3 Extra Flags for the Dees?

[Timothy Reddan-A'Blew 5,272]

30 minutes ago, Macca said:

Not sure about counting anything before 1877 (when the new (back then) VFA comp was quite well organised and structured)

So that would rule out the 3 extra flags for us (as well as taking 3 flags off Carlton) ... applicable from 1870 to 1876

Google will lead people to each particular year (via Wiki) so 1870 itself seems to be more about games organised on the go! No real structure and an uneven amount of games played by the competing clubs

But I'm highly doubtful that anything will change with regards to the premiership count.  I'd change it but I'm part of s small minority

However, it's good that this past history has been brought to life and it will get people thinking.  There's lots of people interested in historical data especially when the newspapers of the day verify that data

Yep, it's been a fascinating thread, hasn't it, Macca? Including the stuff on other sports' histories. I'm one of those to whom you refer 🧐

[Macca 17,032]

27 minutes ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Yep, it's been a fascinating thread, hasn't it, Macca? Including the stuff on other sports' histories. I'm one of those to whom you refer 🧐

I reckon it's only fascinating for a very small minority ... a broken fingernail to Clarrie would gain more traction on these boards!

But for those few who are interested, it is fascinating

[D4Life 2,510]

On 2/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Demonland said:

We should start counting from 2012 when GWS entered the competition.

Hawthorn 3

Richmond 3

Geelong 1

Melbourne 1

Sydney 1

West Coast 1

Western Bulldogs 1

The Rest 0

 

 

 

This take looks pretty good:

- Pies 0

- Blues 0

- Bombers 0

[Dr. Gonzo 24,273]

17 hours ago, Macca said:

I see the 1897 breakaway league as a new league that discarded the teams that didn't fit their criteria

In effect the same league minus 4 or 5 teams.  It's not like there were any new teams included.  They were teams that already existed in the prior league

The VFA continued on but it was obviously not a patch on the 1877-1896 league

And this is where people judge in an incorrect way (I believe) ... we associate the VFA as a lesser competion with teams like Brunswick or Caulfield when in reality, the VFA prior to 1897 was the premier league

All the best teams played in that league or derived from that league and that is indisputable

Put away any bias or prejudice and it should be recognised as such (the Premier football competition)

We can agree to disagree Gonzo but I'm probably as passionate about this revelation as Carter is

In fact, I've been banging on about it with mates for over 30 years.  One of my pet hates is ignoring history.  I've spent hours and days pouring over old archive newspapers in the State library from that era. 

Trust me, footy was huge back in the 19th century ... with big crowds considering only about 650,000 people lived in Melbourne at that time

I agree history should be recognised. Pre-1897 VFA can and should be recognised as the premier competition in Victoria. But it was not the same competition so when you're talking about competition records they don't count for the VFL/AFL.

It's the same reason we don't count SAFL/SAFA/SANFL, WAFL, TFL, WAFL etc records in VFL/AFL records. The SAFL or WAFL could make an argument they were the pre-eminent competitions in the country pre-1897, even post-1897 for a period of time. You can argue those state comp premierships/achievements are equivalent to the achievements of those in the VFL. But they were not in this competition which is why they cannot and should not be included in the official records.

I feel we are both just as passionate on this, I have Colin Carter's book which I will read, I've read Geoff Blaineys book and many other books on the history of the game. I am all for more recognition of the history of Aussie Rules. But if we are talking about VFL/AFL records/premiership tallies those commence in 1897 because that is when the competition commenced and it is the same continuous competition that still runs today. The pre-1897 premierships should be celebrated by the club's as part of their achievements and honour board etc but they don't count towards VFL/AFL premierships because they were not won in the VFL/AFL competition.

[Macca 17,032]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I agree history should be recognised. Pre-1897 VFA can and should be recognised as the premier competition in Victoria. But it was not the same competition so when you're talking about competition records they don't count for the VFL/AFL.

It's the same reason we don't count SAFL/SAFA/SANFL, WAFL, TFL, WAFL etc records in VFL/AFL records. The SAFL or WAFL could make an argument they were the pre-eminent competitions in the country pre-1897, even post-1897 for a period of time. You can argue those state comp premierships/achievements are equivalent to the achievements of those in the VFL. But they were not in this competition which is why they cannot and should not be included in the official records.

I feel we are both just as passionate on this, I have Colin Carter's book which I will read, I've read Geoff Blaineys book and many other books on the history of the game. I am all for more recognition of the history of Aussie Rules. But if we are talking about VFL/AFL records/premiership tallies those commence in 1897 because that is when the competition commenced and it is the same continuous competition that still runs today. The pre-1897 premierships should be celebrated by the club's as part of their achievements and honour board etc but they don't count towards VFL/AFL premierships because they were not won in the VFL/AFL competition.

You make some very good points but I'm of the firm belief that it all started in 1877

SANFL & WAFL have cases but the best competition was always based out of Victoria.  It's just a question of from which year

You know what, if we'd always counted the lost years (1877-1896) then I reckon those years would be readily accepted by all and sundry

And one of the main reasons those years aren't counted (or recognised) is that the new comp (1897 onwards) was in fierce competition with it's former home. VFL vs VFA

So much so that players who switched from the VFL to the VFA were banned for 5 years

A champion Full Forward in Ron Todd was one such case.  Switched from the Pies at the age of 23 to Williamstown for very big money

And as stated earlier, this new book at least alerts people to what once was.  And our Demon history was a big part of it too

It's where we came from ... an example of that is the 1900 Premiership team.  Many of those players would have played in the earlier, VFA competion

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by Macca

[Macca 17,032]

The following is a hypothetical situation only and not something that I would want or wish for

So would we recognise the flags won in the AFL/VFL if there happened to be a breakaway league happening in the near future? 

12 teams only where all the teams play each other twice

Clubs to be discarded ... GWS, Gold Coast, Freo, Crows, North & Saints

So do the flags prior count? ... Including that extra long 57 year wait for the 2021 premiership?

It would look very much like what happened at the end of 1896 going into 1897

 

Footnote: The above scenario is highly unlikely but it wasn't so long ago that Rupert (with all his millions) decided to have his own Australia-wide Rugby League competition (Super League)

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by Macca

[Macca 17,032]

18 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I feel we are both just as passionate on this, I have Colin Carter's book which I will read, I've read Geoff Blaineys book and many other books on the history of the game

I just purchased a signed copy from Dymocks in Hawthorn!  Apparently Colin Carter was in the store yesterday and signed the copies that the store had in stock

Can't wait to read it!  So where we are on the same page Gonzo is our interest in historical happenings

[Macca 17,032]

Our ratio of GF appearances converted to wins takes a hammering if those forgotten* years end up being counted

3 premierships but 9 times runners-up!

And the 1900 flag was seen as a drought breaker ... 24 long, tortuous years since our previous premiership in 1876!

*50 pages into Colin Carter's book and he's already made a compelling argument many times over

So if you're interested in this sort of historical revision, it's a great way to spend 30 bucks

Available at all good book stores! (and online of course)

 

Footnote: Upon analysing the first 8 years, there is a strong case made that the oldest rivalry all-time is the one between Melbourne & Carlton ... closely followed by Geelong & South in the following 10 seasons

Edited February 3, 2023 by Macca

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,708]

On 1/31/2023 at 11:50 PM, Dr. Gonzo said:

He's been going on about this for ages, it's a ridiculous notion. Check out how some of those premierships were "won" pre-1897.

It was a different comp, with different teams and different rules. Club's can celebrate their own achievements but as far as competition records are concerned they should and do commence in 1897 with the breakaway VFL.

I think you'll find that's why they aren't recognised, how can you have two teams as joint winners?

Not to say that the history of the clubs isn't intriguing, hard to come away from that period without a definite Premier in certain years.

Edited February 3, 2023 by YesitwasaWin4theAges

[Macca 17,032]

Not sure they can include any of the years prior to 1877.  In all of those years only 3-5 teams were eligible to win the premiership.  The counter argument is that up until 1924 the media of the day and the VFL & VFA were constantly counting the premierships as from 1870 (7 years prior to the advent of the VFA) 

But 1924 was the same year that the VFL were on the cusp of inviting 3 teams from the VFA to switch comps (Hawks, North & the Doggies) A hit and run mission?  We'll take 3 of your teams and from here on in, we won't be recognising anything prior to 1897.  There was a complete switch of thinking from that year (1924)

An example of what happened prior to 1877 was in 1876 and the final game of the year that turned out to be a de facto premiership decider between Carlton & Melbourne.  During the match the Carlton players abused the umpire who then duly stormed off in disgust (umpire abuse & player dissent goes back aways!)

It took 15 minutes to find another umpire ('Mr Bride') but the result was disputed by both sides anyway! The match was played on an oval now occupied by the Newman College (Melb Uni)

The Demons were awarded the premiership

1977 onwards there's a reasonably strong case to recognise the premierships but a stronger case can be put forward when the competion starts to really hot-up from 1885 (when 8 of the current AFL teams competed ... ongoing) Doggies & Saints joined in 1886 so that year represents an even stronger case ...  then later on the Pies (1892) Hawthorn joined up early in the 20th century

12 years on from 1885, the breakaway VFL was formed

Edited February 3, 2023 by Macca

[kurtneverdied 244]

Personally I think we should recognise this is no longer a Victorian League. 
It's Australian.
It started when Sydney, Brissy, Adelaide and West Coast we're created/re-located.
Now we have Freo, GC, Port, GWS and maybe Tassie.
That's nine new teams.
I'd be annoyed if I was a supporter of them to have Prems awarded to the Victorian teams out of 'History'.
It should start from when the AFL was created. The VFL can be looked upon as it's own history and not a contiuation of the AFL.
 

[Macca 17,032]

Interesting that the MCG was our home ground only from 1890 onwards (not before)

From 1858 until 1885 our home ground was the Metropolitan Ground situated between Wellington Rd & the MCG (nicknamed the 'Gravel Pit') and from 1885 to 1990 our home ground was where the Lexus centre is now

And Carlton's* home ground from 1885 to 1990 was the MCG!  Also, they played some home games at the MCG prior to 1885!  Who knew?

* Info courtesy of Blueseum

[Dr. Gonzo 24,273]

2 hours ago, kurtneverdied said:

Personally I think we should recognise this is no longer a Victorian League. 
It's Australian.
It started when Sydney, Brissy, Adelaide and West Coast we're created/re-located.
Now we have Freo, GC, Port, GWS and maybe Tassie.
That's nine new teams.
I'd be annoyed if I was a supporter of them to have Prems awarded to the Victorian teams out of 'History'.
It should start from when the AFL was created. The VFL can be looked upon as it's own history and not a contiuation of the AFL.
 

The AFL is the VFL. It is the same competition, those interstate teams decided to join an expanded VFL rather than push for a new national competition. Therefore the records get counted from the commencement of the league in 1897. One continuous league, nothing changed in 1990 other than a rebranding.

You say it started when Sydney, Brisbane, West Coast, Adelaide joined/relocated. So should we start from 1982? 1987? 1991? Why not start in 2012 after GC/GWS joined. Or maybe we should wait until Tassie join and just play for participation awards until then. If we don't include premierships pre-1991 do we also exclude games played? Norm Smith, Brownlow, Coleman medals and other awards? Do Pratt/Hudson's 150 goals record get wiped? Fred Fanning's 18 goal record? No because they are competition records, others have scored more goals in other competitions but they are irrelevant to the honour rolls of the VFL/AFL.

The counting of premierships (and other records) is not about the relative merit compared to current day or other comps. They are simply a record of the achievements made in the VFL/AFL competition which commenced in 1897. Nothing more, nothing less. By all means celebrate the achievements pre-1897 or flags won in the SANFL but they don't count in the official records of the VFL/AFL competition.

[Macca 17,032]

5 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The AFL is the VFL. It is the same competition, those interstate teams decided to join an expanded VFL rather than push for a new national competition. Therefore the records get counted from the commencement of the league in 1897. One continuous league, nothing changed in 1990 other than a rebranding.

You say it started when Sydney, Brisbane, West Coast, Adelaide joined/relocated. So should we start from 1982? 1987? 1991? Why not start in 2012 after GC/GWS joined. Or maybe we should wait until Tassie join and just play for participation awards until then. If we don't include premierships pre-1991 do we also exclude games played? Norm Smith, Brownlow, Coleman medals and other awards? Do Pratt/Hudson's 150 goals record get wiped? Fred Fanning's 18 goal record? No because they are competition records, others have scored more goals in other competitions but they are irrelevant to the honour rolls of the VFL/AFL.

The counting of premierships (and other records) is not about the relative merit compared to current day or other comps. They are simply a record of the achievements made in the VFL/AFL competition which commenced in 1897. Nothing more, nothing less. By all means celebrate the achievements pre-1897 or flags won in the SANFL but they don't count in the official records of the VFA/VFL/AFL competition.

Fixed it for you Gonzo 😁

And I agree with the premise of the rest of your post

Upon analysing the VFA competion from 1877-1896 (pre those years the competition was too small and disjointed) I'd be more inclined to count the premierships from 1885 but they will probably recognise all or nothing

A number of big footy names have got behind the idea/concept (Sheahan, Sheedy, Fitzpatrick et al) so I wouldn't be surprised to see a change of view (recognising premierships pre 1897)

About a 15% - 20% chance right now but down the track (say 5 years time) the likelyhood could be more like 50%.  Needs more weight of numbers for change.  Especially from those within the Commission

But right now you'd imagine the Blues, Cats & Dons voting in favour!  Maybe the Demons too! (for the 3 extra Premierships)

 

Footnote: Every footy season from at least 1870 has it's own Wiki page so people here can do their own analysis

[Travy14 1,942]

Absolute joke, the VFA was not the best comp in the country.  How can you attach premierships saying that?

maybe we should start saying the AFL premiers are "World Champs" now too

[Supreme_Demon 3,898]

On 1/31/2023 at 11:06 PM, Demonland said:

 And 7 more for the Cats …

How the flag table would change

		Including VFA 1870-1896	1897-2022
	Carlton	22	16
	Essendon	20	16
	Geelong	17	10
	Collingwood	16	15
	Melbourne	16	13
	Richmond	13	13
	Hawthorn	13	13
	South Melbourne/Sydney	10	5
	Fitzroy	9	8
	North Melbourne	4	4
	West Coast	4	4
	Brisbane Lions	3	3
	Footscray/Western Bulldogs	2	2
	Adelaide	2	2
	St Kilda	1	1
	Port Adelaide	1	1
	Fremantle	0	0
	GWS	0	0
	Gold Coast	0	0
	Brisbane Bears	0	0

I am actually not against this idea.

Geelong and Carlton certainly benefit the most! South Melbourne/Sydney getting another 5 Premierships is pretty handy for them too.

I will have to read this book by Colin Carter.

Another 3 Premierships for the Melbourne Football Club would be nice.

Especially having Flags in the 70s! 🤣😂😆😁😄

16 Premierships puts us equal with Collingwood.

Interesting enough, I remember reading somewhere that our arch rivals back in the 1870s was actually Carlton! We used to absolutely hate eachother back then apparently. However, since the VFL/AFL days we have never actually played against Carlton in a Grand Final.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,908]

I'm a bit disappointed that so many people have a view based solely on the number of extra Premierships that would be added to our record. A dispassionate view should be taken and the merits of the argument should be the same whether we get zero or ten. I lean towards the Carter view, but do not know enough about the history to go all-in and support him.

[Timothy Reddan-A'Blew 5,272]

52 minutes ago, Supreme_Demon said:

I am actually not against this idea.

Geelong and Carlton certainly benefit the most! South Melbourne/Sydney getting another 5 Premierships is pretty handy for them too.

I will have to read this book by Colin Carter.

Another 3 Premierships for the Melbourne Football Club would be nice.

Especially having Flags in the 70s! 🤣😂😆😁😄

16 Premierships puts us equal with Collingwood.

Interesting enough, I remember reading somewhere that our arch rivals back in the 1870s was actually Carlton! We used to absolutely hate eachother back then apparently. However, since the VFL/AFL days we have never actually played against Carlton in a Grand Final.

This was a pretty nice close second best though!

 

(...though, of course, you'll then need to do this: 🙉🙈🙊...🟤🟡)

[Willmoy1947 4,140]

1 hour ago, Supreme_Demon said:

I am actually not against this idea.

Geelong and Carlton certainly benefit the most! South Melbourne/Sydney getting another 5 Premierships is pretty handy for them too.

I will have to read this book by Colin Carter.

Another 3 Premierships for the Melbourne Football Club would be nice.

Especially having Flags in the 70s! 🤣😂😆😁😄

16 Premierships puts us equal with Collingwood.

Interesting enough, I remember reading somewhere that our arch rivals back in the 1870s was actually Carlton! We used to absolutely hate eachother back then apparently. However, since the VFL/AFL days we have never actually played against Carlton in a Grand Final.

I can remember walking back to our rooms after an AWAY game at the G, Carltons ground, and falling in the river,

 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,273]

6 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm a bit disappointed that so many people have a view based solely on the number of extra Premierships that would be added to our record. A dispassionate view should be taken and the merits of the argument should be the same whether we get zero or ten. I lean towards the Carter view, but do not know enough about the history to go all-in and support him.

It's pretty simple I think and I don't really understand the conjecture around it. I have the book and will start reading it shortly and I'm interested to read exactly what arguments he makes.

In my mind it seems extremely fanciful. MFC does have 16 premierships, 3 in the pre-VFA/Victorian Rules, 0 VFA and 13 VFL/AFL.

My feeling is part of this argument originated (and it has been going on for some time now, back at least 6 or 7 years) to try and set up 2020 as the 150th Season of the VFL, something those who were around for the centenary season in 1996 would find ridiculous. The other part is I think there will be a push to delineate between the three era's of flags in the record books, so for MFC it would be

Victorian Rules/VFA (1870-1896) flags 3

VFL (1897-1989) flags 12

AFL (1990-current) flags 1

He would get support from the non-Vic clubs for this who would then try and add their flags into the pre-AFL tallies and distinguish the AFL as a separate competition commencing in 1990. Those of us who were alive at the time know that nothing changed in 1990 other than the leagues name/branding, the competition was continuous and still is since 1897.

It would also mean Hawthorn sit atop the AFL flags ladder with 5 and Geelong/West Coast equal 2nd with 4 each instead of Essendon and Carlton with 16 each. So although he is doing this under the guise of "reclaiming" a lost history of the league the end game is to remove the actual history of the league so everything starts fresh in the AFL era, something we should not allow to happen.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Dr. Gonzo

[Big Col 1,347]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

remove the actual history of the league so everything starts fresh in the AFL era, something we should not allow to happen.

But why?
I think your post is spot on otherwise but I don't understand your conclusion.

[58er 6,547]

8 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm a bit disappointed that so many people have a view based solely on the number of extra Premierships that would be added to our record. A dispassionate view should be taken and the merits of the argument should be the same whether we get zero or ten. I lean towards the Carter view, but do not know enough about the history to go all-in and support him.

The history does not matter. It's what is logical in total premierships in a competition. You can't manufacture flags and hand them around like cream cakes at  a child's birthday party. 

 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,273]

7 hours ago, Big Col said:

But why?
I think your post is spot on otherwise but I don't understand your conclusion.

Because the AFL and the VFL are the same competition which commenced in 1897. Nothing changed in 1990 except for the name, a rebranding of the VFL into the AFL. The corporate governance of the league remained the same. The clubs remained the same. The awards and trophies remained the same. It's like trying to argue the history of the MFC pre-1930s is wiped because we rebranded from the Redlegs/Fuschias to the Demons.

The history of the league since its inception has been an evolution, of rules, of governance, of teams. But evolution is not revolution which is why I don't believe wiping the slate clean of all records in 1990 is a good or fair idea. How does this impact things like games played? Do we exclude Coleman and Norm Smith medals won prior to 1990? Does Hawthorns 1989 flag have any less relevance than Collingwood's 1990 flag?

History is important and accurate history even moreso. The league we all follow now, the AFL commenced in 1897 as the VFL. The AFL at the time acknowledged this with the league Centenary celebrations and the Gold Premiership Cup in 1996. Why do we think we can go back and rewrite history? Yes it is now an expanded competition but it evolved into that. It could have been a brand new breakaway league incorporating clubs from other states which is what was being pushed for in the early-80s by John Elliott and others. But that is an alternate history that didn't eventuate, the history books state that the AFL is an expanded, rebranded VFL and all records etc continue from 1897.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Dr. Gonzo

[Whispering_Jack 30,602]

I’ve always been fascinated by the history of our sport and, over the years have amassed a fair collection of books about Aussie footy. 

I embarked up the Carter book with an open mind but started to run aground at about pages 50-60 where I found it becoming a bit too repetitive in its advocacy of adding premierships won from 1870 through to the commencement of the VFA in 1877 to the VFL/AFL count from 1897 onwards.

I’ve stopped reading it for the time being but am a long way off supporting a change to the status quo. I’m inclined to favour the argument that the game didn’t really reach the stage where it had premier status until 1896 with the formation of the VFL and I think we should stick with the way we look back at our game these days. We can still acknowledge the old SANFL, VFA, WAFL records for what they were and we can recognize the pre VFA “competition” as it was but, after more than 100 years of VFL/AFL competition, I don’t think we should change things now for the sake of giving mainly Victorian teams further recognition over and above what they have now.