I've always hated West Coast.
No, not the club (which I have supported since that very first game against Richmond in 1987), but the name - "West Coast".
More News Videos
- Video duration
- 01:53
Will West Coast play at new stadium
- Video duration
- 01:39
Adam Shand calls out Perth Lord Mayor
- Video duration
- 00:24
Shark Shield fends off shark in Cockburn
- Video duration
- 00:24
Maggot in a cooked chicken
- Video duration
- 01:13
Right wing figure banned from Facebook
- Video duration
- 01:05
Oswals legal win
Will West Coast play at new stadium
The West Coast Eagles have warned fans the move to the new Perth stadium could trigger a price hike for members. Vision: Nine News Perth.
It always seemed so American, which is perhaps no surprise given it was chosen in the lead-up to Fremantle's hosting of our America's Cup defence and at a time when our fascination with US pop culture was really taking off.
And have you ever heard a pro-Eagles crowd at Subiaco Oval chant "West Coast, West Coast, West Coast" or heard an Eagles supporter tell you they barrack for "West Coast"? I haven't.
The obvious choice would have been to call the team the Perth Eagles. And that's exactly what I reckon should happen now, as the club prepares to move in with WAFL club Perth at Lathlain Park.
I know such a suggestion might be unpopular given the Eagles have now been around for 30 years, but things have changed in that time and most of the impediments to using the Perth moniker have been removed.
But let's start with a few reasons that "Perth" would be a good name for the club.
First, it would formalise that century-old rivalry between Perth and Fremantle in the names of our two football clubs.
When footy first started in WA in 1885, there were three clubs – two based in Perth and one in Freo. The prospect of regular Perth versus Fremantle clashes was a big factor in footy winning the battle with rugby (which didn't have a Fremantle team in 1884) for supremacy in WA.
Second, people with no interest in football would actually be able to work out where the club was from.
Consider the names used in elite overseas competitions.
Of the 30 teams in the American National Basketball Association, only one has a name that isn't the proper name of its home city or state – the Golden State Warriors. And how many non-basketball fans know which city they're based in?
It's a similar story in the American National Football League – 32 teams and only one that doesn't fit the rule. Even then, the Carolina Panthers are based in Charlotte, North Carolina (The New England Patriots represent several states that comprise the New England region).
In the English Premier League, it might be difficult for foreigners to identify the home cities of clubs like Everton and Crystal Palace, but Everton is a district of Liverpool and Crystal Palace is a residential area of London.
Which brings me to the AFL itself where only three clubs have names that don't identify a discrete suburb or city as their home – West Coast, the Western Bulldogs and Greater Western Sydney.
And, before you say, "what about Gold Coast?", well, that's actually a single city that covers 57km from top to bottom. Perth alone stretches more than 100km.
The Bulldogs and GWS, meanwhile, are the only clubs in the huge expanses of suburbia to the west of their respective cities (Essendon is more north-west of Melbourne).
Their names were designed to embrace those areas, much as West Coast's probably was back in 1986.
But, like it or not, the Eagles are no longer the only team in WA and they don't represent the entire coastal population, especially the area around the port city.
It's also quite likely that there will one day be another AFL team based in Perth, probably on the coast in the northern suburbs.
It's for these reasons that the Eagles' use of slogans like "The West is Ours" and "The West is United" has made me cringe in the past couple of years, especially when they were getting beaten by Freo.
On the other side of the ledger, there are few reasons (other than cost and a preference for inertia) not to become the Perth Eagles.
The original reasons for using "West Coast" were identified in 1986 when the club was officially launched at a glitzy function at the Merlin Hotel
Everyone present that night was given a portfolio of documents that clearly explained why "Perth" or "Western Australia" had not been used.
"The name 'West Coast' was added to describe WA's territorial situation and to avoid 'Perth', because of the Perth Football Club in the WAFL and 'Western Australia', because of the existing State side," the document said.
"Using 'Western Australia' would have made it difficult for any future national side from WA to be given an appropriate name."
Put simply, these reasons are no longer valid.
The club said the name "Western Australia" wasn't used because a WA team in a future national competition might want to use it. The VFL became that national competition and another WA team has joined, so that's now irrelevant.
And, as much as I hate to admit it as a passionate WAFL supporter and historian, the Eagles can't and don't have the interests of WAFL clubs, like Perth, at heart like they did in 1986.
So, my vote, should club members ever get one, is for the club to change its name to the Perth Eagles.
And my argument might actually be strengthened over the next couple of years as the WAFL's alignment situation comes under review.
There is some possibility that the Eagles players not required for AFL duty will all be sent to play for WAFL club Perth once the Eagles move to Lathlain, rather than East Perth.
Though I'm vehemently against the alignment system, it would mean Perth Eagles players would play for Perth in the WAFL. Such a situation would satisfy many an obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Sean Cowan is a journalism lecturer at Curtin University and has a First Class Honours in sports history.
13 comments
New User? Sign up