TOPIC:

Beasley Hutton wrote: The AFL Hall Of Fame is a deadset Victorian Biased Joke!! Some of those Vics already in there couldnt carry Todd, Bunton, Naylor, McIntosh, Michael et al's bag to the ground as footballers but alas those boys didnt play in the "supposed" big league!

Quite well summed up BH.Im not saying its right at all. Reckon the blokes ya mentioned would be walk up starts. Its just that the VFL was the pinnacle of football, and "alledgely" you had to prove yerself there, as (again) allegedly MOST of the better players (though not all) wanted to rpove themselves in the "highest" comp. I still bemoan the fact my "cats" had Michael signed on a form four for years and years, yet he never came across.

Unk then it should be renamed the VFL Hall Of Fame (not the Australian Football Hall Of Fame) as that is essentially who it represents!!

Who gives a rats arse what any of the experts say, they have an opinion, nothing more. The proof will be in the pudding, one way or the other. My opinion is that the Dockers will continue to improve as their depth grows. It is a brave or stupid call to say they won't make the 8. It would take a complete reversal of what they have achieved in the second half of last year and early indications this year.

Beasley Hutton wrote: Unk then it should be renamed the VFL Hall Of Fame (not the Australian Football Hall Of Fame) as that is essentially who it represents!!

Fair point.

Beasley Hutton wrote: Unk then it should be renamed the VFL Hall Of Fame (not the Australian Football Hall Of Fame) as that is essentially who it represents!!

You're flogging a dead horse here mate. I argued the point on FG that AFL records should start from the formation of the AFL, but squeezers seem to think that VFL records really do count in the AFL. It's quite simple really, AFL records, VFL records, WAFL records and SANFL records. Trouble is the vics can't really understand that the world doesn't rotate around them - it's their arrogance I guess.

58shark wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: Unk then it should be renamed the VFL Hall Of Fame (not the Australian Football Hall Of Fame) as that is essentially who it represents!!

You're flogging a dead horse here mate. I argued the point on FG that AFL records should start from the formation of the AFL, but squeezers seem to think that VFL records really do count in the AFL. It's quite simple really, AFL records, VFL records, WAFL records and SANFL records. Trouble is the vics can't really understand that the world doesn't rotate around them - it's their arrogance I guess.

I mentioned before 58 i dont necessarily agree with the way it has been handled. HOWEVER the pinnacle of Aussie rules footy was always the VFL. Thats not arrogant just fact.

Spot on Unka2.

58shark wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: Unk then it should be renamed the VFL Hall Of Fame (not the Australian Football Hall Of Fame) as that is essentially who it represents!!

You're flogging a dead horse here mate. I argued the point on FG that AFL records should start from the formation of the AFL, but squeezers seem to think that VFL records really do count in the AFL. It's quite simple really, AFL records, VFL records, WAFL records and SANFL records. Trouble is the vics can't really understand that the world doesn't rotate around them - it's their arrogance I guess.

Please somebody tell me that this bloke is pulling the p#&s???? Ha Ha i don't even know how to respond to such a ridiculous statment Ha Ha ive never read such a stupid comment .

That would be like saying world history before the colonisation of Australia doesn't count. You see the pinnacle of football for almost 100 years before the inception of the Eagles, Port, Adelaide etc consisted of pretty much the best of the best from the country with the exception of a few i will admit.

It would have been called the Afl allot earlier if certain states got of their ass to form a team. However it was still called VFL when teams such as the Brisbane Bears and Sydney Swans were in the comp. It became the AFL in 1990 3 years after Brisbane and the Eagles joined the comp so what your saying is those clubs first few years count for nothing??????? That every Grand Final that was played before 1990 doesn't count????? You my friend.......... Ha Ha its too easy with such a dumb comment ha ha.

Ask yourself this question? who out of today's comp would you have inducted into the hall of fame in 30 years time? I guarantee you there would be more Victorian players than any other state, its not an arrogant statement its just a simple fact that Victorian players alone would make up easily half of the comp.(safe Guess) Simple Maths.

What i should have said was, the best players from around the country mainly went to victoria to play, not all but most. I wasn't saying all the best players were vics, sorry if i didn't sound clear on that.

However Of the 136 inaugural inductees into the Hall of Fame, 116 played substantial parts of their careers in Victoria, with eleven of the thirteen "Legends" from Victoria. The players are chosen on their ability, integrity, sportsmanship and character not always the amount of brownlows they have won.

Look it probably is bias with far more victorian judges on the selection committee but when you have a large majority of victorian players in our game, past and presently and based on the criteria simple maths dictates that there would be a larger number of victorian players in the Hall of Fame. Over time we will see this change as we see plyers from the 90's and 2000's gain recognition with allot of those coming from clubs such as Westcoast, Sydney, Brisbane etc.

UNKA2 wrote:

58shark wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: Unk then it should be renamed the VFL Hall Of Fame (not the Australian Football Hall Of Fame) as that is essentially who it represents!!

You're flogging a dead horse here mate. I argued the point on FG that AFL records should start from the formation of the AFL, but squeezers seem to think that VFL records really do count in the AFL. It's quite simple really, AFL records, VFL records, WAFL records and SANFL records. Trouble is the vics can't really understand that the world doesn't rotate around them - it's their arrogance I guess.

I mentioned before 58 i dont necessarily agree with the way it has been handled. HOWEVER the pinnacle of Aussie rules footy was always the VFL. Thats not arrogant just fact.

Yer right there unk, but tell me why a VFL club is able to claim their state league records as part of the AFL? 2 different leagues really. My father had some pretty impressive medals in his day, why can't I claim them as mine...same diff???

Who are the non-Victorian legends?