2019 season guernsey numbers

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ScottH
    It's Goodes to cheer!!
    • Sep 2003
    • 23665

    #16
    Originally posted by stevoswan
    37 years?
    I wondered this as well.
    Would be a shame not to see it used again.

    How long was 14 empty after Kelly??

    Originally posted by stevoswan
    That list has new recruit James Rowbottom listed as James Rowthorn...... ??
    Oops!!
    Corrected.

    Comment

    • rb4x
      Regular in the Side
      • Dec 2007
      • 969

      #17
      Zac Foot born in 2001 ?

      Comment

      • ScottH
        It's Goodes to cheer!!
        • Sep 2003
        • 23665

        #18
        Originally posted by rb4x
        Zac Foot born in 2001 ?
        Was correct based on the source I had at the time of draft.
        Changed to 2000.

        Comment

        • ugg
          Can you feel it?
          Site Admin
          • Jan 2003
          • 15976

          #19
          Wow that makes me feel old.
          Reserves live updates (Twitter)
          Reserves WIKI -
          Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

          Comment

          • CureTheSane
            Carpe Noctem
            • Jan 2003
            • 5032

            #20
            Originally posted by ScottH
            They might wait for another special indigenous to come along.
            I hate the thought of that.
            Segregating and divisive.
            But then I've never been a fan of retiring jumpers regardless.
            The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

            Comment

            • wolftone57
              Veterans List
              • Aug 2008
              • 5861

              #21
              Originally posted by ScottH
              I wondered this as well.
              Would be a shame not to see it used again.

              How long was 14 empty after Kelly??



              Oops!!
              Corrected.
              I think it was Craig bird that re-energised 14. it was only vacant between 2002 and 2008

              Comment

              • stevoswan
                Veterans List
                • Sep 2014
                • 8573

                #22
                Originally posted by CureTheSane
                I hate the thought of that.
                Segregating and divisive.
                But then I've never been a fan of retiring jumpers regardless.
                Embracing a young indigenous player by giving him the number of an idol is "segregating and devisive"? How so? To be frank, that sounds a bit Bolt to me......

                Comment

                • liz
                  Veteran
                  Site Admin
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 16786

                  #23
                  Originally posted by stevoswan
                  Embracing a young indigenous player by giving him the number of an idol is "segregating and devisive"? How so? To be frank, that sounds a bit Bolt to me......
                  I think you've badly twisted what CTS is saying.

                  Goodes was a great footballer and leader at the Swans, and is still a great man. While his indigenous heritage has clearly shaped him, and also influenced his leadership role within the broad AFL competition, it didn't define him as a player or a leader within the club. He was great regardless of his heritage.

                  Reserving the number 37 just for a young indigenous player is what (to me, at least) comes across as "segregating and devisive", potentially at least. Any young player arriving at our club - indigenous Australian or not - should aspire to be what Goodes was and be proud to wear his number, if it was offered to him.

                  Comment

                  • stevoswan
                    Veterans List
                    • Sep 2014
                    • 8573

                    #24
                    Originally posted by liz
                    I think you've badly twisted what CTS is saying.

                    Goodes was a great footballer and leader at the Swans, and is still a great man. While his indigenous heritage has clearly shaped him, and also influenced his leadership role within the broad AFL competition, it didn't define him as a player or a leader within the club. He was great regardless of his heritage.

                    Reserving the number 37 just for a young indigenous player is what (to me, at least) comes across as "segregating and devisive", potentially at least. Any young player arriving at our club - indigenous Australian or not - should aspire to be what Goodes was and be proud to wear his number, if it was offered to him.
                    Well, that's just one way we could look at it. I understand you are a moderator and would like to 'keep the peace' but maybe CTS could explain it himself? Except that now he has an 'out'.....

                    Comment

                    • Bloods05
                      Senior Player
                      • Oct 2008
                      • 1641

                      #25
                      Originally posted by stevoswan
                      Well, that's just one way we could look at it. I understand you are a moderator and would like to 'keep the peace' but maybe CTS could explain it himself? Except that now he has an 'out'.....
                      Indeed. You are quite wrong here Liz. The idea that it is "divisive" to reserve a number for indigenous players, especially one that has been made famous by one who became, and continues to be, a leader in the indigenous community, is a clear example of a rhetorical device that has been used to devastating effect by those who seek to discredit efforts to enhance the status of first peoples in this country. You are being far too generous. Stevoswan is right on the money.

                      Comment

                      • MattW
                        Veterans List
                        • May 2011
                        • 4231

                        #26
                        I approve of the gesture of setting aside 37, in fact I'm proud of it. In relation to allocating the number to another player, I'd hope and would expect they'd take into account Adam's wishes.

                        Comment

                        • YvonneH
                          Senior Player
                          • Sep 2011
                          • 1141

                          #27
                          I would be happy for #37 to be retired permanently, at the same time for it to be re-allocated at a later date is fine with me.
                          I guess that makes me undecided.

                          Comment

                          • chalbilto
                            Senior Player
                            • Oct 2007
                            • 1139

                            #28
                            Originally posted by CureTheSane
                            I hate the thought of that.
                            Segregating and divisive.
                            But then I've never been a fan of retiring jumpers regardless.
                            I agree with CTS, the retirement of a number is an over reaction. When it comes to Adam Goodes or any other great players, I think it's their deeds and exploits and not the number that is the reason for their greatness. In other words the number does not make them great or successful. For example Roger Dangerfield had number 32 with Adelaide but has 35 with Geelong. Does either number make him a better player, so what I am trying to say is, honour and remember the player for his deeds and exploits, for the number is a way of identification, locker room allocation, registration on rosters etc. Numbers do not have magic powers which is passed on.

                            Comment

                            • CureTheSane
                              Carpe Noctem
                              • Jan 2003
                              • 5032

                              #29
                              Originally posted by stevoswan
                              Well, that's just one way we could look at it. I understand you are a moderator and would like to 'keep the peace' but maybe CTS could explain it himself? Except that now he has an 'out'.....
                              Liz is absolutely right.
                              To get that from what I said is just putting words in my mouth that were never there.
                              There is no reason a young indigenous player shouldn't get the jumper, but saving it for a specific skin colour is wrong to me.
                              Simply, it cheapens the jumper.

                              It cheapens it in exactly the same way as giving Mills #14 kind of cheapened it for me.
                              Craig Bird was a great player to wear it, as not everyone needs to be a superstar to perpetuate the 'tradition' of the number.
                              What makes the numbers special is that they are given out and from time to time there will come a star and they will happen to have a jumper that has a rich tradition to add to.

                              Your comment to me is bordering on calling me racist, which I don't appreciate at all.
                              I don't need an 'out' from anyone, but I appreciate the understanding and explanation provided by Liz.

                              For what it's worth, there are times I would support retirement of a jumper, probably not permanently though.
                              Darren Millane would be a good example.
                              The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

                              Comment

                              • CureTheSane
                                Carpe Noctem
                                • Jan 2003
                                • 5032

                                #30
                                Originally posted by Bloods05
                                Indeed. You are quite wrong here Liz. The idea that it is "divisive" to reserve a number for indigenous players, especially one that has been made famous by one who became, and continues to be, a leader in the indigenous community, is a clear example of a rhetorical device that has been used to devastating effect by those who seek to discredit efforts to enhance the status of first peoples in this country. You are being far too generous. Stevoswan is right on the money.
                                Pfft.

                                17 should be reserved for the irish
                                27 for Americans

                                Reserving 37 for indigenous Australians would definitely be seen as divisive by many football fans, particularly the ones who booed Goodes.
                                Add to that, I'd suggest that throwing a young player into the position would be setting him up to deal with a whole bunch of problems to add to him developing as a footballer.
                                The Goodes issue brought racism issues into football.
                                The sport acted as a hotspot to debate racism, bullying and 'the spotlight'

                                The issue has not disappeared, and will raise its ugly head again at some time.
                                I would be wanting to protect any new indigenous player from the ugliness rather than throwing them into the fire.
                                The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.

                                Comment

                                Working...