by therisingblues » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:34 pm
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:44 pm
by nuggety goodness » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:48 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:As a Collingwood supporter, I wax and wane on this issue.
Here's some random thoughts on it.
Where's the harm in having an alternate strip? It's good for marketing and it's only colours after all and if Manchester United can defile itself over the years in some god awful away shirts, why should we resist change and not have an alternate strip.
However, just because every other team has an alternate strip, why should we?
You can argue the tradition card that Collingwood is black and white. That's how we see ourselves and that's how you, the opposition that hates us, sees us. So why should we change?
However, we've also seen that tradition is a very flexible thing and Collingwood uses it when it wants.
Maybe I'm just a fence sitter.
I don't think we should have to change our guernsey until forced by the AFL.
I can't see the AFL taking this on while Eddie is president.
by therisingblues » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:56 pm
"tipper" wrote
It isnt just about the colours though, it is about how they are arranged on the guernsey. The three clubs with blue and white have a different "pattern" with the same colours. North Melbourne dont have horizontal blue and white stripes like Geelong, neither do Carlton. The power do have black and white on their design, there is also silver and teal. they were allowed to use the same colours as collingwod, just not the design.
How ridiculous would it be having two clubs with exactly the same design? You dont think that may cause even more of an identity problem? And you are still ignoring the fact that Collingwood were a part of the AFL before the Power joined. Just because the power have the more successful "history" does that mean a team that was there first should have to change to accomodate them? First in Best dressed......
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:58 pm
by nuggety goodness » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:02 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Port is of a higher pedigree than Collingwood?????? What?
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:04 pm
by therisingblues » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:06 pm
HeartBeatsTrue wrote:therisingblues wrote:Heart Beats True: Following your logic, I guess Port could change its colours to Black, with the White there just to make a design?
And by your logic, Sturt should not be called the double blues as all shades of blue are the same.
Port probably could have dropped their "white" and be known as just being "black" to get around Collingwood's "ownership" of the colour combobut I dont think that would appeal with existing or new supporters.
by therisingblues » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:10 pm
nuggety goodness wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Port is of a higher pedigree than Collingwood?????? What?
a pedigree is a pure bred.....
Port = 1% pure bred 99% mongrel
Collingwood = 100% mongrel
by nuggety goodness » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:13 pm
therisingblues wrote:nuggety goodness wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Port is of a higher pedigree than Collingwood?????? What?
a pedigree is a pure bred.....
Port = 1% pure bred 99% mongrel
Collingwood = 100% mongrel
True.
But I have read somewhere that Port is the most successful sporting club in the world or something along those lines. If this is true then they'd have to be ranked above Collingwood on the pedigree stakes.
Unless it could be argued that the SANFL was so far below the VFL in standard that it doesn't matter how successful they were.
by westozfalcon » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:16 pm
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:31 pm
by Q. » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:34 pm
by Strawb » Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:33 pm
by Leaping Lindner » Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:54 pm
by Adelaide Hawk » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:47 pm
Leaping Lindner wrote:Collingwood pinched the idea of the South Australian State Team to began with.
by MightyEagles » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:54 pm
Adelaide Hawk wrote:Leaping Lindner wrote:Collingwood pinched the idea of the South Australian State Team to began with.
Are you sure about that LL? I thought Port Adelaide didn't adopt the back & white until 1902, and Collingwood were around before that.
by Hondo » Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:02 pm
by redden whites » Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:11 pm
Strawb07 wrote:. As port were joining the competition they had the right to change their colours. If the SANFL went national and Collingwood joined it would be Collingwood to change their jumper and nickname. Get Over It.
by Leaping Lindner » Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:07 pm
MightyEagles wrote:Adelaide Hawk wrote:Leaping Lindner wrote:Collingwood pinched the idea of the South Australian State Team to began with.
Are you sure about that LL? I thought Port Adelaide didn't adopt the back & white until 1902, and Collingwood were around before that.
I'm pretty sure he is correct as the State Side wore black and white before Collingwood started playing and they also thought that the bird on our flag was a magpie (same family).
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |