other than a cosmetic one). You're free to view things any way you want, but the AFL Season Guide - "The official statistical history of the AFL" - doesn't distinguish between them. And may it be forever so.

 

[sighclone]

There's only one Big League and the notion of discerning between VFL and AFL is nonsense since, as already proven, there is no logical point of demarcation (other than a cosmetic one). You're free to view things any way you want, but the AFL Season Guide - "The official statistical history of the AFL" - doesn't distinguish between them. And may it be forever so.

Well said.
I wonder if the same argument occurs in Canada (Plus Chicago and Detroit) with their national sport. Perhaps not. The NHL has seen a slightly longer expansion.

 

[sherb]

Superficially, yes. But as always the devil is in the details, and the details say they dont look the same.

If you look closely, the VFL cups are engraved Victorian Football League, awarded pre 1990 and from a state league.

The AFL cups are national league cups, engraved Australian Football League and awarded post 1990. They are all I choose to count as I believe the national league is all that matters, given that i didnt really give a tuppeny stuff for the VFL.

There is a tally for people who like to over inflate thier tyres and combine the two totals, its called "AFL/VFL premierships". If you choose to do it this way, good luck to you. Although even blind Freddy can see that there is a slash in that title and two component parts that can be seperated if desired.

The major fallacy here is claiming that Richmond has won any AFL flags when its plainly obvious that they havent.

It's not "over-inflating" at all. It is simply counting flags won in this competition, which started in 1897 and changed its name in 1990.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Really haven't we all had enough of this.

It's about time we look at the more serious issues.

Interstate teams have to travel too much compared to Vic sides.
Now when we joined the comp we realised that there were 10 Vic teams & that we based ourselves interstate.

But they didn't consider that meant they have to travel more, outrageous.
It's just a Vic-centric web of lies that got us caught up in this.
Not FAIR!!! Wah wah!!!

Same thing happened to my mate. Got a job in WA & then the pricks wanted him to travel to work everyday. Some companies







P.S: Please mention the irony of a Pies supp talking about travel, i have a side bet.

 

[The Speaker]

really haven't we all had enough of this.

It's about time we look at the more serious issues.

Interstate teams have to travel too much compared to vic sides.
Now when we joined the comp we realised that there were 10 vic teams & that we based ourselves interstate.

But they didn't consider that meant they have to travel more, outrageous.
It's just a vic-centric web of lies that got us caught up in this.
Not fair!!! Wah wah!!!

Same thing happened to my mate. Got a job in wa & then the pricks wanted him to travel to work everyday. Some companies







P.s: Please mention the irony of a pies supp talking about travel, i have a side bet.:d

THANKS BRIAN. a

 

[RogersResults]

Superficially, yes. But as always the devil is in the details, and the details say they dont look the same.

If you look closely, the VFL cups are engraved Victorian Football League, awarded pre 1990 and from a state league.

The AFL cups are national league cups, engraved Australian Football League and awarded post 1990. They are all I choose to count as I believe the national league is all that matters, given that i didnt really give a tuppeny stuff for the VFL.

There is a tally for people who like to over inflate thier tyres and combine the two totals, its called "AFL/VFL premierships". If you choose to do it this way, good luck to you. Although even blind Freddy can see that there is a slash in that title and two component parts that can be seperated if desired.

The major fallacy here is claiming that Richmond has won any AFL flags when its plainly obvious that they havent.

Official AFL statistically policy - all Premierships and records from the foundation of the League in 1897 are AFL records. Do you doubt that? Do you have documentary evidence that this isn't so?

You may not approve of this situation and if you were in charge of the AFL you might attempt to change this situation.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but no one is entitled to their own facts.

There may be a cogent argument to be made for the AFL to change its statistics and records policy, you are not making it by denying reality.

 

[mediumsizered]

If it's the same league why isn't the all Australian team made up of players from the WAFL and SANFL like it used to be?

The AA team included players from SA & WA during the era when interstate carnivals were played. Once these carnivals ceased to be held, the AA/Team of the Year was chosen only from players in the VFL/AFL.

 

[Blues_Man]

Just seems absurd to spout nonsense

Yes lets forget the leagues history and tradition ..because some nuffy who supports a franchise team that has won diddley squat since thier inception wants to.

If i was a purple shocker supporter i'd want my clubs history erased as well .

 

[RogersResults]

The AA team included players from SA & WA during the era when interstate carnivals were played. Once these carnivals ceased to be held, the AA/Team of the Year was chosen only from players in the VFL/AFL.

Official All-Australian teams 1953 to 1988 were under the auspices of the national controlling body, the Australian National Football Council of which the VFL, SANFL and WAFL amongst other state competitions were just constituent members. Players were chosen from all state competitions.

The AFL (VFL) from 1982 to 1990 named their own "teams of the year".

After 1990 when the Australian National Football Council was subsumed by the AFL and the AFL took its place as the national controlling body of Australian Football, the All-Australian team was only selected from AFL players.

 

[One PAFC]

No one is trying to say that Victorian clubs achievements prior to 1990 don't mean anything, coz they do.

But here's a case in point, all the Victorian clubs continue to count their state comp premierships in their premiership total, yet us at Port Adelaide, you shoot us down when we count our state comp premierships as part of our premiership total.

Let's compromise, you can keep saying you have x amount of VFL/AFL premierships, but Port Adelaide get to say we have x amount of SANFL/AFL premierships. Fair enough?