Just haven't seen anyone wear with pride since Rioli, so what's the point
So Paul Broderick didn't wear it with pride? Didn't deserve to wear it?
Ooh im sorry i didn't realize Broders was captain? Kane Johnson though gee wiz how inspirational was he with his 20 metre set shot behinds. Please give me a spell
I'm in favour of players wearing 17 but why does it have to be the captain. Its complete BS.
whether your 17 or 70 u should wear the jumper with pride. Enter Steve Morris and Tuck. Those are players i really enjoy watching. Not gifted with talent but give it their all and within the rules not like spud Jackson
Cotch stays at 9. Old school leather face mentality don't need it
Broderick wasn't captain, neither was Rioli
You said that "just haven't seen anyone wear with pride since Rioli" I asked what about Broderick seeing he was player to wear it directly after Rioli.
I asked you a question whether Broderick wore it with pride - a question you still haven't actually answered
FWIW - the concept of having the captain wear number 17 was introduced when Wayne Campbell was captain (his 2nd season IIRC) so around 2004.
The club copped alot of flack in 2002 when Spud gave the number to Paul Hudson; rightly so I might add. So the decision was made that in the future the captain would wear number 17
In all seriousness, Chimp has stated before that nothing would make him prouder than wearing the #17 a few players have.
It's history and symbolism obviously means something to the playing group, even if it doesn't to the ferals, and I guess that's all that really matters.
Agree