Sturt v Power trial game

[Macca19]

And despite this vote, a new entity was first registered in 1995, and is the entity which currently trades as the Port Adelaide Football Club.

Correct. So I guess this means that Collingwood is only 26 years old...considering it was only registered in 1983, and Melbourne in 1980 etc.

Since the standard party line is that the Real Port was still playing in the SANFL in 1995, the newly registered entry cannot have been the Real Port, ipso facto.

Now you could amend the standard party line to read that Port left the SANFL after 1994 but I doubt that would go down well with the faithful, having preached something which is mutually exclusive to this for the last 12 years.

Alternatively you could argue that the legal entity isn't what makes the club - but then you're leaving precious little which defines the club, having already dispensed with all the icons (nickname, logo, colours), current players of the time, coach, oval (since the Power had to buy it), board structure, premiership reunions, etc. There ain't much left to define the club; the Port Power emperor has been systematically stripped naked.

Actually the board structure was the same, so was the coaching line up.

[Pseudo]

Actually the board structure was the same, so was the coaching line up.

Stephen Williams was coaching the PAFC at the end of 1996. He remained with the Magpies. If the coach defines the club, then Port Magpies is the original Port. John Cahill left the PAFC coaching position towards the end of 96 to take up the job of AFL coach. If the Magpies of 1996 were the original Port, then the club which Cahill joined cannot be the original Port - and it was this club which entered the AFL, not the Magpies.

As for the board structure, was it not the case that half the board of the Power had to be appointed by the SANFL? I'll admit to ignorance in this matter. Demonstrate that the SANFL appointed half the board to the PAFC prior to the AFL entry and I'll grant you some evidence that Port Power was the original.

[Macca19]

Actually the board structure was the same, so was the coaching line up.

Stephen Williams was coaching the PAFC at the end of 1996. He remained with the Magpies. If the coach defines the club, then Port Magpies is the original Port. John Cahill left the PAFC coaching position towards the end of 96 to take up the job of AFL coach. If the Magpies of 1996 were the original Port, then the club which Cahill joined cannot be the original Port - and it was this club which entered the AFL, not the Magpies.

Jack left the coaching role midway through 1996, but he didnt 'join' another club. He simply left to help choose the players for the squad. I also dont think the coach defines the club.

As for the board structure, was it not the case that half the board of the Power had to be appointed by the SANFL? I'll admit to ignorance in this matter. Demonstrate that the SANFL appointed half the board to the PAFC prior to the AFL entry and I'll grant you some evidence that Port Power was the original.

Some board members (2) have to be SANFL approved. I dont know what they do with the Crows but with Port we put recommendations to them which they approve. All SANFL appointed board members are Port people. From 96 to 97, the club had the same President, CEO etc.

[Wedgie]

Apart from having a different name, different team mascot, different colours (and a different playing top), different home ground and playing in a different football competition (that play different teams for a different premiership trophy with different named medals that can be won for B&F and goalkicking), yep Port Power has a 100+ year history, not the PAFC...

Talk about selective editing? And who is this Port Power that you speak of?

The club was named the Port Adelaide Football Club in the SANFL. Tell me what it is named now in the AFL einstein.

The club called Alberton Oval home in the SANFL. And guess what it still does. It only plays at Football Park, exactly the same as when they played at Adelaide Oval during the 70's when in dispute with the council. Did that make them a different club?

And so you think a different guernsey makes a different club? Let's try Magenta and Blue, Blue and White hoops and various Black and White (and now Teal) designs. All worn by the Port Adelaide Football Club.

Speaking of selective editting, no mention of the Rose Pink outfit Port wore?

[Hondo]

The company I work for was founded in 1988. In 2003, for various reasons we did a corporate restructure and inserted a now holding company incorporated in 2003. An outsider could download the 2003 document and swear blue that we started in 2003. However, we know the reality is we started 15 years earlier.

What's my point? You can pull 10,000 legal documents and tell whatever story you want. PAFC were in a unique situation (as far as I know) where a club in one comp won a bid to enter a team into another, with the stipulation that they maintain a team in the original comp.

This naturally required a raft of legal documents dated around 1996 to put these complex arrangements into effect (new entities, new agreements, etc). If someone wants to use those documents and spin their own story about when what team started when they can go for it. Will it be the true reality? Probably not.

However, IMO the essence of what happened is that the PAFC that existed since 1870 ended up with 1 team in the SANFL and 1 in the AFL. That's how I look at it and I don't lose any sleep over it. Whether you claim heritage for one or both I personally don't give a rats. I hate them both!

Psuedo, should we launch a Royal Commission into what started when?

[Psyber]

All this debate is irrelevant. The core fact is that both forms of Port Adelaide are an evil blot on the football landscape.
They should be expunged from both leagues...

On the other hand I would like to see Sturt saved, but I can't see how it can be done at Unley.

[beenreal]

Apart from having a different name, different team mascot, different colours (and a different playing top), different home ground and playing in a different football competition (that play different teams for a different premiership trophy with different named medals that can be won for B&F and goalkicking), yep Port Power has a 100+ year history, not the PAFC...

Talk about selective editing? And who is this Port Power that you speak of?

The club was named the Port Adelaide Football Club in the SANFL. Tell me what it is named now in the AFL einstein.

The club called Alberton Oval home in the SANFL. And guess what it still does. It only plays at Football Park, exactly the same as when they played at Adelaide Oval during the 70's when in dispute with the council. Did that make them a different club?

And so you think a different guernsey makes a different club? Let's try Magenta and Blue, Blue and White hoops and various Black and White (and now Teal) designs. All worn by the Port Adelaide Football Club.

Speaking of selective editting, no mention of the Rose Pink outfit Port wore?

Ummm, that would be the Magenta?

[Booney]

The company I work for was founded in 1988. In 2003, for various reasons we did a corporate restructure and inserted a now holding company incorporated in 2003. An outsider could download the 2003 document and swear blue that we started in 2003. However, we know the reality is we started 15 years earlier.

What's my point? You can pull 10,000 legal documents and tell whatever story you want. PAFC were in a unique situation (as far as I know) where a club in one comp won a bid to enter a team into another, with the stipulation that they maintain a team in the original comp.

This naturally required a raft of legal documents dated around 1996 to put these complex arrangements into effect (new entities, new agreements, etc). If someone wants to use those documents and spin their own story about when what team started when they can go for it. Will it be the true reality? Probably not.

However, IMO the essence of what happened is that the PAFC that existed since 1870 ended up with 1 team in the SANFL and 1 in the AFL. That's how I look at it and I don't lose any sleep over it. Whether you claim heritage for one or both I personally don't give a rats. I hate them both!

Psuedo, should we launch a Royal Commission into what started when?

Yes they were and I dont expect fans of other clubs to understand.

The SANFL initially told the PAFC if they were going to the AFL they could do just that,move. Upon discussion with the other SANFL clubs and the PAFC the Port Adelaide Magpies Football CLub was formed to remain in the SANFL.

This is all fact. As Hondo has said you can distort the facts to suit your own story,but facts remain facts. Any one who suggests the Port Adelaide Football Club ( now competing in the AFL ) has no heritage is kidding themselves. But as I said above,I dont expect supporters of other clubs to understand, no other SANFL club had the 'Power' or backing to join the AFL.

Perhaps this should be on the Power Board?

[Wedgie]

Apart from having a different name, different team mascot, different colours (and a different playing top), different home ground and playing in a different football competition (that play different teams for a different premiership trophy with different named medals that can be won for B&F and goalkicking), yep Port Power has a 100+ year history, not the PAFC...

Talk about selective editing? And who is this Port Power that you speak of?

The club was named the Port Adelaide Football Club in the SANFL. Tell me what it is named now in the AFL einstein.

The club called Alberton Oval home in the SANFL. And guess what it still does. It only plays at Football Park, exactly the same as when they played at Adelaide Oval during the 70's when in dispute with the council. Did that make them a different club?

And so you think a different guernsey makes a different club? Let's try Magenta and Blue, Blue and White hoops and various Black and White (and now Teal) designs. All worn by the Port Adelaide Football Club.

Speaking of selective editting, no mention of the Rose Pink outfit Port wore?

Ummm, that would be the Magenta?

Umm no, magenta is a completely different colour to rose pink and the outfit which had rose pink in it was a completely different outfit to that which had magenta in it.
You might want to study up a bit harder on your clubs history before telling others about it.

From that first game until 1877 Port Adelaide wore blue and white colours, which they changed to a rose pink cap, guernsey and socks with white knickerbockers in 1878.

A further change was made in 1883 when we wore a magenta and blue cap, guernsey and hooped socks with navy blue knickerbockers. But in 1902 someone must have come to their senses, as we changed to the famous black and white colours.

[Booney]

Ahh, so now you are suggesting his club has history?

[Wedgie]

Ahh, so now you are suggesting his club has history?

I never suggested the Magpies didnt have a history.
But full marks to the Power, they managed in 12 years what the Magpies couldnt achieve in 112 years, losing a grand final by 119 points and becoming the laughing stock of the nation.

[beenreal]

Speaking of selective editting, no mention of the Rose Pink outfit Port wore?

Ummm, that would be the Magenta?[/quote]

Umm no, magenta is a completely different colour to rose pink and the outfit which had rose pink in it was a completely different outfit to that which had magenta in it.
You might want to study up a bit harder on your clubs history before telling others about it.

From that first game until 1877 Port Adelaide wore blue and white colours, which they changed to a rose pink cap, guernsey and socks with white knickerbockers in 1878.

A further change was made in 1883 when we wore a magenta and blue cap, guernsey and hooped socks with navy blue knickerbockers. But in 1902 someone must have come to their senses, as we changed to the famous black and white colours.

[/quote]

Yep forgot about that one, so you've got me. Looking forward to supporters of other clubs making the same admission when they are found to have their facts wrong.

[JK]

Far out, you blokes still banging on about this ... IMHO there's 2 Ports, and I consider both to be from the same bloodline as the original PAFC.

Now when's this trial game, or has it already been?? lol

[redden whites]

Far out, you blokes still banging on about this ... IMHO there's 2 Ports, and I consider both to be from the same bloodline as the original PAFC.

Yes, sanity at last.

[ubeauty]

Ahh, so now you are suggesting his club has history?

I never suggested the Magpies didnt have a history.
But full marks to the Power, they managed in 12 years what the Magpies couldnt achieve in 112 years, losing a grand final by 119 points and becoming the laughing stock of the nation.

time to move on guys heard this cr*p over and over and over again.......119 points blah blah blah...........

[Barto]

119 points blah blah blah...........

I'd forgotten about that. Cheers.

[Psyber]

..time to move on guys heard this cr*p over and over and over again.......119 points blah blah blah...........

Shouldn't it be on a permanent banner across Port Road as you pass Woodville Rd as a reminder?!

[am Bays]

So Port supporters if one has become two which of the two "clubs" in the genetic mutant one????

Are the Magpies the "real" Port true to the colours or and is Port Power a modern mutant given that it appears to want to attract newer disciples from outside the traditional Port catchment area - non-criminal, two parent familes with legal disposable income....

I will not let this argumet die

[JK]

So Port supporters if one has become two which of the two "clubs" in the genetic mutant one????

If you have two children do you love 1 more than the other?

[Voice]

So Port supporters if one has become two which of the two "clubs" in the genetic mutant one????

If you have two children do you love 1 more than the other?

I would love the one that is winning the most at the time.