I'm not sure anybody said they needed them, rather that they would not of been so successful without them. That was my take on it anyway.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Lions Logo Battle Hits Court
- Thread starter cammo78
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I'm not sure anybody said they needed them, rather that they would not of been so successful without them. That was my take on it anyway.
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,065
- 108,670
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Yeah, I agree.
Would not have won 3 flags without Chris Johnson, Mal Michael (via the Jarrod Molloy trade), Tim Notting (via concession pick from Matthew Primus to Port) and a certain CHF we got from a father/son pick.
absfab
Premiership Player
- Mar 8, 2009
- 3,128
- 83
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Yup.
The Bears had a messy start because the AFL screwed them something shocking on foundation, not through some deep seated inadequacy that good noble Fitzroy somehow magically solved.
The rise of the Lions is all about the AFL belatedly getting the bleeding obvious message that laughing stock interstate clubs were not such a good thing for the game. And taking strong action to repair the damage.
The logo at the time was the north melbourne shield design with a red (I remember it being red, not maroon) kangaroo below royal blue stripes on a white background. The clubs name was to be "Fitzroy-North Melbourne Kangaroos Football Club"
I don't ever recall seeing the propsed jumper.
royboy2
Average Old Bastard
- Dec 7, 2007
- 13,273
- 15,596
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Rabbitohs, Villa, McLaren F1, ENG
There were 3 proposed names :
- Fitzroy-North Melbourne Kangaroos F.C which North rejected as they wanted their name 1st
- North Melbourne - Fitzroy Kangaroos F.C which Fitzroy rejected which the roys rejected as they felt it was uneven to have North Melbourne 1st aswell as the mascot
- And finally North-Fitzroy Kangaroos which both parties agreed on as long as a small lion was located on the left breast
Did it entail having you're board replaced by... who? Your board in boardshorts?
You're right, it's not the time or place. You just couldn't resist slipping it in though, could you?
That is because you blindly hate all things Fitzroy and have no intention of opening your eyes to anything different.
(BTW did you see what the outcome was from the Fitzroy bequest State Trustees battle - remember that thread you hijacked with anti-Fitzroy hysterics http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=652811&highlight=bequest - I'll give you a hint who won http://www.fitzroyfc.com.au/home.html ).
If Fitzroy win, the logo will have to change. Fitzroy got very little out of the merger, but why for one second should they not defend the little that they got?
If the logo must change, Brisbane may voluntarily reverse its jumper change / merchandise branding decisions at the end of this season or in the near future in order to keep all of its branding consistent.
In any case, a win by Fitzroy in the court would also give both Brisbane-based and Melbourne-based Lions members who hate the new jumper a great base to help get rid of the jumper through member resolutions at the 2010 AGM.
And how is Brisbane's Admin going?
All they have done throughout this whole fiasco is weaken the Club they are meant to be running!
I totally agree... but that said, probably the best club with regards to sponsorship, merchandising, marketing etc, West Coast change their jumpers and shade of blue very often so it does show that a change equals money.
Fitzroy have a simple solution - change the logo back to one that incorporates the original Fitzroy Lion - can't get much more simple than that.
You really thought through Brisbane rescinding the merger agreement didn't you - would Brisbane also have to pay back the benefits they gained making the Club completely insolvent (like close to $6m plus interest; and how about putting a value on 3 premierships).
By the way, the Merger Agreement doesn't say 6 Victorian games - it says a minimum of 6 games at the MCG, Waverley or Princess Park - none of those are outside of Melbourne. (And by the way from the outer eastern Melbourne suburbs it takes the same time to drive to Geelong as a flight takes to travel from Melbourne to Brisbane - i.e. around 2 hours).
I suggest you are doing little for the harmony of the Brisbane Lions - most Brisbane based and Melbourne based members and supporters fully embrace the Club, its Fitzroy and Bears heritage, and what it has achieved. That doesn't mean we should roll over on command.
It was a voluntary restraint of trade entered into by Brisbane (who wrote the merger agreement) in order to gain substantial benefits. That in my opinion is absolutely legally binding.
- Moderator
- #112
Certainly Fitzroy, like every amateur VFL club struggling to turn professional made mistakes, mainly overspending in the late 70's. Unlike many of the other clubs, it lacked a geographic area from which to draw a large supporter base. Coupled with a lack of success in the 60's and 70's, its supporter base was smaller than many of the other Victorian clubs.
Whether you acknowledge it or not, Fitzroy was not helped by the AFL, as other Melbourne based clubs, who have since received millions of dollars of funding from the AFL (that doesn't have to be paid back) through the competitive balance fund have since been helped. Indeed in the wake of Port Adelaide's intended entry i 1997 there was a concerted effort from about 1993 by the AFL to freeze out an AFL club, so that the competition could remain at sixteen teams - a policy that has since been admitted to by Graeme Samuel. Fitzroy as the smallest of the Victorian clubs was seen as expendable.
Yes. Very small. And given the amount of success and the poaching of players, such as Roos, Armstrong, Brodeick, Lynch, Osborne and co. it was very difficult to break a cycle of poor onfirld preformances --> leading to less revenue --> leading to further poor on-field performances. That was why, from 1978 onwards Fitzroy considered a number of relocations and mergers (which for various reasons - usually outside Fitzroy's control) fell through. I can provide details of all of these and why they fell through if you like.
Yes, we did, Like many clubs we shared home grounds. Unfortunately usually the other tenant club was well established. Fitzroy was forced to move from the Brunswick Street Oval in 1966 because of the Cricket Club and the Council's refusal to upgrade the change room (despite repeated requests from the football club. Contrast that to the Carlton's council attitude to putting money into to developing Princes Park. In 1984, Fitzroy was forced by the VFL to move from the Junction Oval, where it had established itself, because the ground did not have enough seats. From then on the club was nomadic as it struggled to find an equitable ground sharing arrangement, where the co-tenant already owned the ground, or had established itself at the ground for decades.
I didn't think the Fitzroy Club Hotel was that bad as a social venue. It operated at a profit and was a good social club arrangement just up from the Brunswick Street Oval and not that far from Princes Park.
No, our current home is the Brunswick Street Oval. No home games are played out at Mordialloc.
And the Bears got the home ground (and the 11-12 home games per year), the vast majority of the players, the coach, the majority of the Board who control the club, the social club, the maroon and gold in the Bears jumper. It was supposed to be a merger wasn’t it? Shouldn’t Fitzroy, the other ‘merger partner’, receive something? Clearly the Fitzroy Football Club as a merger partner is unhappy that the merger agreement had been broken and their identity, as a result diluted even more
They added blue to the existing Bears maroon and gold, added "the Fitzroy lion logo" which per the terms of the merger agreement became the official logo of the club "in perpetuity". Then in 2008, they changed the maroon to red for six Victorian games only.
Fitzroy are not asking for more. Fitzroy are asking that the terms of the existing merger agreement be kept. They’re not even opposed to Brisbane re-designing their logo. All they are asking for is that in that ,ogo, Brisbane retain the Fitzroy lion logo.
So's this,
but it isn't "the Fitzroy lion", as stipulated in the merger agreement.
Of course you have. The legal is now inconvenient isn’t it? Let’s not forget here that the Brisbane bears/ Lions imposed that restriction on themselves. They wrote the agreement and with the connivance of the AFL commission and 14 of the 16 clubs forced Fitzroy to sign it.
Oh please. Ask who? The AFL? That’s very unlikely to happen. The AFL sets the draw and they struggle to fit six games in Victoria into the schedule.
They’ve been asked. No interest. Brisbane is primarily looking after its Queensland supporter base.
Hawthorn were indeed fortunate that they had a solid supporter base, courtesy of a few years of success and being based in an area that was the population centre of Melbourne That supporter base rallied around them when they looked set to merge. They were also well compensated for moving from VFL Park.
After being helped by several million dollars of funds from the AFL via the Competitive Balance Fund, they sure have.
I could go through all the attempts Fitzroy made to survive in their own right in the AFL competition and also their attempts to seek a preferred merger with a Melbourne based club that was relatively equal. For a variety of reasons, most of which were out of the control of the club, they weren’t able to affect either.
I thought it was the “Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Lions”.
Players come and go. I barrack for a jumper. I follow the Lions because of its links to the Fitzroy Football Club…no more no less. That would be the same whether they were on top of the ladder or the bottom…it makes little difference to me. If I consider the links to Fitzroy have been diluted to an extent that following a club based in Queensland is not worth it….,.then I will cease my support and do exactly what you advise…follow the Fitzroy Football Club in the VAFA and channel my energies and finances into them.
I have been a North supporter my whole life, and became a Fitzroy member last year so I could support a local footy team.
I feel like more of a Fitzroy supporter than BearLion, which is a bit ****ed up.
I feel like more of a Fitzroy supporter than BearLion, which is a bit ****ed up.
Magic post
Covers all the angles. Fingers crossed we get this sorted and can focus on the main aim - winning games of footy!
royboy2
Average Old Bastard
- Dec 7, 2007
- 13,273
- 15,596
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Rabbitohs, Villa, McLaren F1, ENG
Cheers for that
Do you know why the kangaroo was red and not maroon? As far as I am aware, fitzroy's 'official' colours were Maroon and Blue.
Fitzroy changed from maroon to red with the introduction of color tv, but kept the song as "maroon & blue". The Brisbane lions chose to go with maroon as it was Fitzroys & Queensland's traditional color.
This whole thing is a slap in the face of those that chose to stick with the Brisbane Lions. I never understood how as a club they could decide to merge with us but accepted that some administrator told them to follow Brisbane because he decided to sell the club to them.
The whole merger was a hatchet job conspired by the AFL who gave us their "expert" advice to not agree to pay Nauru the full amount because we were not legally obliged to while at the same time working with Brisbane to get a deal in place. Add in some paranoia about some execs losing positions, which would have to occur with two teams merging and you have an A-Class derailment.
The problem is, it is not a business venture to supporters. I don't understand how so many people bought the con job and it has been a con job which has lived past it's use-by date and they now they wish to ditch the baggage. Hell, they even tried to snatch a small bequest to Fitzroy which shows how much they think of them. Their legal fees would have worth more than the bequest. They just want Fitzroy to die.
The whole merger was a hatchet job conspired by the AFL who gave us their "expert" advice to not agree to pay Nauru the full amount because we were not legally obliged to while at the same time working with Brisbane to get a deal in place. Add in some paranoia about some execs losing positions, which would have to occur with two teams merging and you have an A-Class derailment.
The problem is, it is not a business venture to supporters. I don't understand how so many people bought the con job and it has been a con job which has lived past it's use-by date and they now they wish to ditch the baggage. Hell, they even tried to snatch a small bequest to Fitzroy which shows how much they think of them. Their legal fees would have worth more than the bequest. They just want Fitzroy to die.
The Eagles weren't set up as a marketing exercise. They were primarily set up because greedy clubs such as yours had sucked the guts out of the local league.
In the year before the Eagles formed 37 WAFL players were taken by VFL teams. Thats basically 2 starting teams out of a 8 team competition.
I'm tired and sick of listening to ignorant Vics moaning about the interstate teams wrecked their suburban footy and traditions, completely oblivious to the fact that VFL teams had basically bankrupted themselves and in the process wrecked every other major Suburban comp in the country.
The only way West Australians could watch quality football was to join the Vfl.
Believe me there are plenty of West Aussies who wish they had their old comp back instead of the second rate skeleton of a league we have now.
If I could go back in time, I'd like it to be about 1983. Inter State footy was great, the WAFL and the SANFL were going great guns, hell even Fitzroy were a good side under Wallsy.
The damage done to these comps and grass roots footy has been horrendous, however the AFL tell us things have never been better.
I'm not sure what should have been done differently but I would have preferred more options other than the "strategic reasons" of the Brisbane / Fitzroy merger. Having managed to accept and embrace it, I am like most people disappointed with the direction of the club regarding the Fizroy aspect under the cyrrent administration and there petty attempts to justify there ill conceived plans.
- Moderator
- #119
I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to here.
The directors of Fitzroy were bound, and continue to be bound, by the decisions of the administrator, once he was appointed to recover Nauru's debt. It was the administrator that signed the merger agreement with Brisbane in place of the directors of the company.
Yep. Had the administrator not been appointed, then the Fitzroy merger with North Melbourne, almost certainly would have proceeded. Fitzroy's shareholders had already approved and North didn't need to go to their members.
Many, including myself, wanted to support an AFL team that had a Fitzroy identity - colours, lion logo etc. And Brisbane have, up to this point, done a pretty good job in preserving the Fitzroy identity in the AFL. There's certainly no other AFL club that had enough of a Fitzroy identity that I would have supported in preference to the Lions.
I'm not sure they want Fitzroy to die. Fitzroy won't die - not as long as the company exists and fields teams, as Fitzroy currently do. What the Lions don't want, or care about, is observing the terms of the merger agreement that have become inconvenient - despite the fact (as I have already said several times), they originally wrote the agreement.
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,065
- 108,670
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
I am disgusted with some of the recent actions of the club, but as for "trying to snatch a bequest"... that situation played out so differently to the way the media and Fitzroy portrayed it.
I was very satisfied with the explanation I received from the Lions in regard to this.
They didn't try to snatch anything. It was a ****up by the estates department if anything.
I'd suggest getting a better detail of the facts in the future, especially if you are using that as evidence to back an inflammatory statement such as "they want Fitzroy to die".
I also laugh at the suggestion that North Melbourne were going to be careful custodians of the Fitzroy legacy. Just like the Bears, there was pure self-interest at the heart of North Melbourne's proposal. Some of the stuff they wanted as part of the agreement was just ludicrous.
shintemaster
Brownlow Medallist
Did it entail having you're board replaced by... who? Your board in boardshorts?
You're right, it's not the time or place. You just couldn't resist slipping it in though, could you?
In what world is the board the key defining attribute of a member based club?
On topic. I must be missing something. It seems a fairly clear cut element of the merger agreement. Considering that it's not corporate entity I'm not sure how successful the club would be in arguing that it affects their ongoing ability to trade...
As another side issue, you can't help but wonder how exactly this will endear the club to Melbourne based supporters who are still a reasonable chunk of the membership. The attitude of the club tells exactly what they mean - $$$$, and that's about it.
Here is my 2 cents on this issue.
Times move on and with that so must businesses, which is what the Brisbane Lions are, a business. Obviously the Brisbane board think that the old logo and jumper where a little out of date and decided to change it to a more modern version. You would think a major part of this is to appeal to the younger generation rather then the generation which supported Fitzroy. The new logo, "Paddle Pop Lion", will very much do this imo, it combines the lions and the paddle pop symbol which for kids would be very appealing.
To say that a bunch of older supporters are not happy with a club and buisness trying to move forward is in my books wrong. If you even remotely cared about what is happening with the club NOW and in its FUTURE you would let the club move on to doing what it does best.
Fitzroy played a large part in the history of AFL/VFL however that history is now over and dead so why this fuss is happening to me is wrong and just a money grabbing scheme. I know they openly said it was not about money but think of all the publicity they have received out of this.
Even if this fails it WILL change if now now in 10 - 15 years time when the people making a fuss are long gone and most sentimental connections are gone.
Times move on and with that so must businesses, which is what the Brisbane Lions are, a business. Obviously the Brisbane board think that the old logo and jumper where a little out of date and decided to change it to a more modern version. You would think a major part of this is to appeal to the younger generation rather then the generation which supported Fitzroy. The new logo, "Paddle Pop Lion", will very much do this imo, it combines the lions and the paddle pop symbol which for kids would be very appealing.
To say that a bunch of older supporters are not happy with a club and buisness trying to move forward is in my books wrong. If you even remotely cared about what is happening with the club NOW and in its FUTURE you would let the club move on to doing what it does best.
Fitzroy played a large part in the history of AFL/VFL however that history is now over and dead so why this fuss is happening to me is wrong and just a money grabbing scheme. I know they openly said it was not about money but think of all the publicity they have received out of this.
Even if this fails it WILL change if now now in 10 - 15 years time when the people making a fuss are long gone and most sentimental connections are gone.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
What nonsense.
I blindy hate people that cry over spilt milk (30 years too late) and especially people that take no responsiblity for their actions. Yeah, people like Dyson Hore Lacy. All blame and no responsibility.
Again, utter nonsense. There's one person indulging in hysterics here and it aint me.
Think you'll find that what happened in that case was along the lines of what I speculated.
This whole paranoia over poor-old Fitzroy is rather pathetic.
What's that goal here? Helping Brisbane or helping Fitzroy?
Fitzroy supporters that embraced Brisbane, embraced a living, breating entity. One that would ultimately need to evolve to become successful in the market they were based. IMO debating over logos is like St Kilda supporters wanting to bring back the 80's stickman.
Romanticism is nice but respecting the past doesn't mean you have to live in it.
For Fitzroy supporters that didn't embrace Brisbane, frankly they shouldn't even have a voice in the running of Brisbane. Sure we're all entitled to our opinions, I just think it's ridiculous to expect Brisbane to run their club in the interests of people that don't even support the club!
What I find even more ludicrous is the anti-Brisbane/pro-Fitzroy mentality adopted by many Brisbane supporters. Hell, post something pro-Birsbane/anti-Fitzroy on the BRISBANE board and you get carded!
I understand Brisbane supporters not liking the jumper change. Happens with any team that changes their jumper. No problem, go hard complaining to the club. I suspect most though couldn't give a continental about the logo - they just want the old jumper back. Jumping onto Fitzroy's case because of that when that has nothing to do with the jumper seems pretty stupid and pretty self defeating.
- Oct 29, 2009
- 230
- 2
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Fitzroy
From what I understand Fitzroy simply want their lion to be used on official documents as the symbol of the club, a view I personally agree with. Brisbane choosing to change the logo on the jumper and other merchandise seems reasonable because they are a business as stated previously in this thread, and this is their way of 'selling the brand'.
I don't know enough about either sides arguments but I think for Brisbane to continue with the 'paddle-pop lion' on merchandise and use the 'Fitzroy lion' on official documents would be a reasonable compromise for both sides, upholding the original merger agreement while still allowing Brisbane to grow as a business.
I don't know enough about either sides arguments but I think for Brisbane to continue with the 'paddle-pop lion' on merchandise and use the 'Fitzroy lion' on official documents would be a reasonable compromise for both sides, upholding the original merger agreement while still allowing Brisbane to grow as a business.
