Lions Guernsey survey results: An open letter to Malcolm Holmes

[The Flying Belgian]

The analysis of the survey results is excellent and I can't really add more than that. It speaks for itself. It is clear that the club needs to consult members about the design of our playing strip at the earliest possible opportunity.

Phenomenal effort by those involved. The club is lucky to have supporters who care deeply enough to put in so much hard work. It is a resource that the previous administration was simply too arrogant to tap into. A real shame.

Very true. Hats off to those who got this off the ground so quickly and processed equally promptly. Hopefully this demonstrates how passionately people feel on the issue and more importantly how passionate they are about the club.

I look forward to the clubs comment.

 

[Roylion]

Even as Fitzroy though, the guernsey changed several times. Pre-merger, Fitzroy even changed their colours a couple of times. First maroon and yellow, then maroon and blue, and then removing the maroon completely and going red, blue, yellow back in the 70s. Even FFC didn't think their guernsey timeless.

Most changes were fairly minor tweaking.

Major changes were in 1909 when the gold was replaced by blue
An FFC logo was added to the jumper in 1942
The FFC logo was changed to white in 1956 for TV.
The FFC logo was changed to gold in 1974 for colour TV. (Gold was on the Fitzroy jumper from 1884-1908, so it was an old Fitzroy colour anyway) The dark maroon was also lightened.

The Fitzroy lion was on the breast of the jumper from 1968-1982.

RE: the lion - i wasn't aware it had only been in use for 50 years. I thought ex-Roys supporters claim was that it was as old as their club. Would be interested to have seen the opposition it received when it was first brought in.

Virtually none. It was very well received.

Far as I was aware, our loyalty and culture was in the TEAM or the CLUB, not in the logo, the song, the flag, the guernsey, or any other such thing. We could start next season with a plain white strip, no logo, no flag, no team nickname and no song - and we should still support them... that is the point of team culture.

I'm afraid that's not true. The logo, song, the guernsey or whatever is often what binds a supporter to a particular club. For me and many others in Victoria, the link with a Queensland based club is through their Fitzroy identification. The more the Fitzroy identity is diluted in the Lions, the less enthusiasm I feel for a club I have little other personal connection with, given they are two states and thousands of kilometres away. I can't go to training, I can't go to home games, I can't visit the social club for example. Players and officials come and go and I look at them in relation to what they can contribute to the club. If the Lions can't provide me with a meaningful reason to support them, given the reason above, then I'll look elsewhere. My kids will look elsewhere. It might be supporting Fitzroy in the amateurs....and while that isnt the AFL, I can still take some comfort is that they are a local club with a rich history stretching back to 1883. For others it might be adopting a local Melbourne AFL club. IF the Lions want a Melbourne support base (and a Lions director told me recently that they do) then they need to consider this. Their best way of growing a Melbourne base is through the inherently Victorian Fitzroy Football Club.

 

[spotthedog1]

Well, I feel I've said my piece here. I've put forward my opinion, have heard others, some of which I respect... I appreciate your recent comments Roylion - i don't necessarily agree with all of them, but I appreciate that you have argued the case, not just attacked me for having a different opinion. I still don't share your opinion - I don't see a perpetual reason for the sideways facing lion, and still don't think that the club can be reasonably expected to consult members on quite a number of things... But I appreciate yours and others opinions who have argued the case. I'll let you guys continue to draft your open letter to the club. In terms of the original discussion, the playing strip, my vote is for "lets scrap paddlepop, and go something entirely new".

 

[Roylion]

I don't see a perpetual reason for the sideways facing lion, and still don't think that the club can be reasonably expected to consult members on quite a number of things...

They should at least consult the Fitzroy Football Club, who are supposedly the Lions' merger partners. And it's my opinion, that on big decisions that concern the supporters and members, such as club branding, members should be consulted. In fact it's fiscally important to be able to appeal to your market or in the case of Fitzroy supporters in Victoria your potential market.

In terms of the original discussion, the playing strip, my vote is for "lets scrap paddlepop, and go something entirely new".

Do the Lions want a Victorian supporter base or not?

Do you think a significant Melbourne support base is important to the success of the Lions given that many of the home and away games are played in Melbourne as well as finals and the Grand Final? Is it better for the team to have a considerable crowd support, instead of silence when a Lions goal is scored? Is it better for the club that the club have revenue coming into the club from both Brisbane and Melbourne?

Is going for something entirely new going to attract a Melbourne support base? What do the Lions have to offer their Fitzroy / Victorian supporters? If not at least a Fitzroy-ish branding, then they become no more appealing to those Victorian supporters than any other interstate club. I might as well go and support one of my local AFL clubs or reject AFL altogether and put all my money and energies into helping build Fitzroy Football Club into a Victorian football club powerhouse again.

 

[notliondown]

Wow, this thread has gone from something that was going to unify into something that vilifies in a heartbeat. Its such a disappointing thing to see supporters all round on each other, and more to the point that some who are here who are meant to step back in these situations and look at things impartially and ensure that the debate doesn't become attacking or personal cant remove themselves long enough from their own opinions to protect posters who dare disagree.

I've said it before in the other thread and I'll repeat it. I don't like the current strip... nor do I like how it came about. It was the most obvious outward sign of a club torn apart by egos, by exclusion-ism, by a dictatorial attitude that swept all sections of the club from the board down. It was a bad decision, a wrong decision. It ignored history and passion... 2 things the AFL prides itself on.

And yes the poll conducted proves it is decisive. Everyone behind that work last week should be proud... that's the passion and determination that makes the Lions the Lions. It was the efforts of a few that means the debate has any real substance apart from the emotions of fired up BF posters.

But to let the argument that its decisive justify the tone of this thread now, and more importantly let some of the more personal ridicule stand because someone dares differ to the majority is not only pathetic its sad.

Some argue that this is about communication from the club.
Some argue its about consultation from the club.
Some argue that its about the members right to influence decisions made by the club.
Some argue its about logos.
Some argue it about its about Guernseys.

The reality is there is no unified argument in this thread despite some trying to paint it that way.

And should anyone here dare suggest that commercial reality or different priorities within the club should be addressed before this is they are howled down.

Some want Collingwood to be the example. Let me ask you this. When Collingwood resisted with all their corporate might to introduce an alternate strip... an away strip... did they poll their members? Did they conduct surveys? Did they seek outside opinion? Did they bow to the might of the supporter base?? Did they find out if their army might have wanted new merchandise, a new strip?

I don't care that the result would have been status quo. The arguments and criticisms here are that the board didn't ask, didn't listen. They don't care, they do what they think is right blindly without passion or consideration. Well guess what. Thats what boards do. And the most powerful club in the league operates the same way.

Doesn't make it right... but it is how it is. Thats the commercial reality of big business. And as much as we all want footy to still be just footy, its not anymore. Its business. Cut throat ruthless business.

So before we all tear each other apart because someone might disagree with the 5 or 6 disparate arguments that are going on here how about we remember we are all on the same team. We all want the same basic thing first and foremost. A successful, proud club. And that as supporters thats the big picture.

Do what you like as far as memberships go or whatever action you feel appropriate, be proud of your own opinions and passions. But at least have some courtesy and respect for those who are still your Lions brothers and sisters should they dare differ.

Gold Member
10086696

 

[spotthedog1]

Interesting point Roylion. Yes, I'd like us to have Victorian Fans, primarily because i'd like us to have supporters anywhere we play... Melbourne more so because we play more games there than anywhere else outside QLD.

But regardless, I disagree with your assertion. Fitzroy are not the Lions merging partner. Fitzroy were the Bears merging partner, which formed the Brisbane Lions - a joint entity (The Brisbane Bears Fitzroy Football Club). You see yourself as a Fitzroy supporter - a separate entity with an agreement with the Brisbane Lions. That's not the case - the Brisbane Lions are the joint result of the agreement - if you're a Fitzroy supporter, you are a Brisbane Lions supporter... not an associate supporter who gives favour based on what they get in return. I understand your point of view though, and I acknowledge that the Lions have to make an effort to maintain their Victorian supporters. I'm just not sure that I agree on what that should be...

That's my point of view, and that's why i don't think that the Lions had to consult Fitzroy on changing things... because the Lions aren't separate to Fitzroy... when the BBFFC decided to make the changes, in my view, that was the joint Bears and Fitzroy entity making the decision...

 

[Haso]

This thread has perhaps wandered off course a bit, and has moved to a related but off-topic area. There is a time and another place for those arguments, but this thread is not it. Here and here and good examples.

Some argue that this is about communication from the club.
Some argue its about consultation from the club.
Some argue that its about the members right to influence decisions made by the club.
Some argue its about logos.
Some argue it about its about Guernseys.

You are right, notliondown, and i would say that it is mostly the first 3, with elements of the last 2 added.

If I can quote from the 3rd of the opening posts

So the survey data has confirmed what we've long known to be true – the “paddlepop” guernsey is divisive. The question is, what is the Club going to do about it?

Simply, it is time for the Club to publicly commit to a time frame to do what it should have done 3 years ago - to transparently poll its members about the guernsey and heed the results - what it should have done in the first place. We will not be kept in the dark any longer.

For many the "paddlepop" remains a symbol of a dark period in our club's history; a monument to an arrogant and divisive administration. Malcolm, let's treat this wound so that we can all move forward, united, respectful and relentless. Poll us. Heed us. Heal us.

It's as simple as that.

Please people, keep your stories coming, as they are of great interest to me and other posters, and really contribute to the thread. If somebody offers an opinion that differs from your own, please read, consider, take it on it's merits, and understand that by the very nature of our survey results, some people will have a differing opinion to your own.

Go Lions

 

[Brisroy Fitzbane]

Thank you Notiondown and Haso. You are both correct. I appologise for my part in sending this thread off-topic and have self edited some of my previous posts. I get particularly caught up in issues of branding.

At the end of the day, a fair and impartial survey was conducted. The information was collated in an exceptionally professional manner, and some great analysis was added. We wait patiently for a response from the Club's administration on this data. Everything else is somewhat superfluous.

Appologies to Spotthedog1 if I caused any offense. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion - polar from mine that it is. I appreciate your stance.

 

[Roylion]

Interesting point Roylion. Yes, I'd like us to have Victorian Fans, primarily because i'd like us to have supporters anywhere we play... Melbourne more so because we play more games there than anywhere else outside QLD.

OK. So you would agree that it is in the Brisbane Lions' interests to develop a Melbourne supporter base So, how would you do this? In my view is by appealing to their Victorian connections. And that is the Fitzroy Football Club.

But regardless, I disagree with your assertion. Fitzroy are not the Lions merging partner.

Yes they are. Read the Deed of Arrangement carefully. It was Fitzroy that took the Brisbane Lions to the Supreme Court in 2010.

Fitzroy were the Bears merging partner, which formed the Brisbane Lions - a joint entity (The Brisbane Bears Fitzroy Football Club).

That is not correct. Read the Deed, check with ASIC and look at what Associate Justice Nemeer Mukhtar had to say about the merger in 2009 when Fitzroy and Brisbane took the matter to the Supreme Court of Victoria.

That's not the case - the Brisbane Lions are the joint result of the agreement - if you're a Fitzroy supporter, you are a Brisbane Lions supporter... not an associate supporter who gives favour based on what they get in return.

I am a current Fitzroy member and shareholder. That does not make me a Brisbane Lions member and shareholder. They are seperate entities.

I don't think you quite understand the "merger". As I have explained many times before the Brisbane Bears are the Brisbane Lions. Fitzroy Football Club still exists in their own right and plays in Melbourne in the VAFA. Michael Bowers didn't understand it either and he was a lawyer. It took an appearance in the Supreme Court before he understood Fitzroy's real legal status.

The relevant part of the agreement reads as follows:

"Merged Club" means Brisbane Bears which will conduct the combined Club Operations of Fitzroy and Brisbane Bears following the Merger;

The club operations meant 8 players, and essentially some memorabilia which was transferred to the Brisbane Bears.

".....nothing in this Deed will be construed or interpreted to mean that Brisbane Bears will assume any liability for the debts or obligations of Fitzroy or that the Brisbane Bears will have any input in the ongoing management of Fitzroy after the Merger Date."

6. BRISBANE BEARS' CHANGE OF NAME
Brisbane Bears shall arrange for a general meeting to be held at which a special resolution will be proposed to change the company name of Brisbane Bears to Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club Limited and Brisbane Bears shall use its best endeavours to obtain such approval.

Note that this was a meeting of Brisbane Bears members only.

That's my point of view, and that's why i don't think that the Lions had to consult Fitzroy on changing things... because the Lions aren't separate to Fitzroy...

They are. Any court of law will recognise that fact. The Australian and Securiites Investment Commission (ASIC) recognises that fact.

when the BBFFC decided to make the changes, in my view, that was the joint Bears and Fitzroy entity making the decision...

No it wasn't. No Fitzroy Football Club director has ever served on the Brisbane Lions board.

Why do you think the Fitzroy Football Club took court action a couple of years ago? The Brisbane Lions weren't suing themselves.

 

[____]

Back on topic the club should consider wearing the premiership jumper against Collingwood next year (if we get them at home) to commemorate a decade of triple premierships.

(And conveniently wear it in the other 10 home games and all away games where there is no clash).

 

[spotthedog1]

Thanks Brisroy Fitzbane - that's very big of you, and I appreciate it. I'm also sorry for any offence.

Thanks Notliondown too - appreciate the perspective.

Roylion - I've only read part of the agreement, and really can't be bothered reading all of it, but at the end of the day, my opinion, which you are entitled to disagree with, is that agreements are worded to try to achieve an aim... and I try to see the aim, not the wording. I know that's not a legal argument (well, it slightly is in the presence of ambiguity - which given the length of time this has continued, is assumed), but that's still what I try to do as a non-lawyer. I am, however, a business consultant (though I will admit, I don't specialise in M&A), and I could give you an opinion on why they didn't actually dissolve FFC, but it's rather bland and pointless... But my opinion of the aim of the agreement was that if the Bears wanted the players/memorabilia, they could've bought it, or they could've taken it over and amalgamated it. They specifically called it a merger, and specifically tried to bring in elements of Fitzroy, like the mascot, to symbolise the joining of two. I'm aware that FFC still exists, and that really it was only a merge-in of the AFL arm of FFC (or per the wording "the combined club operations of Fitzroy and Brisbane Bears") - I just get the feeling that they weren't intending to take over as much as bring in...

And I agree, the best way to have a Vic supporter base is appealing to the Victorian connections - the ex-Fitzroy Lions fan. How do they do this? You say - keep the lion, exactly as was, on the jumper. I say, putting the Lion in the name (the trading name "Brisbane Lions", not the legal name "BBFFC" - though realistically Fitzroy/Lions is in both) was a bigger offering to the Fitzroy faithful.

As you said before, the Bears worded the agreement, they could've worded it however they liked... And they still chose to recognise Fitzroy in both legal name, and by adopting the Fitzroy mascot, nickname, etc as their own...

 

[Roylion]

I am, however, a business consultant (though I will admit, I don't specialise in M&A), and I could give you an opinion on why they didn't actually dissolve FFC, but it's rather bland and pointless...

The Bears had no power to dissolve the Fitzroy Football Club Ltd. Only the administrator can do that. Once the debts of Fitzroy were paid, the administrator returned control of the club to the elected directors.

But my opinion of the aim of the agreement was that if the Bears wanted the players/memorabilia, they could've bought it, or they could've taken it over and amalgamated it.

No they couldn't have. The club is owned by the shareholders. The only way they could have taken Fitzroy over is to buy enough shares to do so under company law. I know for a fact that the Fitzroy shareholders would not have sold their shares to the Bears back in 1996.

They specifically called it a merger, and specifically tried to bring in elements of Fitzroy, like the mascot, to symbolise the joining of two.

In other words the Brisbane Bears re-branded themselves. And they did so in order to attract more supporters from Victoria, specifically from the Fitzroy faithful.

I'm aware that FFC still exists, and that really it was only a merge-in of the AFL arm of FFC (or per the wording "the combined club operations of Fitzroy and Brisbane Bears") - I just get the feeling that they weren't intending to take over as much as bring in...

From your perspective. Try telling that to the many Fitzroy supporters who saw their club ejected from the AFL in the manner that it was. And even if it was true, wouldn't you try and re-brand your club to appeal to the wider community of Fitzroy supporters, all of who have their own reasons for following the club? Merely using the name "Lions" and adding blue to the colours isn't going to cut it with many supporters. However a greater number of concessions is going to bring more Fitzroy supporters across.

And I agree, the best way to have a Vic supporter base is appealing to the Victorian connections - the ex-Fitzroy Lions fan. How do they do this? You say - keep the lion, exactly as was, on the jumper. I say, putting the Lion in the name (the trading name "Brisbane Lions", not the legal name "BBFFC" - though realistically Fitzroy/Lions is in both) was a bigger offering to the Fitzroy faithful.

Many would disagree with you. There has to be a reason (or reasons) for Victorian supporters to follow a Queensland based club. One change to incorporate Fitzroy's identity isn't going to be enough. When the club plays, trains and is based in Brisbane in terms of its social and corporate functions, there has to be a sense that the "merger" is at least on the face of it reasonably equal. If there's not then people won't have a reason to follow it. I know I certainly wouldn't.

As you said before, the Bears worded the agreement, they could've worded it however they liked... And they still chose to recognise Fitzroy in both legal name, and by adopting the Fitzroy mascot, nickname, etc as their own...

Well they had to didn't they if they wanted any chance of attracting more supporters in Victoria.

So how is this relevant to the guernsey. I know many Queensland based members on here see the guernsey issue from a club consultation with members issue. And that's a fair point to make.

For many down here (not all) that is not the issue. There are many who consider that the Lions decision at the end of 2009 to change the logo and hence the jumper to be a betrayal of what was promised back in 1996. For example I was told in a meeting of about 50 Fitzroy people chaired by Kinnear Beatson in 1997 that the Fitzroy Lion would always be the mascot of the club and that (along with a whole host of other reasons) was why I should now support Brisbane in the AFL as opposed to any other club. Noel Gordon promised the same in another meeting at the Dallas Brooks Hall of Fitzroy supporters. People have long memories. And the bottom line is (as I have said many times before) IF the Lions want to develop a sizeable Victorian supporter base then they must make their club appealing to those supporters, most of whom have a Fitzroy background.

What I'm doing here in this thread is giving another perspective about why the current guernsey (and logo - although that is another issue) is not acceptable to me (and many other Victorian supporters). Yeah consultation with the members is important. Yeah Lions members need to be polled, consulted or whatever. All important.

However seen to be keeping the agreement with Fitzroy and accentuating the Fitzroy connection in the club is also important to many.

 

[spotthedog1]

I have no issue with most of what you've said - yes, it was partially marketing/re-branding. Doesn't negate the fact that they did it, and continue to do stuff regularly, like the Hall of Fame thingo earlier in the year, and the FFC strip this year. And I wouldn't call rebranding the largest identifier of the club (after location) a small gesture. In my opinion, it was quite sizeable. That's fine though - I agree with most of what you've said.

The Bears had no power to dissolve the Fitzroy Football Club Ltd. Only the administrator can do that. Once the debts of Fitzroy were paid, the administrator returned control of the club to the elected directors.

No they couldn't have. The club is owned by the shareholders. The only way they could have taken Fitzroy over is to buy enough shares to do so under company law. I know for a fact that the Fitzroy shareholders would not have sold their shares to the Bears back in 1996.

OK, if you want to keep at this, I'll give you the cliff notes.

There are numerous ways to take over another entity. There are two main ones:
1. Buy the shares of the entity, and assume control of it. This is your assumption when I say 'take over'.
Main advantage - tidy, takes over everything, much easier to deal with. Disadvantages - shareholder approval, assumes the liabilities (present - eg. debts, and future - eg. future legal claims)
2. Reach an agreement with the entity to buy assets and/or specific intangibles.
Main advantages - No assumed company risk, no liabilities, director approval is sufficient (barring ASX listed entities, which must obtain shareholder approval in accordance with the listing rules). Disadvantage - a bit messy, leaves behind another company, need for more complex asset purchase agreements.

That's a bit simplified, but that's the gist of it... Again, I'm not in M&A, so i'm not a specialist at this. They are the two big ones though...

So, when i say "Brisbane Bears could've taken over FFC", I don't mean "buy the shares". There is more than one way to skin a cat (pun unintended, though kinda funny). The club could've reached an agreement with the administrator, stripped FFC of everything, and been done with it... Quite tidily avoiding issues with liabilities, complaints, members, requirement to do anything at all to appease FFC. And the administrator would've been licking his lips to reach such an agreement, just to get rid of future contract liabilities to players.

Now, they did, in a manner, do this, but they did it far more complexly, and with more consideration for Fitzroy, than they ever needed to. They elected not to tamper with Fitzroy's presence in the state league for starters - which i'm sure you're grateful for. Looking that the merger agreement, there are many clauses to give the FFC operation that was merged in a decent weight in the club - things like the merged entity having a minimum number of FFC players on it's inaugural list, and, hmm, adopting the Lion as the logo. Were there marketing benefits? Yes. Did it help maintain a Melbourne supporter base? Yep. But I don't see how that's a problem. Of course the club considered marketing and future income when doing it. What business wouldn't? And yes, the club rebranded, but the Bears could've done a hell of a lot less to achieve a takeover... and no - it's not perfectly equal (how can it be when it's based in Brisbane)... But Mergers don't have to be equal at all, and both can still benefit. Brisbane gets additional fans but gives up it's branded identity, Fitzroy gets to maintain an AFL presence, and see the continuity of the branded identity, both of which otherwise would've been lost completely - even if it's through another club...

And this doesn't relate to the guernsey... I thought you were trying demonstrate how the club betrayed and mistreated its Melbourne based followers... maybe we've just veered massively off topic...

Anyway, I can completely understand the point of those suggesting greater club consultation should've been done... and for this thread, a good survey was done, and quite impressively too, given the lack of resources. Seems to have stated the objectives, and came up with a decent and accurate way of showing that, and polled from a cross-section that is relevant to the decision at hand. Really impressive stuff... Proves beyond argument that the FFC Lion icon is more popular than the paddlepop lion. If this is done again in future, I'd be really interested to see the results based on a third option with neither logo - either a different one, or neither... but obviously, you can't put everything everyone would like to see on one survey, so i can completely understand why this wasn't done... just a future option if something similar is done again...

 

[The Brisbane Beast]

I started passionately following the Brisbane Lions in 1999, after half-heartedly taking an interest in the Brisbane Bears on and off over the previous decade, whilst still building my knowledge of, and love for, the game.

I love my club like nothing else. Am proud of Brisbane's heritage as a Club (even more so after watching Robert Walls at the podium last Friday night).

I am proud that both Brisbane and Fitzroy have managed, via pure passion, to form to create a beautiful, proud club.

Although my father loved both North Melbourne and Fitzroy as I was growing up, I never had the inclination (or reason, previously) to be a 'staunch supporter' of the Fiztroy Football Club.

Being a member of this forum, and the greater Brisbane Lions community, it thrills me to be able to learn the history, and view the pride of such a great club as Fitzroy.

The opinions (and facts) put forward on here by Roylion (and others) have made me take a much deeper interest in the Fitzroy Football Club, and urge me to learn as much as I can about them (and better fact checking).

There's some truly amazing minds on here. And agree or disagree, it's a pleasure to see so much pride and passion from all.

Go Brisbane. Go Fitzroy. Go Lions.

 

[Quigley]

The Lions have released the "new era" caps with the paddlepop on the front.

The hardcore fans are the only ones who would have any interest at this time of year and the timing of the release seems like another deliberate snub by management. Either that or they really have NFI about stakeholder management.

 

[Dylan12]

The hardcore fans are the only ones who would have any interest at this time of year and the timing of the release seems like another deliberate snub by management. Either that or they really have NFI about stakeholder management.

I'm of the opinion that the club just do not give a stuff and are happy to continue to give the middle finger to the club's hardcore fans. I just don't buy that as professionals they have their heads in the sand to the extent that they are not aware of this issue.

As much as I love and support the club and will always purchase a membership, outside of that, they will never see a single dollar of my, or my family and friends money outside of a simple membership.

 

[notting18]

The Lions have released the "new era" caps with the paddlepop on the front.

The hardcore fans are the only ones who would have any interest at this time of year and the timing of the release seems like another deliberate snub by management. Either that or they really have NFI about stakeholder management.

I think you're looking for a fight with this one. The "new era" caps have been in development for quite a while and they're being done for each AFL club across the competition and as such would most likely have to be done using the club's official logo.

The timing of their release would be outside the reach of the Lions' managment.

 

[WheresTheBears]

Why does it seem to me that The Brisbane Lions are just trying to bring back the Fitzroy Lions? More and more I've been noticing less and less of the Bear heritage. Its meant to be a merger not some rehashed Fitzroy club that not only embarrasses the loyal Fitzroy supporters but also the Bear supporters... FFS

 

[Tairy Greene]

Yeah reaching a fair bit with the 'new era' caps there, as Notting18 said they've been in development for a while and the target audience would definitely not be the 'hardcore' fans but the teens & twenty-somethings that sport the American NFL/NHL/MBL new era caps.

 

[Dylan12]

Why does it seem to me that The Brisbane Lions are just trying to bring back the Fitzroy Lions?

Are they?...I've been on board since the birth of the Brisbane Lions in 96 and completely disagree with your statement.

There are many around here, including myself who would love nothing more than to see a Bears inspired strip once a year at the Gabba, not to mention our clash strip being a gold and maroon strip which pays hommage to the Bears (which you will find on the guernsey thread) instead of the white strip.

 

[MICKYCONLAN]

Is it good business to disenfranchise your members? Do you want more supporters in Melbourne or less? The first thing Eddie does when an issue comes up is to ask "How can we look after our members? They are the most important thing" This is how they have built such a massive membership over a long period of time... by respecting (treasuring) their traditions and looking after their supporters and members. It's a slow but sure process. We have a unique opportunity but as yet haven't made the most of it.

 

[Caiphus]

Why does it seem to me that The Brisbane Lions are just trying to bring back the Fitzroy Lions? More and more I've been noticing less and less of the Bear heritage. Its meant to be a merger not some rehashed Fitzroy club that not only embarrasses the loyal Fitzroy supporters but also the Bear supporters... FFS

That's a fair enough point, if the club had consultation with the members and supporters and it came out that was the best idea to get rid of the divisiveness around them many of us would get behind it.

The fact is we are a merged club, that created it's own history as a merged club as well as having two individual clubs histories to look back on. It's impossible to please all the stakeholders all the time, but they should at least try and especially on this one issue that hangs over from the previous administration.

 

[Stocka]

Wow, this thread has gone from something that was going to unify into something that vilifies in a heartbeat. Its such a disappointing thing to see supporters all round on each other, and more to the point that some who are here who are meant to step back in these situations and look at things impartially and ensure that the debate doesn't become attacking or personal cant remove themselves long enough from their own opinions to protect posters who dare disagree.

Having just read the last four pages of the thread, I can't say that I've seen any of this, but rather, I have seen well-reasoned, informative and thought-provoking discussion and debate.

 

[Always a Lion]

Having just read the last four pages of the thread, I can't say that I've seen any of this, but rather, I have seen well-reasoned, informative and thought-provoking discussion and debate.

Yeah I agree, I think the debate has been insightful, robust and informative, and mostly respectful. No one can of should expect that we'll all agree.

Fact is survey clearly shows that we don't all agree. Thats the whole point of surveying, to get a handle of the range of views, and to establish what the majority view is.

There's no change in the survey result. The one thing that we've (seemingly majority view?) said and wanted, is that the club should have and should hence-forward consult us on certain issues, one of which is the jumper, and others which are outlined in the members charter. When the club finally conducts a consultation process on these issues, it'll undoubtably reveal a spread of views, it will not be unanimous, but will reveal the majority view.

 

[alscotoz]

Liverpool and Rangers also do the exact same.

'Rangers'? bad example. they're almost liquidated/extinct/...parrot sketch etc.