Brayshaw has nothing to lose

[saintspremiers]

Brayshaw is right with his push to keep North Melbourne in Melbourne.

If the club went with their head not heart they would've gone to QLD, but then North would've lost it's soul and died.

So they have nothing to loose.....it's better to fight for survival as a Melbourne based club or just die completely, then to be relocated.

[plugger66]

Brayshaw is right with his push to keep North Melbourne in Melbourne.

If the club went with their head not heart they would've gone to QLD, but then North would've lost it's soul and died.

So they have nothing to loose.....it's better to fight for survival as a Melbourne based club or just die completely, then to be relocated.

That is rubbish. I have a few friends who support the Swans and they would completely disagree with you and if the Saints were in the same boat as the Roos I would disagree as well.

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

Under your theory thousands of Swans supportors would never have seen a flag in 2005.

[JeffDunne]

Shouldn't that be "Brayshaw has nothing too loose"?

I agree, he's a tight package.

[bigcarl]

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

i'm with you on this one plugger. if the choice is between living and dying, I'd choose living every time.

as doug hawkins would say, it's not "rocket surgery".

if we were in the kangaroos' financial position i'd want the club to err on the side of survival and take the deal. the alternative is not pretty

[St Fidelius]

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

i'm with you on this one plugger. if the choice is between living and dying, I'd choose living every time.

as doug hawkins would say, "it's not rocket surgery".

if we were in the kangaroos' financial position i'd want the club to err on the side of survival.

Agreed, better off to move than to disappear all together, but I somehow think that wont happen, the last side that disappeared altogether was University.

[asiu]

my home club is gone ...

sandy bay ....(seagulls)

bullsh!t experience

[rodgerfox]

That is rubbish. I have a few friends who support the Swans and they would completely disagree with you and if the Saints were in the same boat as the Roos I would disagree as well.

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

Under your theory thousands of Swans supportors would never have seen a flag in 2005.

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

[bob__71]

my home club is gone ...

sandy bay ....(seagulls)

bullsh!t experience

They still have junior sides

[GrumpyOne]

my home club is gone ...

sandy bay ....(seagulls)

bullsh!t experience

They still have junior sides

My first experience of footy was Mordialloc, 2nd division VFA, The Bloods.

Sadly now departed, as have Moorabbin and Brighton from the VFA.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

That is rubbish. I have a few friends who support the Swans and they would completely disagree with you and if the Saints were in the same boat as the Roos I would disagree as well.

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

Under your theory thousands of Swans supportors would never have seen a flag in 2005.

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

its all to do with the fans if the fans want to keep the history alive after a team re-locates then all the power to them this felling that relocating will destroy any links to the past teams is a load of crap if the support of the club is strong enuff it will survive a re location even a merge i know a few ex fitzroy fans one who jumped on the brions after the merge the other who swore he wouldnt support anyone casue his team was gone who do you reckon is the happier punter nowdays ?? survival in any form is beter then folding

[bozza1980]

That is rubbish. I have a few friends who support the Swans and they would completely disagree with you and if the Saints were in the same boat as the Roos I would disagree as well.

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

Under your theory thousands of Swans supportors would never have seen a flag in 2005.

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

Rodger do you believe the AFL has a right to claim that it is a continuation of the VFL??

Were the Sydney Swans a new club when they played matches in 1982?? No they were the same club that played home matches in Sydney the year before as the Swans and away matches in Melbourne as South Melbourne.

I guess the argument comes down to what you believe is "the club". Are the Western Bulldogs still the Footscray Football Club?? Different jumpers, different ground for home matches, different name?? The St Kilda Football Club are about to move to their 3rd home base, we wear different jumpers to what we wore in 1897, even from what we wore in 1997 are we the same club??

[SENsei]

Shouldn't that be "Brayshaw has nothing too loose"?

I agree, he's a tight package.

[saintsRrising]

The one constant in life is change.


Those that resist it end up in misery.


Those that embrace it and leverage off it, prosper.

The trick in life is to understand that change is inevitable and to use it to your advantage.

The Gold Coast provided a goldern opportunity for the Roos to have prospered. Yes with significant change but in a manner where the Kangaroos would still have been essentially what they are today but a much more powerful club. They could have been the masters of their own destiny.



A glorious death....is still death and there is nothing glorious about it. Just bitterness and an ending.

The VFL is long gone...the AFL is here and nationallising of the competition is only going to continue and not lessen. The Roos and St Kilda both need to consider how they can be a strong part of the AFL.

All things evolve and change...or die out. Both St Kilda and the Roos if they want to be a significant force in the AFL in 50 years time..a 100 years time need to evolve.


In the Roos case, their situation was already dire and one of slow decline and are only not gone already as the AFL propped them up. So for all those currently bashing the AFL remember that..if it was not for the AFL's current charity the NMFC would not be in the competition here and now.


Whether NMFC lives or dies is up to them to choose...it is their club.

However I think quite a number who have cheered Brayshaw on will live to regret it inless Brayshaw can work some genuine miracles.


Westaway and FF now have the baton and their task is to evolve the Saints. We cannot stand still.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

That is rubbish. I have a few friends who support the Swans and they would completely disagree with you and if the Saints were in the same boat as the Roos I would disagree as well.

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

Under your theory thousands of Swans supportors would never have seen a flag in 2005.

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

To each their own.

I have no problem with the idea of franchises being able to move in concept. Whether it's the same team would IMO be something for the hearts of the fans - if a Fitzroy fan supports the Lions, or South Melbourne Fan retains their allegiance to the Swans, who am I to argue?

Many of us seem to have faced the idea the Saints may someday fall prey to economics and face relocation... Some would stay Saints, some say they'd change. Me, I'll face that one when I see the colours running around on television, I honestly don't know how I'd feel.

[rodgerfox]

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

its all to do with the fans if the fans want to keep the history alive after a team re-locates then all the power to them this felling that relocating will destroy any links to the past teams is a load of crap if the support of the club is strong enuff it will survive a re location even a merge i know a few ex fitzroy fans one who jumped on the brions after the merge the other who swore he wouldnt support anyone casue his team was gone who do you reckon is the happier punter nowdays ?? survival in any form is beter then folding

Fans who choose to keep history alive are basically sucked in. Or choose to be sucked in.

Sydney play at a different ground.

Have a different jumper.

Have a different name.

Play and represent a different state.

It's different club. Those who choose to hang on are delusional.

Ditto Fitzroy. Different name, jumper, home ground, state etc.

Different club. Good luck to those who choose to pretend that nothing's changed - but I wouldn't be one of them.

[rodgerfox]

Rodger do you believe the AFL has a right to claim that it is a continuation of the VFL??

No.

The VFL was a Victorian competition. It had an equivalent in other states. When it went national, it was a new comp. Particularly when it sold a license to the the SANFL's biggest club.

Were the Sydney Swans a new club when they played matches in 1982?? No they were the same club that played home matches in Sydney the year before as the Swans and away matches in Melbourne as South Melbourne.

They became a new club once they changed their name, their jumper and relocated to another state.

I guess the argument comes down to what you believe is "the club". Are the Western Bulldogs still the Footscray Football Club?? Different jumpers, different ground for home matches, different name?? The St Kilda Football Club are about to move to their 3rd home base, we wear different jumpers to what we wore in 1897, even from what we wore in 1997 are we the same club??

Now this is where it gets interesting.

I don't believe the St.Kilda footy club that I follow today is the same one I fell in love with 22 years ago.

We have a corporate indentity - but have lost the identity that I knew. We have no home. Our jumper changes every week. I am told by the club and the press that unless I pay $100 odd dollars each year, I'm not really a part of it.

It's a business now. No doubt about it.

Flags and success are allocated to generate more revenue. Anyone who still feels a strong bond with their footy club are.....well.....lucky. They have very rosy glasses on.

The days of jumping on the train with the backpack loaded up with provisions, heading off with your mates to 'enemy territory' on the other side of Melbourne to play a true 'away' game are gone. The days of walking the back streets from Moorabbin station to Linton St with a spring in your step and your chest puffed out because we were 'at home' that week, are gone.

Those are the days when a victory and success meant something. It was tribal.

Now? It's entertainment.

Nothing more.

It's a business. Designed to get us to hand over our cash.

As I said, those who don't see this, are fortunate. It's still enjoyable to them. To the rest, it's sad.

[plugger66]

That is rubbish. I have a few friends who support the Swans and they would completely disagree with you and if the Saints were in the same boat as the Roos I would disagree as well.

Better to survive anywhere than not have any club to support.

Under your theory thousands of Swans supportors would never have seen a flag in 2005.

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

How would you know how my mates think of the Swans. They are a combination of Sydney and the swans and that is how they feel. You can think what you like but they have followed the club all their life and they still have a bit of Sth Melbourne in them.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

South Melbourne are dead. They died 20 odd years ago.

The 2005 flag was a Sydney flag - not a South Melbourne one.

The club your friends now support in Sydney, is the Sydney Swans. Not the club they used to support.

If the Saints moved to the Gold Coast, they're not the Saints anymore. They're Gold Coast. Nothing wrong with supporting them, but if anyone hangs on to the belief that it's the same club - just in a different state - they're delusional.

The 2005 flag made me laugh (once I stopped crying after the Prelim) how the AFL served their own purpose once more by talking up the South Melbourne link.

They'd spent the past 20 years selling Sydney's own club to the New South Welshmen, then when it suits them suddenly they start trying to fool everyone that it had something at all to do with South Melbourne.

South Melbourne didn't win a flag in 2005. Sydney did.

There is no link at all. Different name. Different ground. Different jumper. Different state.

its all to do with the fans if the fans want to keep the history alive after a team re-locates then all the power to them this felling that relocating will destroy any links to the past teams is a load of crap if the support of the club is strong enuff it will survive a re location even a merge i know a few ex fitzroy fans one who jumped on the brions after the merge the other who swore he wouldnt support anyone casue his team was gone who do you reckon is the happier punter nowdays ?? survival in any form is beter then folding

Fans who choose to keep history alive are basically sucked in. Or choose to be sucked in.

Sydney play at a different ground.

Have a different jumper.

Have a different name.

Play and represent a different state.

It's different club. Those who choose to hang on are delusional.

Ditto Fitzroy. Different name, jumper, home ground, state etc.

Different club. Good luck to those who choose to pretend that nothing's changed - but I wouldn't be one of them.

and where does St Kilda play ?
and whats jumper did we wear in the 1800's i dont think it was a white one with a faded logo
were we not a some stage known as the panthers ??
and aint we now located some distance from st kilda ?

who are you to tell a suporter of fitzroy or south that they have no link to the brions or the swines ?? its not where the team plays or who plays for the team that decides your passion for your team south have every claim to the syd flag as do fitzroy and the bears have to theire flags because it is a prat of them the sydney swans wouldn be the swans without south and the brions wouldnt be the brions with out the roys

[rodgerfox]

south have every claim to the syd flag as do fitzroy and the bears have to theire flags because it is a prat of them the sydney swans wouldn be the swans without south and the brions wouldnt be the brions with out the roys

Rubbish.

Absolute rubbish.

Do you think the new Gold Coast club will go ahead without North? Of course they will.

So would have Sydney. Brisbane infact did. As did West Coast and Adelaide.

By stitching a little SMFC on the collar of the Sydney jumpers gives some diehard Melbourne based fans an excuse to keep forking out cash for these new clubs.

The clubs they absorb, have absolutely no relevance whatsoever - and absolutely no claim to any flags they get down the track. By 'merging' or 'relocating' clubs, all the AFL is doing is keeping a couple of extra thousand fans pouring money in.

[rodgerfox]

Ask yourself this....

Why do these clubs relocate?

Why do they 'merge'?


Answer those questions honestly, and you'll see exactly why it's frogshyt that it's the same club - just in a different state.


Then ask yourself this question....

Why didn't Hawthorn merge?

[yipper]

The reality is that the old VFL we all grew up with and those tribal battles would now be a defunct competition if it had of continued. The clubs were way to ruthless and were eating each other alive!! The AFL national comp was the saviour of the game - and I still have a spring in my step when I go to the G' or the Dome' to watch the Saints. In fact, I can watch any game because it is still a great game played by tough, talented players. Footy is our national game and it is played on the biggest stages and the supporters barrack for their team passionately and hate everyone else. Is that so different from the 50's, 60's and 70's??? I grew up with the tribal, local game and have now embraced the national version. And my team is a major player in the national game in 2007 - that is fantastic I reckon. My old man still thinks it's the same club - they wear the same colours and have that shield on the jumper that was struck in the 50's. And thay preserve their history for anyone to see in our museum. Our past champions are all still on the walls at Moorabbin. So, I don't really have a problem with the old-timers clinging to the Swans or the Lions given that both Bobby Skilton and Kevin Murray gave their blessings to these clubs moving. Each to their own - but the game is healthy, and vibrant.and still a great spectacle.

[rodgerfox]

but the game is healthy, and vibrant.and still a great spectacle.

Sure.

But it is different to the game of 20 years ago - even 10 years ago.

Sydney are a great club. Now if people choose to support them, that's fine. However those who claim that it's simply South Melbourne in a different location - are wrong.

Ditto Brisbane.

Ditto whoever merges or moves to the Gold Coast.

[yipper]

but the game is healthy, and vibrant.and still a great spectacle.

Sure.

But it is different to the game of 20 years ago - even 10 years ago.

Sydney are a great club. Now if people choose to support them, that's fine. However those who claim that it's simply South Melbourne in a different location - are wrong.

Ditto Brisbane.
Ditto whoever merges or moves to the Gold Coast.

I know what you're getting at Rodg - but the reality is that the Sydney Swans were actually formed when the Sth Melbourne Football club moved up there. They initially had the South Board or some members - and retained the colours. Paul Roos deliberately embraced the old Bloods moniker going into the 2005 season. History starts somewhere - and with Sydney, it started at the Lakeside Oval South Melbourne. The Lions are a bit different - they already had a team that merged with Fitzroy and effectively took them over. That one was poorly done and some fans have been lost forever as a result.

[bozza1980]

Rodger do you believe the AFL has a right to claim that it is a continuation of the VFL??

No.

The VFL was a Victorian competition. It had an equivalent in other states. When it went national, it was a new comp. Particularly when it sold a license to the the SANFL's biggest club.

Were the Sydney Swans a new club when they played matches in 1982?? No they were the same club that played home matches in Sydney the year before as the Swans and away matches in Melbourne as South Melbourne.

They became a new club once they changed their name, their jumper and relocated to another state.

I guess the argument comes down to what you believe is "the club". Are the Western Bulldogs still the Footscray Football Club?? Different jumpers, different ground for home matches, different name?? The St Kilda Football Club are about to move to their 3rd home base, we wear different jumpers to what we wore in 1897, even from what we wore in 1997 are we the same club??

Now this is where it gets interesting.

I don't believe the St.Kilda footy club that I follow today is the same one I fell in love with 22 years ago.

We have a corporate indentity - but have lost the identity that I knew. We have no home. Our jumper changes every week. I am told by the club and the press that unless I pay $100 odd dollars each year, I'm not really a part of it.

It's a business now. No doubt about it.

Flags and success are allocated to generate more revenue. Anyone who still feels a strong bond with their footy club are.....well.....lucky. They have very rosy glasses on.

The days of jumping on the train with the backpack loaded up with provisions, heading off with your mates to 'enemy territory' on the other side of Melbourne to play a true 'away' game are gone. The days of walking the back streets from Moorabbin station to Linton St with a spring in your step and your chest puffed out because we were 'at home' that week, are gone.

Those are the days when a victory and success meant something. It was tribal.

Now? It's entertainment.

Nothing more.

It's a business. Designed to get us to hand over our cash.

As I said, those who don't see this, are fortunate. It's still enjoyable to them. To the rest, it's sad.

I think it's fair to say we will need to agree to disagree on the VFL/AFL, South Melbourne/Sydney arguments.

That said I hear what you are saying about the game being different to what it used to be. The thing is, in 20 years time it will be different again and we will probably still be disagreeing about other aspects of the game but I think that's one of the best things about footy is arguing your point of view.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

the only thing that makes a club a club is its suporters and if the suporters stay true to the team moving then the team keeps its history you put too much empesis on the location and the jumper its the heart of the club in its suporters that keep it going .. im a saints manand i would suport them not matter where they moved or who they merged with but its a bit hard to support a non existant team if it just folds