Anzac Day - Essendon &Collingwood

The debate pros and cons will go on. For mine, it's a farce that these 2 teams, and especially Hubris Hirds mob have a monopoly on this great occasion.

I have always advocated that this day should belong to the 2 sides who played off in the GF, this approach gives the opportunity for any team to play. This monopoly is outdated and needs review.

As for the bombers....well what else can be said!

Make it so

Parochialism aside, I've never really had a problem with Collingwood and Essendon playing the Anzac Day match.

Realistically, they have built a huge rivalry around the match and there is always a great atmosphere at the G. These two teams rain; hail or shine will draw 90 000 to the match and it is a completely stress free day for me to watch the football with some mates.

I think there's value in your proposal for it to be a Grand Final replay, but in regards to sharing it around; I don't think most teams could draw a crowd or create an atmosphere that's comparable... including, unfortunately, the MFC.

No problems with those 2 doing ANZAC day, they built it from a football perspective and have made the day traditional for the vets. I do however have a massive issue with the ANZAC day medal. And how such and such is a 3 time ANZAC day medallist talked about like it's something special - no it's B.O.G. in a home and away game nothing more nothing less

I've got no problem with them making it their traditional fixture.

Best not to rattle the cage too much. There are a few clubs who wouldn't mind taking QB off our hands.

Whilst i think the 2 teams in the GF is a great idea Soi, this is just how the AFL like it. 2 out of their top 3 Vic clubs playing off in their (the AFL's) biggest block buster of the year outside of the GF.

And one of them it saved from oblivion this year. What a celebration this will be for those in the AFL's elite inner circle. Essendrug are back, the ANZAC day block buster goes on! How chuffed those in the AFL inner circle and hierarchy must be right now... long live HIrd and his bongers! Both the day and Essendrug are and will be untouchable for as long as the present AFL structure and hierarchy remain in place.

I blame this on the weakness of the remaining Vic clubs and their CEOs/board. None have the balls to speak up against such a rediculous duopoly on such an important occasion, including the MFC. Not that we are in a position of strength to lead the charge i realise. But until or unless the other Vic clubs start to make a song and dance about missing out i wouldn't waste my breath Soi. It's set in stone mate.

Gee people actually think about this stuff?....Am I missing something, I spent the afternoon discussing an upcoming gig at the Tote

Sorry, but after what Essendon have done to the whole image of AFL I just cannot watch them play, and especially that smug Hird at a press conference. And as I have said before to equate the "heroics on the field" as they refer incessantly on the day with what our soldiers went through in all wars but particularly at ANZAC and the Western Front is an absolute insult. Cannot watch it.

Dudes. We're in prime time Friday night football this week.

I said in the past that ANZAC day should be a challenge cup type fixture with the winner as holder and challengers rotated year by year. Not much interest though. If we got a decent and fair draw throughout the year I wouldn't care much if we lost QB.

Will not be watching.

Will not be watching.

I will be going Friday and Saturday, hopefully to watch the Dees win and the Pies lose!

I will be going Friday and Saturday, hopefully to watch the Dees win and the Pies lose!

Will not support anything Essendon

Friday night is a seperate game

Happy for Essendon V Collingwood to continue if our anzac eve Richmond game will remain (or who knows, maybe even swap the two down the line).

Gee people actually think about this stuff?....Am I missing something, I spent the afternoon discussing an upcoming gig at the Tote

Wow, that sounds thrilling...

Anyone else want to share what random [censored] they spoke about yesterday?

I have no problem with Essendon. I have many problems with Collingwood.

During World War 1, the clubs with the highest tally of players serving came from "upper-class" (at the time) clubs: Melbourne, Geelong, St Kilda, South Melbourne.

Essendon had many players serve during the war, but Collingwood was very under-represented: of the four "working class" clubs -- Collingwood, Fitzroy, Richmond and Carlton -- the Pies had by far the lowest amount of players serving.

Melbourne stood aside from the competition and along with University had the highest number of players serving die: 16. In WW2, Melbourne lost a further 13, including ‘Bluey’ Truscott, and the Rat of Tobruk, Ron Barassi Senior.

Collingwood's enlistment was half that of the Lions, Tiges and Blues.

But this pisses me off the most: Melbourne name its best-and-fairest trophies after fallen war heroes, whereas Collingwood named theirs after Copeland and treasurer Bob Rush, who disguised gifts to players and committeemen during the wars as presents to soldiers, when they were anything but.

Also consider that the neighbourhood was mainly Irish Catholic, heavily unionised and against conscription. In the 1916 and 1917 conscription referenda, Collingwood voted against conscription. Whether you agree with conscription or not (I can't see how you would), it seems bizarre that a club so aggressive in its campaign against the wars would be rewarded with arguably the biggest game on the regular season schedule that recognises those who served.

If ANZAC Day was about "tradition", Collingwood most certainly wouldn't be there. The day is about nothing more than branding and corporate exploitation. If it had anything to do with the "ANZACS" and tradition, Melbourne would be playing.

But it's not like Melbourne was smart enough to conjure up the day itself. It had an obligation to. It didn't. Now it's someone else's day, evidently, someone that most certainly shouldn't be held up on the day as a "club for the ANZACS".

From the AFL website. "Great Forgotten Anzac Day Matches"

Melbourne 17.11 (113) d Collingwood 10.17 (77)

Waverley, round six, 1991
Questions began to hover over the reigning premiers as they dropped their second game of the year, this time to Melbourne at VFL Park on Anzac Day. The Magpies had struggled to recapture their premiership form from 1990 and let themselves down with poor kicking for goal. By contrast Melbourne built on its recent good form. Darren Cuthbertson continued his brilliant start to his career by booting seven goals and Darren Bennett played a more than handy support role with a bag of five. New recruit Paul Williams was one of few shining lights for Collingwood in the 36-point loss.

I was there that day. Bright sunshine and a packed AFL Park. Oh what a day and thank goodness for memories such as these.

I will be going Friday and Saturday, hopefully to watch the Dees win and the Pies lose!

Only reason I usually watch them play is in the hope that the pies lose. This year I hope they cane the bombers.

Anzac Day - Essendon &Collingwood

The debate pros and cons will go on. For mine, it's a farce that these 2 teams, and especially Hubris Hirds mob have a monopoly on this great occasion.

I have always advocated that this day should belong to the 2 sides who played off in the GF, this approach gives the opportunity for any team to play. This monopoly is outdated and needs review.

As for the bombers....well what else can be said!

Playing devil's advocate, it's an economic/marketing argument. You have two top-selling products - Grand final replay and Anzac Day, combining the two is just shooting yourself in the foot. If one of those two products loses its shine in terms of people coming through the gate, I don't think the AFL will hesitate to change it up.

I have no problem with Essendon. I have many problems with Collingwood.

During World War 1, the clubs with the highest tally of players serving came from "upper-class" (at the time) clubs: Melbourne, Geelong, St Kilda, South Melbourne.

Essendon had many players serve during the war, but Collingwood was very under-represented: of the four "working class" clubs -- Collingwood, Fitzroy, Richmond and Carlton -- the Pies had by far the lowest amount of players serving.

Melbourne stood aside from the competition and along with University had the highest number of players serving die: 16. In WW2, Melbourne lost a further 13, including ‘Bluey’ Truscott, and the Rat of Tobruk, Ron Barassi Senior.

Collingwood's enlistment was half that of the Lions, Tiges and Blues.

But this pisses me off the most: Melbourne name its best-and-fairest trophies after fallen war heroes, whereas Collingwood named theirs after Copeland and treasurer Bob Rush, who disguised gifts to players and committeemen during the wars as presents to soldiers, when they were anything but.

Also consider that the neighbourhood was mainly Irish Catholic, heavily unionised and against conscription. In the 1916 and 1917 conscription referenda, Collingwood voted against conscription. Whether you agree with conscription or not (I can't see how you would), it seems bizarre that a club so aggressive in its campaign against the wars would be rewarded with arguably the biggest game on the regular season schedule that recognises those who served.

If ANZAC Day was about "tradition", Collingwood most certainly wouldn't be there. The day is about nothing more than branding and corporate exploitation. If it had anything to do with the "ANZACS" and tradition, Melbourne would be playing.

But it's not like Melbourne was smart enough to conjure up the day itself. It had an obligation to. It didn't. Now it's someone else's day, evidently, someone that most certainly shouldn't be held up on the day as a "club for the ANZACS".

Wow. I just don't like either team

All clubs should be rostered. It would be overwhelmingly supported as it should.

I have no problem with Essendon. I have many problems with Collingwood.

During World War 1, the clubs with the highest tally of players serving came from "upper-class" (at the time) clubs: Melbourne, Geelong, St Kilda, South Melbourne.

Essendon had many players serve during the war, but Collingwood was very under-represented: of the four "working class" clubs -- Collingwood, Fitzroy, Richmond and Carlton -- the Pies had by far the lowest amount of players serving.

Melbourne stood aside from the competition and along with University had the highest number of players serving die: 16. In WW2, Melbourne lost a further 13, including ‘Bluey’ Truscott, and the Rat of Tobruk, Ron Barassi Senior.

Collingwood's enlistment was half that of the Lions, Tiges and Blues.

But this pisses me off the most: Melbourne name its best-and-fairest trophies after fallen war heroes, whereas Collingwood named theirs after Copeland and treasurer Bob Rush, who disguised gifts to players and committeemen during the wars as presents to soldiers, when they were anything but.

Also consider that the neighbourhood was mainly Irish Catholic, heavily unionised and against conscription. In the 1916 and 1917 conscription referenda, Collingwood voted against conscription. Whether you agree with conscription or not (I can't see how you would), it seems bizarre that a club so aggressive in its campaign against the wars would be rewarded with arguably the biggest game on the regular season schedule that recognises those who served.

If ANZAC Day was about "tradition", Collingwood most certainly wouldn't be there. The day is about nothing more than branding and corporate exploitation. If it had anything to do with the "ANZACS" and tradition, Melbourne would be playing.

But it's not like Melbourne was smart enough to conjure up the day itself. It had an obligation to. It didn't. Now it's someone else's day, evidently, someone that most certainly shouldn't be held up on the day as a "club for the ANZACS".

Not mentioned much and largely forgotten these days, the Irish Catholic mostly sympathised with the Entende Powers(Germany, Austria and Turkey) in WWI. In an ironic way Collingwood represent the enemy on ANZAC day. Underserving imposters.

From the AFL website. "Great Forgotten Anzac Day Matches"

Melbourne 17.11 (113) d Collingwood 10.17 (77)

Waverley, round six, 1991

Questions began to hover over the reigning premiers as they dropped their second game of the year, this time to Melbourne at VFL Park on Anzac Day. The Magpies had struggled to recapture their premiership form from 1990 and let themselves down with poor kicking for goal. By contrast Melbourne built on its recent good form. Darren Cuthbertson continued his brilliant start to his career by booting seven goals and Darren Bennett played a more than handy support role with a bag of five. New recruit Paul Williams was one of few shining lights for Collingwood in the 36-point loss.

I was there that day. Bright sunshine and a packed AFL Park. Oh what a day and think goodness for memories such as these.

Still have this game on VHS. I too was there. Very lucky to be there i must say.

Had a very serious car accident 2 days before the game, rolled a car.

So i was happy to see a victory. It helped dull the aches!!

Still have this game on VHS. I too was there. Very lucky to be there i must say.

Had a very serious car accident 2 days before the game, rolled a car.

So i was happy to see a victory. It helped dull the aches!!

I guess my main point is that play a stand alone game in Melbourne on ANZAC Day, between any 2 Vic teams, and you will pack out the 'G. It should never be forgotten that the MFC - unfortunately - was over-represented in terms of casualties in war. After all, our best and fairest trophy is named after Bluey Truscott; an ace pilot who lost is life while on active duty, not too mention the loss of Ron Barassi Senior. Of course 'Barassi' being a name which will live on in the annuls of VFL/AFL History, now and forever.

Should ANZAC Day be about blockbusters or to honour those who laid down their lives for their mates and country? The MFC gave more than its fair share of favourite sons.

All clubs should be rostered. It would be overwhelmingly supported as it should.

This. Each club's war history could be appropriately publicised when their turn came, and thus commemorate the losses and sacrifices. It personalises the day, and draws it away from corporate marketing, which is effectively what the Essendon v Collingwood repetition is about. Sadly, it reflects the consumerisation of Anzac Day as a whole.