AFL teams to get Alternate jumpers

[rmered]

One of the cool things about Aussie Rules is that some teams have worn the same jumper designs since their inception.

Given we have different designs, stripes, hoops, sashes etc, clubs have worn one jumper each week.

My team, Essendon have worn the same design since 1873. 133 seasons.

Yesterday the AFL sent letters to each club advising them that all clubs must have an Alternate jumper for games when their jumper clashes with the Home team's jumper.

Previously, the tradition was that the club who caused the clash resolved the clash.

ie the team whose jumper design was newer had to have an alternate.

This may make sense to a North American, as you've grown up with two uniforms for all sports, but imagine if the club had to have a different set of colours for Home and Away.

This is a real shame as far as I'm concerned.

133 years of history down the toilet.

[jr79]

And fans sick of trying to pick out light and dark shorts when Richmond play Essendon rejoice!

[rmered]

And fans sick of trying to pick out light and dark shorts when Richmond play Essendon rejoice!

Not withstanding one has a huge yellow sash and the other a red sash?

[plattopus]

Previously, the tradition was that the club who caused the clash resolved the clash.

ie the team whose jumper design was newer had to have an alternate.

Just out of interest, was it actually an AFL directive that the team with the newer jumper had to use an alternate? I've never heard anyone from the AFL say anything about that, it's usually all about the away team having to come up with the clash strip.

EDIT: I'm a big supporter of alternate strips, and I'm an Essendon member just like Mero. Not ALL of us are stuck in the past.

[-kj]

Oh, boo-hoo.

Wasn't there a time when two clubs had yellow sashes, running in opposite directions?

[Primal]

EDIT: I'm a big supporter of alternate strips, and I'm an Essendon member just like Mero. Not ALL of us are stuck in the past. 

Allow me to virtually shake your hand, sir. And buy you a virtual beer

For the first time in decades, there is a real risk that the AFL may have done something right...

[DEAD!]

Oh, boo-hoo.

Wasn't there a time when two clubs had yellow sashes, running in opposite directions?

I think you're confused. It's really one team. However, Richmond players have been known to be confused at times

I don't feel the AFL should make an alternate strip mandatory. Clubs should be able to negotiate colour combinations. I don't know how important of an issue colour clashes are. Can the majority of AFL fans distinguish between Richmond and Essendon on the field? If so, then why change?

[rmered]

Previously, the tradition was that the club who caused the clash resolved the clash.

ie the team whose jumper design was newer had to have an alternate.

Just out of interest, was it actually an AFL directive that the team with the newer jumper had to use an alternate? I've never heard anyone from the AFL say anything about that, it's usually all about the away team having to come up with the clash strip.

EDIT: I'm a big supporter of alternate strips, and I'm an Essendon member just like Mero. Not ALL of us are stuck in the past.

1987, West Coast v Hawthorn in Perth.

West Coast were made to have an alternate jumper as their Gold Home jumper looked too similar to Hawthorn's. (They also wore Gold shorts)

12 months later that became West Coast's jumper.

First time it happened was 1914 with Geelong, their 1912 jumper was thought to be too close to Collingwood, so they were a Blue jumper against them, then wore red socks in other games.

This has always been the precedent.

[rmered]

Oh, boo-hoo.

Wasn't there a time when two clubs had yellow sashes, running in opposite directions?

I think you're confused. It's really one team. However, Richmond players have been known to be confused at times

I don't feel the AFL should make an alternate strip mandatory. Clubs should be able to negotiate colour combinations. I don't know how important of an issue colour clashes are. Can the majority of AFL fans distinguish between Richmond and Essendon on the field? If so, then why change?

Good point, of course they can distinguish between the two.

Just like they have done since 1914 when Richmond first introduced the sash jumper.

[rmered]

EDIT: I'm a big supporter of alternate strips, and I'm an Essendon member just like Mero. Not ALL of us are stuck in the past. 

Allow me to virtually shake your hand, sir. And buy you a virtual beer

For the first time in decades, there is a real risk that the AFL may have done something right...

Pull the Gold shorts out of the drawer Rod and go for a run.

Clubs change their jumpers to look like other teams, then have the audacity to tell them they need to make an alternate so they don't clash.

[plattopus]

Previously, the tradition was that the club who caused the clash resolved the clash.

ie the team whose jumper design was newer had to have an alternate.

Just out of interest, was it actually an AFL directive that the team with the newer jumper had to use an alternate? I've never heard anyone from the AFL say anything about that, it's usually all about the away team having to come up with the clash strip.

EDIT: I'm a big supporter of alternate strips, and I'm an Essendon member just like Mero. Not ALL of us are stuck in the past.

1987, West Coast v Hawthorn in Perth.

West Coast were made to have an alternate jumper as their Gold Home jumper looked too similar to Hawthorn's. (They also wore Gold shorts)

12 months later that became West Coast's jumper.

First time it happened was 1914 with Geelong, their 1912 jumper was thought to be too close to Collingwood, so they were a Blue jumper against them, then wore red socks in other games.

This has always been the precedent.

So it's not actually an official AFL directive, it's just what happened one time in 1987? Seems a bit of a stretch.

(And was it a Collingwood home game in 1914?)

[rmered]

Previously, the tradition was that the club who caused the clash resolved the clash.

ie the team whose jumper design was newer had to have an alternate.

Just out of interest, was it actually an AFL directive that the team with the newer jumper had to use an alternate? I've never heard anyone from the AFL say anything about that, it's usually all about the away team having to come up with the clash strip.

EDIT: I'm a big supporter of alternate strips, and I'm an Essendon member just like Mero. Not ALL of us are stuck in the past.

1987, West Coast v Hawthorn in Perth.

West Coast were made to have an alternate jumper as their Gold Home jumper looked too similar to Hawthorn's. (They also wore Gold shorts)

12 months later that became West Coast's jumper.

First time it happened was 1914 with Geelong, their 1912 jumper was thought to be too close to Collingwood, so they were a Blue jumper against them, then wore red socks in other games.

This has always been the precedent.

So it's not actually an official AFL directive, it's just what happened one time in 1987? Seems a bit of a stretch.

(And was it a Collingwood home game in 1914?)

Yes it was an AFL directive to have a clash jumper for when they were playing Hawthorn. Where ever they played them. That's what I meant when I said they were "made to have an alternate..."

As for 1914, they wore it in both games. Both at Geelong, which was first, then later at Collingwood.

[plattopus]

But it's not an AFL directive NOW. Sure, the AFL told West Coast to wear an alternate strip at a home game once in 1987, but you've not presented any evidence that this is the case for ALL jumper clashes. In fact, the AFL has for the past few years always said it's the AWAY team who needs to come up with a clash strip, not the team with the newer jumper.

[rmered]

But it's not an AFL directive NOW. Sure, the AFL told West Coast to wear an alternate strip at a home game once in 1987, but you've not presented any evidence that this is the case for ALL jumper clashes. In fact, the AFL has for the past few years always said it's the AWAY team who needs to come up with a clash strip, not the team with the newer jumper.

Well, apparently so. If they're writing letters to the clubs telling them to make them up I'd say you're right.

Doesn't change the fact that this is a disgrace when they said 4 months ago it was unlikely to happen.

The AFL have never said that either Home or Away should have them.

Media commentators have said that.

The AFL's official line is they would prefer all clubs to have them, but until they do, they hoped the clubs worked it out by themselves.

Is this a legal argument?

As far as precedent is concerned. That is proof.

If the AFL tells one club to do something, they therefore are creating a precedent.

Do a Google search on the word. You make a rule, you make it for everyone.

(Obviously until you then make another rule, which it appears they have.)

Primal, you're the lawyer, advise your client will you?

[rmered]

Actually, the precedent was actually set in 1925.

North Melbourne were admitted to the then VFL under a few conditions.

One of them was that they were to either wear a different jumper to their Navy with White monogram version they had in 1924, or they were to provide an alternative for games against Carlton.

The opted for a Royal Blue jumper with a White Vee.

[plattopus]

This is hardly a situation where the AFL have set a "precedent", this situation is quite different to 1987 and COMPLETELY different to 1925.

[rmered]

This is hardly a situation where the AFL have set a "precedent", this situation is quite different to 1987 and COMPLETELY different to 1925.

OK, perhaps you didn't look the word up.

When the controlling body says "this is what we do" in a certain situation, that becomes the precedent.

This means that until they change their mind, that's the way things go.

So when a club comes into the AFL, or an existing club changes their jumper to look too much like an existing one, then the onus is on that club to provide an alternative for when the two sides meet.

It's the same in park footy as well.

When Pascoe Vale play Ascot Vale, Pascoe Vale always wear a Green jumper because they came into the Essendon District League after Ascot Vale.

[plattopus]

When the controlling body says "this is what we do" in a certain situation, that becomes the precedent.

This means that until they change their mind, that's the way things go.

These situations are different. It's like saying we've set a precedent for when someone commits murder, and then applying it to a manslaughter charge.

It's the same in park footy as well.

When Pascoe Vale play Ascot Vale, Pascoe Vale always wear a Green jumper because they came into the Essendon District League after Ascot Vale.

I fail to see how this is relevant. I could easily say "90% of sports leagues in the world have home/away strips, so the AFL should too". It's irrelevant. The reasons we should have an alternate strip have nothing to do with anything other than the fact that it's a good idea for the AFL right now.

[rmered]

When the controlling body says "this is what we do" in a certain situation, that becomes the precedent.

This means that until they change their mind, that's the way things go.

These situations are different. It's like saying we've set a precedent for when someone commits murder, and then applying it to a manslaughter charge.

It's the same in park footy as well.

When Pascoe Vale play Ascot Vale, Pascoe Vale always wear a Green jumper because they came into the Essendon District League after Ascot Vale.

I fail to see how this is relevant. I could easily say "90% of sports leagues in the world have home/away strips, so the AFL should too". It's irrelevant. The reasons we should have an alternate strip have nothing to do with anything other than the fact that it's a good idea for the AFL right now.

But it's the same thing.

They're not different sutuation like your murder/manslaughter thing.

One jumper looks too much like another.

Who has to wear an Alternative?

What have we always done in this situation?

It's completely relevant. It's the same sport run by the same controlling body.

The reason people offer for a clash strip are because they have no understanding how the competition works, and they think there's a buck in it. Which there's not.

[Discrim]

on the upside, the AFL's not mandating color vs white. the downside is the tradition of Essendon wearing the black jumper with the red sash for every game since 1873 gets flushed down the toilet.

on another side (I don't know whether it's up or down), I predict a red jumper for the Dons. heh, could simply be a reversed version of the regular shirt or it could be something we'd never expect. it could kick ass and stick around, or it could somehow end up uglier than West Coast's 2002 aways