Talk:Australian Football League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Australian Football League article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

Portal	Australian Football League is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject AFL.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Archives
1 2

Contents 1 Hall of Fame 2 Past Player Statistics 3 Vandalism 4 2007 Season 5 Début/Games played 6 AFL (The truth) 7 Former grounds etc 8 Port/AFL/VFL edits 9 Locations, again 10 Team of the Century - Clubs 11 Fair use rationale for Image:2007AFLToyota.png 12 Seven AFL Live 13 Brisbane Bears 14 Fair use rationale for Image:OldAFL.png 15 Fair use rationale for Image:VFLLogo.png 16 Fair use rationale for Image:StKildaDesign.svg 17 Present teams 18 Fair use rationale for Image:2007AFLToyota.png 19 External links 20 Fair use rationale for Image:AdelaideDesign.png 21 Fair use rationale for Image:GeelongDesign.png 22 Fair use rationale for Image:StKildaDesign.png 23 Fair use rationale for Image:WestCoastDesign.png 24 Fair use rationale for Image:PortAdelaideDesign.png 25 Fair use rationale for Image:RichmondDesign.jpg 26 Fair use rationale for Image:SydneyDesign.jpg 27 Fair use rationale for Image:SydneyDesign.png 28 Fair use rationale for Image:UniversityDesign.jpg 29 Fair use rationale for Image:BrisbaneBearsDesign.png 30 Fair use rationale for Image:BrisbaneLionsDesign.png 31 Fair use rationale for Image:CarltonDesign.png 32 Fair use rationale for Image:EssendonDesign.jpg 33 Fair use rationale for Image:EssendonDesign.png 34 Fair use rationale for Image:CollingwoodDesign.jpg 35 Fair use rationale for Image:FitzroyDesign.jpg 36 Fair use rationale for Image:CollingwoodDesign.png 37 Fair use rationale for Image:HawthornDesign.jpg 38 Fair use rationale for Image:HawthornDesign.png 39 Future section 40 Fair use rationale for Image:MelbourneDesign.jpg 41 Fair use rationale for Image:MelbourneDesign.png 42 AFL games in the UK 43 Image copyright problem with Image:BrisbaneLionsDesign.jpg

[edit] Hall of Fame

Just a quick note to bring to everyone's attention: The list of Hall of Fame Legends is just that. There are many others listed as members of the HoF (players, coaches, umpires, administrators, and media) but only a select few of them are officially Legends. Note that this does not include Gary Ablett Snr., Harry Vallence, or many other very good players. In the recent Hall of Fame presentation, Jock McHale was elevated to Legend status - it's just that Gary Ablett got all the media attention. See the links available at the AFL website for any further clarification.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Brain of Morbius (talk • contribs) 9 June 2005.

Gary Ablett wasnt in because of an alleged run in with drugs i think

Gary Ablett IS IN THE hall of Fame as of 2006 there was one incident involving ectasy in 1998 although it was considered irrelevant and thus he was added to the hall of fame as a great player, external problems aside —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrendanReed (talk • contribs) 11:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Past Player Statistics

I have been searching for past player statistics, in particular John Worsfold's of the West Coast Eagles and have been unable to find any. The statistics that I would be interested in are how many kicks, goals, hand balls, marks etc. Am I not looking in the right place or are they not available?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.165.152.57 (talk • contribs) 14 January 2006.

The only thing I can find is from the Eagles 2006 Year Book: John Worsfold: 209 Games, 38 Goals, 26 Behinds. 21 AFL Finals (1 goal). 3 Grand Finals (0 Goals). 17 Official Pre-season Games (8 Goals) 24 WAFL Games (4 Goals) Represented WA 5 Times (0 Goals).

Sorry - no kicks, marks, etc. BartBart 15:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[1] Again sorry no stats on this but WCE past player info. You should be able to get similar on the individual sites, since all bar Essendon's are run by the same people. BartBart 16:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Someone needs to reverse the edits of 202.164.199.138 which removed the former clubs of the VFL/AFL being the Brisbane Bears and South Melbourne Swans ... these are historical facts even though the clubs are not technically defunct, they are no longer part of the league in their previous form.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Biatch (talk • contribs) 18 January 2006

[edit] 2007 Season

Should that really be on the right? Until the end of the year, there is only going to be NAB Cup winners listed there. Everything else will be undecided. If we must have it, I think we should do what was done last year. Have the full previous season, and then the current season updated as it goes. Seth Cohen 07:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree. If not to remove the entire 2007 section, could we not at least cut it back to showing just the NAB cup? Raider2044 ^{Bio • Talk • Contribs} 11:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Début/Games played

I notice that someone has edited Bryce Gibbs to show his début as the pre-season match against Essendon. Do we have a standard for this? Pretty much all the articles I can think of indicate the first Home/Away match as the début game. Countering this I am fairly certain the AFL include such pre-season matches in the players' official match tallies (unlike some other leagues). Pudgey 22:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You often hear the phrase "official AFL games" which includes pre-season, state of origin and international rules, as well as premiership matches (h&a and finals). However, when talking about a debut, it is generally accepted that a player doesn't make his debut until the home and away season. Rookie listed players play in the NAB cup, but their debut in the record will still be n/a. Seth Cohen 12:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFL (The truth)

THE TRUTH

Hey I have supported AFL all my life and i have been browsing one perticular page (the AFL page) and even after i correct the mistakes made by other individuals the section VFL/AFL Records keeps having a false fact. The fact is that it says that Essendon Football Club are tied with Carlton Football club with the most premierships on 16 each but this is a false fact the real fact is that CArlton are up on 16 but essendon are only on 15. This is because 1 one essendons reported 16 premierships was not a premiership cup match but it was just a round robin competition. So that years competition should not have been counted. I know some people will disagree with me on this saying that a round robin should still be counted as a premiership. Well if this is you then you can still not say that it is 16 a piece between Essendon & Carlton. If you count a round robin as a premiership then it would actually Become Essendon 17 & Carlton 16 because the AFL/VFL didnt cound the first ever major round robin competition as a premiership in 1897 which was as you guessed was won by Esssendon. So no matter what your believe these facts prove that the AFL's most premiership IS NOT tied.

QUERIES

Well if you have any queries please dont hesitate to contact my at footy_lover21@hotmail.com

--The afl brain 06:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I have already left the following message at your previous Anon Talk page (User talk:124.177.211.209) (and am about to leave it on your current Talk page).

== Essendon and "that" Premiership ==

I notice that you keep asserting in the article Australian Football League that Essendon have only won 15 VFL/AFL premierships. In your edit of 21 February 2007 you stated:

(Essendon are actually only on fiveteen since one of their premierships that makes up the 16 was not actually a Grand Final a.k.a Premiership it was mearly a round robin compettition just like the one they had one earlier in 1897)

The premiership concerned is of course the 1924 round robin finals where no grand final match was played (because Essendon already had an unassailable lead in the finals series).

It was indeed a premiership to Essendon that year and the AFL acknowledge as much. The article at Did the 1924 Bombers throw their last game? confirms that Essendon were premiers and also makes for interesting reading about the whole end of that season (especially with betting a topical issue in the AFL at present). Please stop reverting the number of premierships. Pudgey 08:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I repeat, please stop reverting the number of premierships.

And no, we won't be corresponding to an email address. If you have queries then the Talk page is the place to resolve them. Pudgey 10:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes well in fact if the afl acknowledge the 1924 round robin competition as a premiership why are they/ you not counting the first one in 1897???

--The afl brain 08:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Essendon Premiership years are 1897, 1901, 1911, 1912, 1923, 1924, 1942, 1946, 1949, 1950, 1962, 1965, 1984, 1985, 1993, 2000. To my count that is 16 premierships. Is there one other you feel they should be awarded?

You could also look at Full Points Footy where the tally is at the bottom of the page; or Essendon club site where they list all 16 premiership sides. But perhaps even more convincing would be the AFL Club summary where the Carlton entry says:

"Carlton — the Blues

Joining the League in 1897, Carlton shares the tag as the most successful club in the history of the VFL/AFL, with 16 premierships, with arch-rival Essendon."

What I cannot find anywhere is anyone to support your contention. By the way, "grand finals" is not synonymous with "premierships", although under the current finals system a team has to win the grand final to be premiers.

I believe we can now consider this matter closed and move on to some constructive editing with our time. I certainly intend doing so. Pudgey 10:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Pudgey is correct. To summarise, as I said on your talk page already, Essendon have won 14 Grand Finals, not 15, and 16 Premierships, as the premiership does not have to be decided by a Grand Final. (As an interesting side note, if Essendon had not won that round robin competition in 1924, then as the minor premiers they would have played a Grand Final against the round robin winners to decide the premiership.) JPD (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Former grounds etc

Seem to be missing quite a few former grounds - Glenferrie Oval, Corio Oval, Lake Oval, East Melbourne Cricket Ground spring to mind

Also why are Fitzroy and University from their detailed suburbs rather than 'Melbourne' like the rest of the Melbourne clubs?

The membership numbers list is also out of whack and needs fixing up. (those tables are a bit beyond me)

Mustard Pot 00:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that they are actually relevant to this article...so I'm going to be bold and remove the list. There are 37 grounds where AFL or VFL premiership footy has been played[2], 10 I'd call very minor (single season or not that many games), 11 current and 16 former grounds. Alberton has NEVER been an AFL or VFL ground. We aren't listing VFA grounds that Richmond, Footscray, Hawthorn etc played at before they joined the VFL, so we don't list SANFL grounds that Port played at, nor training grounds of any teams. The-Pope 03:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Port/AFL/VFL edits

Firstly, Mr 211.whatever, please login so we can debate this without confusion about who is who. Secondly, the article is titled Australian Football League, the timeline is therefore about that league. It does not consider Richmonds performance in the VFA prior to 1908, nor the Dogs/Hawks/Roos before 1925. It can therefore NOT consider Port's existance before 1997. If you had looked properly, I DID change the title to be Performance of Clubs in the AFL/VFL. Please take off your anti-VFL/pro-SANFL/PAFC bias before you edit again. The-Pope 06:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I suspect "Mr 211"/Tonkatonka (who both share the same zeal, if not the same online persona) has little interest in debating the points they seem insistent on raising by repeatedly reverting the article to their view. Nonetheless, let's start with some basic geography and see if that generates discussion rather than a revert-war.

Port Adelaide is a suburb of Adelaide the city, as is Alberton. Alberton is about 1-1½ Kms south of Port Adelaide and contains the delightful Alberton Oval. Alberton Oval is the training ground and headquarters of Port Adelaide Power and the Home ground for Port Adelaide Magpies in the SANFL. It is not an AFL venue nor has it ever been. All Port Adelaide Power Home matches are played at Football Park (aka AAMI Stadium). If someone wants to change the location of Port Adelaide Power from "Adelaide" to "Port Adelaide" then it is patently incorrect as Port Adelaide Power have no facilities in Port Adelaide the suburb. If it was to be changed at all it would have to read either Alberton or West Lakes (the suburb in which AAMI Stadium is to be found). I do not advocate this change as it does not clarify location to any casual readers of the article and has previously led to enthusiastic editors including the original suburban locations for the Melbourne based clubs as their "location" when most have moved to new venues over the last two decades.

In summary I intend changing (again) Port Adelaide Power's location in the article back to Adelaide unless someone can offer a cogent reason why it should stay at the incorrect "Port Adelaide". Pudgey 10:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Pudgey, you say that Port Adelaide Power has no facilities in Port Adelaide. Guess what is located at Brougham Place, Alberton? Yep, the Port Adelaide Football Club, so you are incorrect. I actually wasn't going to respond to your rambling, but I have now decided to because I think I have a clearer line of thought on this. You obviously don't believe that the club should be recognised prior to 1997 even though it is one of the oldest football clubs in the AFL (refer PAFC's website). You are putting faith in your belief that the graph interprets when clubs joined the VFL or AFL, rather than when the clus were formed. Ok, if that's the way it is to be interpreted, then I would question why we have an entry for Sydney dating back to 1897. In fact the Sydney Football Club and South Melb Football Club are separate legal entities (did ACN searches on them last night and am happy to share the results with you). Yes, they shared the colours, players (I think) etc but that is where the continuity starts and stops. The SMFC ceased to exist even though that is obviously not how SM fans would prefer to remember this. If you want the graph to reflect when clubs joined or exited the AFL, then would you agree that the Sydney timeline should start in the 80's (and therefore end the SMFC entry at the same time)? If we have a consensus on that then it would make sense to limit PAFCs date at 1997. If we so have consensus then I would also propose some clarification to the graph to reflect that it records when clubs entered / exited the VFL / AFL rather than record when the clubs started or stopped (the word "club" in the heading currently implies club existence). I also utterly reject The Popes accusations of bias. I'm a Victorian and have thoughts on PAFC I won't share with here - but we ought not mould the entry just to make the VFL look like the be all and end all. Unfortunately it is already that way but why make it worse? Tonkatonka 11:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not attribute things to me that I have not said ("You obviously don't believe that the club should be recognised prior to 1997 even though it is one of the oldest football clubs in the AFL (refer PAFC's website). "}. I have never said that, nor have I commented on the history of any of the VFA clubs that joined the VFL/AFL. I am sorry that you feel that my discussion of your geography issues was "rambling". I await your clarification of the reason for the Location shift you have made as you obviously have a passion for the issue. At the moment you have said "what is located at Brougham Place, Alberton? Yep, the Port Adelaide Football Club". That doesn't particularly sway me from the view that PAP are not "located" at Port Adelaide the suburb. The rest of your response deals with history of clubs which was not my point. I will leave that to others to debate with you, but you seem to be plotting a lonely course at present. Pudgey 13:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Tonkatonka, I think you are missing the point that this article is about the competition which started as the VFL in 1897 and became the AFL, not about the clubs that are now in the competition. So, for the sake of this article, the VFL is the be all and end all until 1989. (Of course, the other competitions can be and are mentioned to give some context to the history, but they are not the subject of the article.) I happen to agree that it is not a particularly good thing that our national competition is simply an expanded VFL, but that is the reality, and it is correct for the article to reflect that. The timeline does not imply anything about when the clubs were created - it clearly states it is about performance in the VFL/AFL and most of the clubs were created before they appear on the timeline. If Port Adelaide's premierships from the SANFL are to be included in timelines, then premierships won by most of the other clubs in the VFA would also need to be included. Information about clubs in general (like the number of premierships PA have won) might be more relevant at a more general article such as Australian rules football.

Your points about the Swans are also completely irrelevant. The question there is not from which date they should be included on the timeline (by your PA logic, the correct date would be 1874!), but whether the "South Melbourne" and "Sydney" should count as the same club. You make an interesting claim for why they should be treated separately, but I think you will find that legal entities and ACNs aren't the be all and end all of whether a club is considered to be the same club. On top of that, your reference supporting the notion that the Lions are the Bears, if it can be at all considered relevant (ABNs didn't exist when the merger occurred!), actually suggests the opposite. JPD (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

JPD, you are being nostalgic about this and it is not helping resolve the factual content of this discussion. I'll wait for The Pope and Pudgey to respond but if we are to ignore the inconsistency re Sydney and focus on the VFL being the all and end all, then that is not going to help. We have an opportunity to clarify a few things here but you don't seem interested. I agree that it would have been an nonesense to include all of PA's cups but the graph was about the 'clubs' rather than the competition. If Pope and Pudgey can come up with something then that will end this tit for tat that you seem to want to continue - and the graphic for Sydney will be split to reflect what actually happened.Tonkatonka 01:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what I am meant to respond to. I have raised factual points, you don't even know when the VFL became the AFL or anything about the South Melbourne relocation and subsequent renaming. ACNs/ABNs etc are pretty much irrelevant as the team did move lock stock and barrel to Sydney. They are not separate teams, they retained all records, history, players etc. It remains that this is an article about the AFL and the timeline shows each club's performance in the AFL, or the VFL as it was known. PAFC's long SANFL history is irrelevant to this timeline - make up a similar timeline for the PAFC article. South Melbourne's is relevant. I think you need to go off and read some football history books and come back in a few months when you understand what really happened. Start with Pascoe's "The Winter Game", then maybe have a read of a few more listed here. The-Pope 04:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that you guys haven't focussed on the intent about the page being about the competition rather than the clubs. The most recent issue has been about whether the Melbourne Swans or whatever they were called, still play in the AFL. Was it just a name change that occurred? No. Did they simply relocate elsewhere? No - although I assume this is where you disagree with me which is fine. However as I said, the SMFC doesn't actually exist any more so but those on nostalgic trips here have outvoted me but that does not make it right. Fact is, SMFC doesn't exist anymore so why can't this be reflected in the graph? As JPD said: "this article is about the competition which started as the VFL in 1897 and became the AFL, not about the clubs that are now in the competition". Although his comment was made for another reason, I trust we are agreed that the AFL page is about the competition, not the clubs - so the case about the name of the graph is now closed. Tonkatonka 06:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Tonkatonka, your comments to me in particular have been utter nonsense. I have not made a single nostalgic statement, and if I have not addressed any particular factual aspect of this discussion, it has been because someone else has already addressed it. The graph was always clearly about the history of the clubs in this particular competition. Some people may not have understood this, if they ignored the context and only looked at the title, but now it has been made even more clear. That is an improvement - trying to make some strange point by extending the PA bar was not. I don't know why you think I want to continue some sort of "tit for tat" - I have simply undone your addition of completely irrelevant material concerning Port Adelaide.

As for the "most recent issue" concerning South Melbourne/Sydney, as I said earlier, this is a completely separate matter. Whether teams playing in this competition before and after 1982 were the same club cannot be linked with whether PA results in another competition before 1997 should be included. The question in the Swans case is whether the move to Sydney is best represented as it is now, by a bar on the timeline for a single club, or by including the Sydney and South Melbourne as separate clubs. There may indeed be a coherent argument for a change, but you have not made it, only referred to irrelevancies like ACNs. The fact is that most sources treate them as the same club, and some even spell out that the SMFC was renamed "Sydney Swans Limited" in 1983, after they had started playing home games in Sydney in 1982 as "The Swans". What exactly are you trying to argue? JPD (talk) 17:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

JPD. You are right in one sense. My comments re nostalgic should not have been directed to you, but Pudgey and The Pope who weren't interested in discussing the matters head on (but failing to demonstrate a knowledge of even where the PAFC is located). Sorry about that being ill-directed but they made targets of themselves and I note they seem to have fallen quiet (perhaps taking their own advice and reading books?). However you are right in your last comment that it would not add value if we were to split the timeline up (even if technically correct to do so) now that the graphs title clarifies the matter - I hope. The relevance to the PAFC issue is one of consistency as it is fundamentally wrong (convenient so) to imply the club didn't exist prior to 97. Fortunately the simple change to the graph has (I think) dispensed with that issue. By the way, I used to be a trainer for the Swans so I should have actually been arguing the opposite.Tonkatonka 03:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, lets finish this... I never got involved in the location arguement, only removed Alberton from the list of AFL grounds. I also never implied they didn't exist prior to 97... but they (and their performance) were basically irrelevant to the AFL before then. I discussed the matter head on by raising the only truely relevant comparison, Rich, Hawthorn, Roos etc in the VFA, whilst you muddied the waters with the Swans move and ABNs, which was all completely irrelevant. I also edited the title to add VFL/AFL Performance, which, as it also shows the wooden spoons, is a better title than the current VFL/AFL premierships. I also, remember was the one who started this discussion here, rather than your rampant editing. I'm going on holiday. See you all in a month. Hopefully the AFL page will continue to improve in correctness, relevant references and structure. Sorry for any direct attacks... lets just make sure we make wikiAFL as good as it can be. The-Pope 03:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries Pope. Hope your trip to the Vatican went well. I don't believe I was rampant. I achieved recognition of the "VFL club" history actually being about the VFL / AFL competition. Unfortunately the listening here was selective (dare I say nostalgic again?) but not beyond reason after considerable convincing. Not worried about the attacks. I had my own as well but all in the same jockular (spelling?) vein.Tonkatonka 15:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

This article should not include information on Footscray, Fitzroy, or South Melbourne prior to the time the AFL was offically defined, and nor should it include any data of any club prior to the official definition of "AFL". Encyclopedic description of these clubs have their proper entry under "VFL," or in the case of Port Adelaide, "SANFL". The "AFL" was created the day the official announcement was made, not before, and it is from that point that this article should take it's historical cue, despite what commentators and others might want to submit or infer. An encyclopedia entry must be more precise than a game commentator or game fan.

The title of this Wiki entry is Australian Football League - not "AFL/VFL" - if you want to have such an entry as "AFL/VFL" submit it, but "Australian Football League" is not the entry for this muddled VFL companion.

[edit] Locations, again

I changed PA's location from Port Adelaide back to Adelaide at the same time as I changed the Melbourne clubs from Hawthorn, St Kilda, etc. back to Melbourne. There may be an argument for more specific locations, but let's at least be consistent. PAFC may be in the suburb of Alberton, the City of Port Adelaide Enfield (is that what you meant in the strange discussion above?), but it is also in the city (not City) of Adelaide. If the table says Alberton for PA, shouldn't it say Moore Park for Sydney, North Carlton for Carlton, Footscray West for the Dogs, Subiaco for WC, Moorabbin for St Kilda, and so on? JPD (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

(Keep in mind that this article is intended for an international audience who may have no idea of where Alberton is. The aim of the Location column is not to be picky about suburb boundaries and exact locations, but to give readers a general idea of how the teams are placed around the country. JPD (talk) 15:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC))

JPD - point taken - I hadn't noticed what locations were used for the other clubs (even if technically incorrect). I will change it back. It was obviously a follow-on point from the above discussion.Tonkatonka 09:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

It has been discussed/changed on several occasions in the distant past, but this seems to be the accepted solution. I think you're pushing it to call it "technically incorrect". As a postal address, "Adelaide" may refer to the area bounded by North Terrace, West Terrace, South Terrace and Hutt St, but in many other contexts, the name refers to the city described in the article Adelaide as having a population of over 1 million. It's quite normal for city names to have meanings dependent on the context in this way. JPD (talk) 11:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Team of the Century - Clubs

It notes under the AFL team of the century that since the naminng of the side, most clubs have nominated their own teams of the century. Is it worth noting that this was started by Collingwood because they had no representatives in the AFL team of the Century (despite being the second most successful club, in terms of premierships)? I just remember the lack of Collingwood players being controversial and the announcement of the Collingwood team of the century was like a 'bugger you' to the AFL. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dgen (talk • contribs) 03:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Second most successful club in the AFL? That would be West Coast Eagles or Adelaide Crows, if the Brisbane Lions are considered first. Collingwood's only won 1 premiership since the commencement of the AFL.

Even though football had been around for over 100 years, the AFL had only been around for about 6 years when this team was named. The only players to have actually participated in the AFL competition were Stephen Silvagni, Gary Ablett Snr and Greg Williams. This team is irrelevent to the AFL, regardless of its history, as that the majority of the named persons didn't even participate in the national competition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chobies (talk • contribs) 21:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:2007AFLToyota.png

Image:2007AFLToyota.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 23:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seven AFL Live

Channel Seven does not not show the game live in Melbourne. Is this because AFL prevents Seven from live screening?

I'm fairly certain Seven would choose to broadcast the games live into Melbourne if the AFL allowed them to. The Sunday AFL starting time of 3:00 is rather strange isn't it?

I know Seven can screen AFL games live from interstate but can anyone clarrify whether Seven can screen games live into Melbourne. Thanks.

only on sell out events, such as Grand Final, Anzac Day, Queens B'day, which weren't on 7 this year because of a rotating agreement with 10

Although its a known fact that Seven don't like live games as it means they can't run as many ads between goals, and therefore can't get as much advertising revenue. Righter than rain 04:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcashm (talk • contribs)

[edit] Brisbane Bears

Could we put put the Bears and Lions into one record please? They are the same club, as the Lions name was picked up after Fitzroy folded in 1996.

Technically, the Brisbane Lions are a joint venture. JPD (talk) 10:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Bears and Lions should be in one record. Fans see them as one team. AFL statistics show them as one team. "technically the Brisbane Lions are a joint venture" is a ridiculous comment and it is irrelevant to the point made by the first poster.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:OldAFL.png

Image:OldAFL.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:VFLLogo.png

Image:VFLLogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:StKildaDesign.svg

Image:StKildaDesign.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Present teams

The map showing the location of the Melbourne clubs is rather silly isnt it? Given most of the clubs have no actually connection to the suburb where they are supposedly based...

--ElZilcho 01:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Disagree, because it is the heritage of the club, and the suburb/town it represents. --Johnson26 19/12/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnson 26 (talk • contribs) 08:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:2007AFLToyota.png

Image:2007AFLToyota.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I was going to revert this edit but thought I would just point it out so that the stats section of the external links can be cleaned out by someone more familiar with them - no need for 3 different sites! -- Chuq (talk) 06:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:AdelaideDesign.png

Image:AdelaideDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:GeelongDesign.png

Image:GeelongDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:StKildaDesign.png

Image:StKildaDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WestCoastDesign.png

Image:WestCoastDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PortAdelaideDesign.png

Image:PortAdelaideDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:RichmondDesign.jpg

Image:RichmondDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SydneyDesign.jpg

Image:SydneyDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SydneyDesign.png

Image:SydneyDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:UniversityDesign.jpg

Image:UniversityDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BrisbaneBearsDesign.png

Image:BrisbaneBearsDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BrisbaneLionsDesign.png

Image:BrisbaneLionsDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CarltonDesign.png

Image:CarltonDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:EssendonDesign.jpg

Image:EssendonDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:EssendonDesign.png

Image:EssendonDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CollingwoodDesign.jpg

Image:CollingwoodDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:FitzroyDesign.jpg

Image:FitzroyDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CollingwoodDesign.png

Image:CollingwoodDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:HawthornDesign.jpg

Image:HawthornDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:HawthornDesign.png

Image:HawthornDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Future section

I understand the need to update the future section now that older plans seem to have bitten the dust and new proposals are being mentioned, but shouldn't it still include details of teams playing in places where there is no current team - this is spreading/cementing the influence of the League, even if there are no specific plans for a permanent team there. JPD (talk) 03:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MelbourneDesign.jpg

Image:MelbourneDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MelbourneDesign.png

Image:MelbourneDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AFL games in the UK

A few years back there was a tradition of playing 1 game of the season in the UK (at Surrey County Cricket Ground) but that seems to have stopped in 2006. Anyone know if this is likely to return? Cheers brob (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

One exhibition match between AFL clubs was played at The Oval after the normal season for quite a few years, but never premiership matches. It depends on how willing clubs are to go and play there after the regular season. JPD (talk) 00:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately this practice seems to have ceased as of 2006. Shame. brob (talk) 23:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:BrisbaneLionsDesign.jpg

The image Image:BrisbaneLionsDesign.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)