This is a follow-up on my whinge about the trashing of tradition by our rugby provinces — removing collars from jerseys and throwing out traditional colours.
Had the five Super franchises been playing each other in 1995, the year before professionalism, this is how their outfits would have looked.
QUEENSLAND
Jersey: Maroon with White collar and number
Shorts: Navy Blue
Sox: Maroon with twin White bands on fold
NEW SOUTH WALES
Jersey: Sky Blue with Navy Blue collar and number
Shorts: Navy Blue
Sox: Navy Blue with Sky Blue fold
ACT
Jersey: Royal Blue and Yellow hoops with White collar and number
Shorts: Royal Blue (perhaps Black)
Sox: Royal Blue with Yellow fold
VICTORIA
Jersey: Navy Blue with White collar and number
Shorts: Navy Blue
Sox: Navy Blue with White fold, or twin white bands on fold
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Jersey: Yellow with Black collar and number
Shorts: Black
Sox: Black with single Black band on Yellow fold
Compare this with what we have today.
Queensland used to wear Maroon, not Red. WA wore Yellow, not Pale Blue. Victoria had a ‘block’ Navy Blue jersey instead of the current ‘stripes’. And ACT’s colours were Royal Blue and Yellow.
Each uniform was distinctive, and not requiring an alternate uniform in case of colour “clashes”.
Today, apart from Queensland’s garish Red, the other four provinces all have variations of blue, from ACT & VIctoria’s Dark Blues to NSW & WA’s Light Blues.
And what if South Australia was thrown into the mix?
They have the potential for the most attractive jersey. While there have been many variations of their jersey, my favourite was a similarity with the traditional Northampton (Eng) jersey, as follows.
SOUTH AUSTRALIA
Jersey: Broad Red and Navy Blue hoops broken by narrow Yellow bands with White collar and number
Shorts: Navy Blue
Sox: Red with single Yellow and Navy Blue band on fold
I know there are more important issues around, but I can’t help but feel what we are witnessing today is not an improvement on the past.
I can accept the changes to the ACT and Victorian uniforms, but not Queensland and WA. Not to mention the disappearance of the collars!
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Rugby Union, Super Rugby 2011
February 16th 2010 @ 11:44am
sheek said | February 16th 2010 @ 11:44am | Report comment
DST,
The baseball commissioners in US MLB seem to understand all about history & tradition & what drives the emotions of fans. I read an article some years ago, & deeply regret not keeping it. It would have been something worth quoting from on a regular basis.
Basically, the MLB had grown to 32 franchises, & the commissioners said it was incumbent upon them to keep those 32 franchises going at all costs. While moving a franchise from one city to another might not appear ideal, at least the team, it’s nickname, colours, & record against other teams dating back 50, or 100 years, is preserved.
History & tradition give us a reference point. We remember the great clashes in the past between specific teams. Look at all the excitement generated last year in rugby league by the re-emergence of Canterbury-Bankstown & Parramatta. The annual pre-season Charity Shield match preserves for posterity the legendary clashes between St.George & South Sydney.
MLB & NFL also retain the traditional look of their uniforms despite accepting the latest in technological advancements. Advertising is kept to a minimum, & it appears there is codification of how the uniforms are designed to look, where logos can be placed, amount of advertising, etc.
In Australian rugby, it appears to be “Rafferty’s Rules”. Whatever can be flogged off to make a buck, is being flogged off, without any thought to tradition & history. Or apparently, what the majority of fans want & feel……….
It disappoints me, even disgusts me, that the ARU & our rugby provincial teams would treat their own history & traditions so trivially.
February 16th 2010 @ 4:48pm
soapit said | February 16th 2010 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
the problem is that rugby was “traditionally” a pretty small game in australia and so the numbers of “traditional” fans are small compared to the numbers of fans that the ARU hopes to attract to compete with AFL, league, soccer so these “potential fans” will carry more sway then the “traditional “fans.
whether or not its been wise is a matter of debate as rugby has stopped attracting the “potential” fans and alienated the “traditional fans”. maybe they tried to grow too fast and should have consolodated the existing fanbase a bit more.
February 16th 2010 @ 5:42pm
sheek said | February 16th 2010 @ 5:42pm | Report comment
Soapit,
What has happened with some aspects of Australian rugby, is totally unnecessary. That’s my grief.
With respect to the thrust of my post – unseemly changes to the tradition of jersey design & state colours – the ARU & various state unions could still have gone out to the market place without, for want of a better word/phrase, prostituting themselves.
I guess Kerry Packer was right after all – we’re all harlots of one kind or another……….
February 16th 2010 @ 8:31pm
Dan said | February 16th 2010 @ 8:31pm | Report comment
Would people please stop whining about the loss of the collar in Rugby jerseys? The collar is an anachronism of the amateur days, a hang over from the game’s school boy beginnings that was once also worn by soccer players too. I’m sure there’s a video somewhere that has done the rounds of all the major Rugby board rooms showing a montage of players being tackled by their collars. This was always going to happen, and in 30 years time no one will ever even remember that Rugby teams had collars.
February 17th 2010 @ 7:38am
sheek said | February 17th 2010 @ 7:38am | Report comment
Dan,
Shame, shame on you – give yourself an uppercut. No, keep going until you knock yourself out…..
Such heresy!
February 17th 2010 @ 9:53am
Dan said | February 17th 2010 @ 9:53am | Report comment
All I’m advocating is a little less romance in favour of some good ol’ pragmatism. You can either sit there whining about “the good ol’ days”, or accept that times change. No collars equal one less thing for a tackler to grab onto and thus ever so slightly increases a players chance of evading a tackle. The poms were the first to do this with their nike jerseys in 2003 (along with the boks and frogs) and half the unions made fun of them. Now look what’s happened: ALL the major unions have done away with the collar! As I said, this was always going to happen.
February 17th 2010 @ 10:45am
sheek said | February 17th 2010 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Dan,
How old are – 15? (And if so, why aren’t you at school)!
Young folk have no appreciation of tradition simply because they haven’t been around long enough to care enough.
So, with your special powers to see into the future (“this was always going to happen”) could you please tell me who’s going to win the Melbourne Cup this year (150th running)???
February 17th 2010 @ 6:04pm
Dan said | February 17th 2010 @ 6:04pm | Report comment
I’m 28 and while I like tradition as much as the next bloke, I also rather enjoy being realistic
. What good will this complaining do exactly? It’s worth remembering we actually tried to persist with a form of collar (the 2005 jersey), but in the end the global trend sent the thing packing. So it hasn’t been through a desire to “ditch tradition” that the thing has gone, it’s a simple percentages game, and the data must have fallen on the wrong side of the collar-fetishes.
If anything it’s because I’ve been around long enough to remember any number of changes in the game that this all sounds a tad trite to me… every time the slightest thing changes you hear fans yell “bloody murder” as if it signalled the death-knell of the sport. But low and behold a few years later no one can remember what the fuss was about. Remember, we’re not even talking about the game itself here either, just a bloody collar. The colour scheme hasn’t changed. It’s not like they were going to dress the wallabies in purple and red…
February 17th 2010 @ 8:32pm
sheek said | February 17th 2010 @ 8:32pm | Report comment
Ahh Dan,
I can laugh at myself & not take myself too seriously. I might go on about collars, but at the end of the day I can’t control what happens all by myself.
I’ll continue to have my dig about non-collars, but I know it’s a useless battle.
Of course, on a serious note, why are we in such a hurry to embrace the future, or reckless change for its own sake?
I’ve just read that in the UK employees can’t advertise for ‘competent’ staff in case they offend incompetent applicants!
If this is an example of the kind of world we’re evolving into, then I’ll happily continue my rage against collarless jerseys!!!
February 17th 2010 @ 8:50pm
Dan said | February 17th 2010 @ 8:50pm | Report comment
Fair enough sheek, this site is all about airing gripes I suppose.
.
Though to be honest I’d argue that the future you speak of is more of the “collared” variety than non-collared in so far as the argument to keep collars is much like that of not using the word competent: it is aimed at protecting people’s “feelings”. The brutal utility seeking perspective has no time for kind language (or pointless collars) on the other hand. If you follow me
February 16th 2010 @ 10:05pm
mtngry said | February 16th 2010 @ 10:05pm | Report comment
I still can’t get excited about any Jersey I couldn’t comfortably where off the Field.
Big fan of NSW coutnry Jersey, Gold and Black.
February 17th 2010 @ 8:20am
vinay verma said | February 17th 2010 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Sheek,the concept of tradition has been diluted over the years and as you rightly point out usurped by money-centric objectives. Team sports like Hockey,Cricket and dare I say Rugby were invented and nourished by the British for a variety of reasons. The chief reason being the need to inculcate a common goal and following on,discipline and fair play. Hockey was largely propogated by the British Armed Forces as a means of firstly a diversion and then to reinforce the shared objectives of a a Military power. Sport in times of war has been a unifying and rallying point. The cricket tours after the second WW did much to salve the pain in the UK and the subcontinent. This was about tradition and a weakening of tradition ..whether it be a rugby jersey or the flag or sense of fairplay will ultimately erode the strength,at least moral strength,of a nation.
We forsake traditon too easily and without heeding the wider ramifications. Not all tradition is good but sporting tradition like jumpers and sportsmanship are significant and need to be preserved. Lest someone jump in and claim “modernity” and globalisation as a catchcry I would suggest they think it through because most do not understand the value till it has been lost. Sporting bodies like Cricket and Rugby,both codes,need to be careful as to the logos displayed on the jersey and logos on their other literature and memorabilia.
February 17th 2010 @ 9:03am
chris said | February 17th 2010 @ 9:03am | Report comment
I can not see many former forwards with a beer cut buying these awful tight jerseys for both Rugby codes.
Surely sales must be down.
February 17th 2010 @ 9:27am
Gatesy said | February 17th 2010 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Chris, there are some forms of footy where a beer gut is a badge of honour!!
February 17th 2010 @ 9:56am
Tragic said | February 17th 2010 @ 9:56am | Report comment
I can understand the material and shape of the jersey changing, even the collar going is fine by me. But the colour and the basic graphic design principles such as logos really ought to remain. AFL is the code in Australia that has got it right. Over time the material and sleeves have altered/disappeared, but the the general look to the jersey has remained intact, leading to strong and identifiable branding and authenticity. The rugby jerseys of today look like F1 racing cars with their overblown complexity.
I understand the code’s desire to attract new followers to it by trying to jazz-up and make contemporary the look of the sport, but who’s going to latch onto something fickle and continuously shifting and pandering to the masses? It’s pathetic.
February 17th 2010 @ 11:37am
cookie said | February 17th 2010 @ 11:37am | Report comment
Seeing that Rugby is supposedly at it’s lowest point… perhaps administration should take note that they they are not delivering what the public want….
I suspect not… what will happen is that the marketing team will be hired and they will say the more colour and bullshit will fix your problem…
Don’t they understand we are not like league or basketball? Do they not understand nobody is interested in horseshit…
I want to watch the rugby peacefully with a few beers not be lambasted with crap all night! I can go to the league for that!
February 19th 2010 @ 4:03am
Matt Manley said | February 19th 2010 @ 4:03am | Report comment
The best thing about the England jersey against Wales was that is still had all the latest technology in the kit. You couldn’t tell, but it had the grip-dots on it. The shirts where formfitting as well. I started playing just before cotton we replaced and I don’t think people remember how heavy those damn things could get!
Technology doesn’t have to look space-age, but too often designers want to make the shirt look as advanced as its functionality.
Don’t worry folks, retro kits will trickle down to rugby in time. Rugby is just behind when it comes to doing anything modern, but we eventually catchup.