17 April 2006

Clash jumpers - so what is the deal?

Eddie McGuire has had another go at the AFL over clash jumpers.

This time the AFL are going to make his beloved Pies wear a clash jumper.

The smartarse response initially from Magpieland was a suggested clash jumper that was, rather than white stripes on a black background, black stripes on a white background. A lot like their original jumper, actually.

The AFL rightly hit this suggestion for six, so el presidente Eddie has weighed in and told the AFL that Collingwood don't wear anything other than back and white stripes.

McGuire has a lot of pull, but I doubt that even he will be able to weasel out of this one.

So what is the big deal? Why, says the media, are we only hearing about jumper clashes now? Isn't the system of dark shorts at home and white shorts away meant to solve this?

These arguments are tired and old and have very little basis in reality.

About 10 years ago, which is about a third of my life, the media was pro away jumpers, or clash strips after beating up an incident in a Melbourne vs Essendon match.

What happened in that game, and my memory is about 75% on this, is that a Melbourne player somehow handballed to James Hird who ran past with his jumper down over his (white) shorts.

And every year this gets blown up again after a similar incident.

But hang on, someone is asking, dark shorts and white shorts are traditional, aren't they?

Wrong again. Tradition is black shorts and white shorts. Sometime about 50 years ago or thereabouts, the black shorts became dark shorts to reflect the wishes of clubs like Carlton, Geelong, Melbourne etc who noticed that they were playing at home in shorts that were not in one of their colours.

Clubs like St Kilda, West Coast, Adelaide, Port and the Doggies are already comfortable, and so are their fans, with what is a very simple proposition - clash or away jumpers.

This is the final say that I'm going to have on this matter, so I'll have it now.

Clubs should be made to adopt a "home" strip and a "clash" strip.

Clubs who don't comply, will be considered to have forfeited.

McGuire and co at Collingwood can move into the 21st Century on this, or they can get stuffed.

At the very most, it'll only be twice a year, anyway. Really, what is Collingwood's problem?


Anonymous said...

Seems a pretty childish thing to be whinging about. Grow up losers, say I.

Can't stand AFL myself, but in the English Premier League, I'm pretty sure they have 3 strips: a home strip, an away strip and an alternate clash strip. They also change their jerseys all the time so people have to buy a new one every couple of years (dodgy). I wasn't too impressed that Arsenal change theirs from a rather nice red/white sleeves combo to an all over maroon so I can kinda understand what their complaining about. But, if it's only for a couple of games a year, it's a non-issue.

Dikkii said...

Darn right.

I think that you could be right about EPL teams and the number of strips that they have. Expensive if you're a fan, and probably more so if you're a travelling fan.

I do have to admit to some envy of the Pies.

They've been ruthlessly protecting their trade mark of black and white stripes pretty well over the years - kinda well recognised like the Gunners' red with white sleeves.

It's truly like, "Collingwood? They're the team in the black an white stripes."

But the time has come for them to grow up and accept that a clash strip is required.

Or are the tantrums from Eddie and co just for show?

Anonymous said...

I think much of it is to do with the fact that most people simply have an aversion to change. They'll fight it hard until it happens, and then quickly adjust. It's yet more small-minded, whiny crap.