An Analogy.

[Wedgie]

So if it doesn't upset you why the bad language and rolling eyes?
I would have thought if you found it amusing you'd speak nicely, thank people for the giggle and put a laughing icon in your post instead?

[Booney]

The ammusing part is the debate rages on and nobody can agree on an outcome. Regardless of who you support.

Perhaps I should use confused instead of ammused.

It doesn't upset me at all. I just find it confusing that we, the supporters of Port Adelaide have come to grips with what has happened and where the history lies but supporters of every other club ( in the SANFL ) have been unable or are unwilling to just move forward.

Sounds better, and fits with the rolling eyes and swearing.

[MightyEagles]

Someone should ask Russell who did he play for Port Magpies or Port Power?

[GWW]

Someone should ask Russell who did he play for Port Magpies or Port Power?

Neither, he played for the Port Adelaide Football Club.

[Barto]

Someone should ask Russell who did he play for Port Magpies or Port Power?

Would it be like the time Tredrea claimed to be the clubs leading goal kicker when at the time it would have been Tim Evans (assuming the club's version of history was true).

[Booney]

Someone should ask Russell who did he play for Port Magpies or Port Power?

Neither, he played for the Port Adelaide Football Club.

LMFAO, now that really helps....!

[Booney]

Cmon every one, jump on and lets go round-and-round-and-round......

[Barto]

Like C7 & C10?

I nearly added that on the end of my post but wasn't sure if it was a valid comparison. I guess it would be if Channel 10 claimed to have been based in North Adelaide for 50 years

[MightyEagles]

Someone should ask Russell who did he play for Port Magpies or Port Power?

Neither, he played for the Port Adelaide Football Club.

Let me rephrase it then 'The Magpies' AKA PAFC or 'The Power' also AKA PAFC

[Wedgie]

The ammusing part is the debate rages on and nobody can agree on an outcome. Regardless of who you support.

Perhaps I should use confused instead of ammused.

It doesn't upset me at all. I just find it confusing that we, the supporters of Port Adelaide have come to grips with what has happened and where the history lies but supporters of every other club ( in the SANFL ) have been unable or are unwilling to just move forward.

Sounds better, and fits with the rolling eyes and swearing.

Fair enough but we'll have to agree to disagree as I find supporters from all clubs including Port supporters confused about it, luckily I am no longer one of these as I understand exactly what happened even though as admitted I too was previously confused and wrong.
Hopefully through he ongoing efforts of people such as myself we will completely eliminate that confusion as its pretty straight forward when explained correctly. Perhaps I could put out a 119 point paper fully detailing it!

[Barto]

It doesn't upset me at all. I just find it ammusing that we, the supporters of Port Adelaide have come to grips with what has happened and where the history lies but supporters of every other club ( in the SANFL ) have been unable or are unwilling to just move forward.

I'm with Wedgie on this one, I care about the history of the comp and never want to see clubs die, but it seems weird reading things like this from "Port Supporters":

[QUOTE=PortBrillance]kill off the PAMFC, **** em. They can die a painful death as for as I'm concerned[/QUOTE]

Even when overwhelming evidence is presented for what really happened, they shut down to the truth but if Port supporters want their club gone, we should stop caring then.

It just seems sad to know that in a year's time, the club we played against in the famous 1976 grand final, the same club we lost to in 1998 will be gone and we cant have another crack at them.

[GWW]

If Sturt is promoted to the AFL, then yes you can have another crack at them.

[Hondo]

There is no right or wrong answer here IMO. It's a matter of opinion I think. But i'll jump back on the merry go round seeing as yet another thread has been started.

The legal entity (same corporate number) argument forgets that businesses, companies and sporting clubs, etc very commonly change the entity they operate in without losing the history of where they started. The company I work for is in exactly that boat. Started in 1988 but now in a new entity. The old one is still there. It' happens all the time.

I believe the current Collingwood FC started in 1982 or so? Do they restart their history from then? I know it's not the same as the Port situation in that the old PAM are still here. However, no-one has yet been able to come up with another example of a club that's moved to a new competition but retained a presence in the old, to be able to definitively say what the right answer is. I think it if it was our own clubs, we'd probably have a more moderate view. There was always going to be 2 entities and, given the complex legalities need for the entity in the AFL, it was always going to have to be a brand new entity. I say, so what? Others say that’s definitive evidence of the PAP having no PAM history.

If not for Collingwood (and their stipulations were perfectly reasonable) we would have a PAM in the AFL running around in the prison bar guernsey. Every heritage round since they started, the Power have worn a replica of an old PAM guernsey. Again, if not for Collingwood, they probably would have worn the prison bars each time. I think it's been twice - once in around 1999 and once in 2006. To me, and many other Crows supporters, the Power have always been Port Adelaide's team in the AFL to go with their SANFL team. This is why the 'creed' debate loses me. To me, the skeleton has been in the closet since 1997 and all Mark Haysman did in 2009 was open the door.

I understand that the potential death of the PAM is driving some of the anger today. I, for one, don't believe the PAM are going anywhere and that they willl rejoin with the Power before they are let die (and even that would only be if all other avenues are exhausted). I don't care what they want to do with their history and I don’t want to see the PAM die.

[Hondo]

The closest example I could think of where clubs field teams in 2 comps is the VFL/AFL with the inter-league alignments. Geelong and Collingwood field teams in both under the same banner and other clubs have direct links, ie Bendigo-Essendon. I know little more about how it works than that. I presume there's not 2 legal entities to worry about and they share the same name/admin, etc so there's no debate about heritage? I know the history of the evolution of the VFA to the current VFL is completely different to our SANFL.

[Wedgie]

How about a fictitious analogy to make it simple and keep the thread on topic?

The creators of Daffy are asked to create a character for Disney.
This pleases fans of Daffy as Disney has a wider exposure than Warner Brothers.

The initial problem is that they can't move Daffy straight into Disney as Donald would crack a fruity!
To counter this they create a brand new character and call it Daffy Camel and leave the original Daffy with Warner Brothers.
Daffy Camel looks completely different to the original Daffy, he is a different colour, a different animal, is drawn by different animators (although some animators of the original Daffy do cross from Warner Brothers) and Daffy Camel despite bringing Daffy's name to Disney requires a completely new contract as he is a brand new creation.

The original Daffy changes his name to Daffy Duck so he isn't confuesd with Daffy Camel.
Well, some are confsed for some reason but every logical person knows the original Daffy is Daffy Duck and some loyal fans stick with him while a majority of bandwaggoners now only tune into Disney. Some tune into both.

Daffy Ducks ratings go down immediately because of those who unmercifully leave him for the Camel. Daffy Camel's ratings start off well but as his owners start to sprout how the camel's history is actually that of the duck's the ratings drop off as fans are put off by this absurd notion. One year the camel even puts on such a good performance that he wins an Oscar but the drop in ratings continues because of the previosly mentioned reason. One year Daffy Camel even loses the ratings to Felix the Cat by 119 points!

Both Daffy Duck and Daffy Camel eventually are broke and are lucky that Warner Brothers and Disney are happy for charity money to be thrown at these now worthless creations. This is particularly interesting seeing as Warner Brothers previously had not thrown any money at Foghorn Leghorn when he was in trouble but luckily Foghorn worked his own way out of trouble through smarts and having loyal fans. They even started a march to the chookhouse one year but that's another story.

Those in the know and with hindsight are well aware that Warner Brothers should have left Daffy alone and perhaps looked at adding a 2nd Crow to Disney's lineup (one called Heckyl already existed).
Even though one Crow was successful a second one could have made a team of Heckyl and Jeckyl and made even more money and everyone would be better off!

[doggies4eva]

Interesting point that Booney raises - do I care about what happens to PAMFC?

Of course me first priority is with the doggies but if we don't have any opposition left then we also die. Sport is a strange business on-field our clubs do everything theycan to dominate the other clubs but off-field they rely on each other for their continued existance.

But it is more than that. We each define our identity by our interaction with the other clubs - ie us doggies supporters can only celebrate this years GF win by defeating Sturt. This year's win was made a little sweeter because last time we played Sturt in a GF we lost. Likewise with Port - we have unfinished business because we have never beaten Port in a GF.

So in a weird way I do care Booney.

As far as all the other guff here. I'm not in a court of law now so when a team wearing black and white calling themselves Port run out on the field against the doggies I regard them as the old enemy.

[Booney]

Couldn't be arsed reading about Daffy and Donald,I'm sure it is very entertaining though.

d4e, I understand that SANFL fans would like to see the Magpies survive, the point that confuses me is the manner in which the PAFC / PAMFC continually is debated about. Who has the history? Who has the Premierships? More often than not this is debated by non-Port people, trying in some vein attempt to get "one up" ( IMO ) on a club that they have suffered at the hands of for many years.

Port people accept what has happened and legal documents aside, a football club is not written on a piece of paper, or a licence, it is what the supporters / members of the club make it. So, the Port Adelaide Football Club that won Premierships in the SANFL now has a side represent it at AFL level. Be them the Power,the Jumbucks,the Wharfies,the "nickname" is irrelevant.That is fairly simple to comprehend, even for the strangest duck in the pond.

The Magpies have been in the SANFL for ever, and I hope will be for ever and a day.

The PAFC / PAMFC are entities required to have a trading name but this, this is not what is in the heart of Port Adelaide fans.

For those whose club has not experienced such a change, by that I mean none of you, I accept it must be difficult to understand. I dont ask for you to all understand, just accept it and move on.

Quack.

[Wedgie]

Couldn't be arsed reading about Daffy and Donald,I'm sure it is very entertaining though.

Geez mate, I put a lot of effort into it, the least you could do is read it!

[once_were_warriors]

How about a fictitious analogy to make it simple and keep the thread on topic?

The creators of Daffy are asked to create a character for Disney.
This pleases fans of Daffy as Disney has a wider exposure than Warner Brothers.

The initial problem is that they can't move Daffy straight into Disney as Donald would crack a fruity!
To counter this they create a brand new character and call it Daffy Camel and leave the original Daffy with Warner Brothers.
Daffy Camel looks completely different to the original Daffy, he is a different colour, a different animal, is drawn by different animators (although some animators of the original Daffy do cross from Warner Brothers) and Daffy Camel despite bringing Daffy's name to Disney requires a completely new contract as he is a brand new creation.

The original Daffy changes his name to Daffy Duck so he isn't confuesd with Daffy Camel.
Well, some are confsed for some reason but every logical person knows the original Daffy is Daffy Duck and some loyal fans stick with him while a majority of bandwaggoners now only tune into Disney. Some tune into both.

Daffy Ducks ratings go down immediately because of those who unmercifully leave him for the Camel. Daffy Camel's ratings start off well but as his owners start to sprout how the camel's history is actually that of the duck's the ratings drop off as fans are put off by this absurd notion. One year the camel even puts on such a good performance that he wins an Oscar but the drop in ratings continues because of the previosly mentioned reason. One year Daffy Camel even loses the ratings to Felix the Cat by 119 points!

Both Daffy Duck and Daffy Camel eventually are broke and are lucky that Warner Brothers and Disney are happy for charity money to be thrown at these now worthless creations. This is particularly interesting seeing as Warner Brothers previously had not thrown any money at Foghorn Leghorn when he was in trouble but luckily Foghorn worked his own way out of trouble through smarts and having loyal fans. They even started a march to the chookhouse one year but that's another story.

Those in the know and with hindsight are well aware that Warner Brothers should have left Daffy alone and perhaps looked at adding a 2nd Crow to Disney's lineup (one called Heckyl already existed).
Even though one Crow was successful a second one could have made a team of Heckyl and Jeckyl and made even more money and everyone would be better off!

Now that explains in beautifully to a simpleton like me.

Well written, I think history was unkind to Woody Woodpecker, whilst ratings weren't great he was finacially stable.

[Booney]

Woody Woodpecker? I thought he was extinct.