why aren't Fitzroy's premierships considered part of Brisbane Lions history?

[Heardy_101]

Do the Swans still carry the words SMFC on the back of their jumper?

I believe so. Happy to be corrected.

 

[Heardy_101]

In the words of George Constanza…

“It’s not a lie, if you believe it.”

Keep on cut and pasting.

What's the lie?

 

[Foxx]

What's the lie?

Calling it a merger.

 

[Heardy_101]

Calling it a merger.

Well, that. But I feel like they were inferring something else.

 

[Taper]

South Melbourne aren't gone, they changed their name to Sydney Swans. It was a literal relocation of a club. Show me where South Melbourne folded?

Fitzroy may no longer be a VFL/AFL club, but they are still very much alive albeit in an amateur competition.

I'll use North Sydney - and Glebe - as an example.

North Sydney Bears still exist as a club in a different competition. And yet using your logic (and the logic of old mate) they are dead, because they are no longer in the NRL and the Northern Eagles merger broke down.

Same with Glebe. Glebe are actually still playing in one of the NSW competitions, and yet they're the same club that once completed in the NSWRL. Again using the above logic they're gone.

What about Port Power and Port Magpies?
One club or two clubs?
I know one was founded in 1870 and the other in 1997.

 

[Heardy_101]

What about Port Power and Port Magpies?
One club or two clubs?
I know one was founded in 1870 and the other in 1997.

Yep, you're right.

Port Adelaide were established in 1870.

In 1996/1997 we left the SANFL to join the AFL. Yes, this included a change of nickname, colours, jumper and song. But we were still Port Adelaide.

To "replace" us in the SANFL, a "new" club was established - the Port Adelaide Magpies FC which was not the same. They were even forced to play out of Ethelton for a while (down the road form Alberton). In 2010 the two clubs merged under the One Club banner (probably more of a takeover as the original Port Adelaide club absorbed the SANFL club).

So yes. One was formed in 1870 and one was formed in 1996.

But how is that even relevant to this topic? How is it relevant to the Brisbane vs Fitzroy argument?

Or are you here purely to troll like that St Kilda idiot?

 

[GoldbergsGold]

I think it's disingenuous to compare 1 company rebranding such as the Western Bulldogs with 2 companies merging to form a new company. The Brisbane Lions are a different entity from The Brisbane Bears and Fitzroy, Brisbane took a lot from Fitzroy, it's not the same as The Bears even if it's at the same location, they trademarked and identified as a different company. Happens all the time in the corporate world companies merge and form a new company at the same location.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

What about Port Power and Port Magpies?
One club or two clubs?
I know one was founded in 1870 and the other in 1997.

Power are Port Adelaide Football Club who got an AFL license in 1994, and they weren't even going to play in The SANFL in 1997, they threw together quickly a composite club called the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club before 1997, which was absorbed by Port Adelaide Football Club in 2010.

 

[Roylion]

I think it's disingenuous to compare 1 company rebranding such as the Western Bulldogs with 2 companies merging to form a new company.

That didn't happen.

The Brisbane Lions are a different entity from The Brisbane Bears

No.

and Fitzroy,

Yes.

Brisbane took a lot from Fitzroy,

Rebranding with AFL-owned IP with some AFL concessions.

it's not the same as The Bears even if it's at the same location,

Same club rebranded.

they trademarked and identified as a different company.

No. Same company.

Happens all the time in the corporate world companies merge and form a new company at the same location.

Except that didn't happen.

 

[Taper]

That didn't happen.


No.


Yes.


Rebranding with AFL-owned IP with some AFL concessions.


Same club rebranded.


No. Same company.


Except that didn't happen.

How is it different to what happened with Wests Tigers, who are a different entity to Balmain Tigers and Western Suburbs Magpies?

 

[Roylion]

How is it different to what happened with Wests Tigers, who are a different entity to Balmain Tigers and Western Suburbs Magpies?

Brisbane Bears and the Brisbane Lions are the same entity. Formed 1986. First competed in the VFL-AFL in 1987. The Bears rebranded. Much the same as the VFL rebranding to the AFL.

 

[Cyclops]

Brisbane Bears and the Brisbane Lions are the same entity. Formed 1986. First competed in the VFL-AFL in 1987. The Bears rebranded. Much the same as the VFL rebranding to the AFL.

It's a painful subject, and the AFL treated both clubs poorly. I know Fitzroy got booted but the way Brisbane were set up and run around was horrible too.

To their credit Brisbane waded out if the morass of their (entirely unfair and underresourced) establishment and made finals despite the enormous #VICBIAS of the era.

Then they got more or less forced to rebrand, still managed to honour Fitzroy and won 3 flags. Not bad.

I hope they win this year, it's one for the old Bears and Roys.

I say this with no love for Fitzroy, they were the first superpower in the League, and they hated Collingwood more than we hate anyone : they were our nemesis back when Carlton were our friends and brothers.

However what's right is right, and it would be justice. Also I had a beaut neighbour, old Don Lewis in Northcote. He was a dyed in the wool Roy, but was happy to name Phil Carman as the best player ever. I was happy for Don when Brisbane mashed us back in 02/03, there wasn't much else to be happy about.

 

[Roylion]

Then they got more or less forced to rebrand, still managed to honour Fitzroy and won 3 flags. Not bad.

The Bears weren't forced to rebrand. They actively chased a merger with Fitzroy since at least 1994 and again actively pursued a merger in 1996 to the exclusion of North Melbourne. In the end they couldn't get the Fitzroy board's agreement, but as Fitzroy were expelled from the AFL competition were able to rebrand with AFL owned IP. For example the Fitzroy Lion logo was owned by the AFL, not the Fitzroy Football Club.

 

[Cyclops]

The Bears weren't forced to rebrand. They actively chased a merger with Fitzroy since at least 1994 and again actively pursued a merger in 1996 to the exclusion of North Melbourne. In the end they couldn't get the Fitzroy board's agreement, but as Fitzroy were expelled from the AFL competition were able to rebrand with AFL owned IP. For example the Fitzroy Lion logo was owned by the AFL, not the Fitzroy Football Club.

Thanks for the correction, good to have my ignorance remedied.

I had mistakenly thought Brisbane were somewhat unwilling partners in what went down.

I think Fitzroy was the first club to notch up 4 or 6 flags? They were"flag tally leaders " for a stretch before the Pies gallumphed to the top.

Likewise Brisbane this century set the early running. I was hoping for a repeat of Pies 1920s dominance in the 2020s, that might not pan out.

 

[Heardy_101]

How is it different to what happened with Wests Tigers, who are a different entity to Balmain Tigers and Western Suburbs Magpies?

The Wests Tigers are a Joint Venture, not a merger. Basically the two clubs still exist but run the JV from behind the scenes.

My local Aussie rules club runs the exact same way.

 

[Heardy_101]

The Wests Tigers are a Joint Venture, not a merger. Basically the two clubs still exist but run the JV from behind the scenes.

My local Aussie rules club runs the exact same way.

Further to this:

Same as when Manly and North Sydney "merged" (again, "Joint Venture") to form the Northern Eagles. When the JV failed, North Sydney got the raw end of the stick and Manly went back to being Manly.

St George Illawarra is the same, although I suspect many down the South Coast weren't happy as the club is still mainly based in Sydney (should've been a requirement to be based down the South Coast full time, but anyways).

As for my local club (BSR Tigers, SA Mid North)...

It's comprised of Gulnare - Redhill, Brinkworth - Yacka and Spalding.

Gulnare - Redhill lease and manage the Redhill clubrooms (I think they still lease and manage the Gulnare facilities as well however they are disused). BY lease and manage Brinkworth Oval, and Spalding manage Spalding.

Whenever you pay at the gate etc it comes up as separate clubs.

Each club pays a % to fund and run the BSR Tigers, while keeping a % for themselves. BSR have their own committee etc, and the three clubs have separate committees of their own.

In "theory", this could mean that, should any of the three clubs ever have enough numbers to go it alone again, they could (not that it'll happen anytime soon, if at all).

 

[Taper]

Brisbane Bears and the Brisbane Lions are the same entity. Formed 1986. First competed in the VFL-AFL in 1987. The Bears rebranded. Much the same as the VFL rebranding to the AFL.

The records on AFL tables have three separate entities:

• Fitzroy
• Brisbane Bears
• Brisbane Lions

Similar to the records on NRL tables which have:

• Balmain Tigers
• Western Suburbs Magpies
• Wests Tigers

I know you say it's a rebrand, but a rebrand is something like Footscray changing their name to Western Bulldogs.

 

[Roylion]

The records on AFL tables have three separate entities:

• Fitzroy
• Brisbane Bears
• Brisbane Lions

Is 'AFL tables' run by the AFL? Or it is a fan site?

The AFL itself count the Bears and Brisbane Lions records as one club.

The AFL want to market what happened in 1996 as a merger. It wasn't.

I know you say it's a rebrand, but a rebrand is something like Footscray changing their name to Western Bulldogs.

The Brisbane Bears changed their name to the Brisbane Lions. It was a rebrand. I've gone through elsewhere the extensive evidence for this.

 

[mikey127]

The Bears weren't forced to rebrand. They actively chased a merger with Fitzroy since at least 1994 and again actively pursued a merger in 1996 to the exclusion of North Melbourne. In the end they couldn't get the Fitzroy board's agreement, but as Fitzroy were expelled from the AFL competition were able to rebrand with AFL owned IP. For example the Fitzroy Lion logo was owned by the AFL, not the Fitzroy Football Club.

What I would say is not all Bears were happy about the merger. I remember sitting out at Waverley in 1997 during the last quarter of the final against St Kilda and as a dissapoining first season of the Lions was coming to an end some Bears supporters behind me were saying 'this merger should never have happened should have been the good old Bears.

I also met other Bears fans in the first few years of the Lions that felt the same way.

To paraphrase Bruce McAvanwy in the 2001 GF it felt like that week there was a coming together of the Lions of Fitzroy and the Lions of Brisbane. Going to Brunswick the day after was special.

 

[Roylion]

What I would say is not all Bears were happy about the merger.

Some of the Bears supporters certainly weren't.

I remember sitting out at Waverley in 1997 during the last quarter of the final against St Kilda

I was at that game. I also remember that year also going to a Lions game at Waverley there was a plane skywriting "Fitzroy Lives" over the ground before the game. Cant quite remember if it was the Hawthorn game or one of the St Kilda games.

Going to Brunswick the day after was special.

It was.

 

[mikey127]

Some of the Bears supporters certainly weren't.


I was at that game. I also remember that year also going to a Lions game at Waverley there was a plane skywriting "Fitzroy Lives" over the ground before the game. Cant quite remember if it was the Hawthorn game or one of the St Kilda games.

It was.

Roylion please don't see this as a criticism but curious about your stance on the Brisbane Lions. On one hand you support them but on the other hand you seem critical of how things unfolded between Fitzroy and Brisbane.

Do you see it as mire of spiritual merger rather than a legal merger if that makes sense or do you say legally not a merger but a club trying to embrace the Fitzroy history or what?

 

[Roylion]

Roylion please don't see this as a criticism but curious about your stance on the Brisbane Lions. On one hand you support them but on the other hand you seem critical of how things unfolded between Fitzroy and Brisbane.

I'm a paid up 2024 member of the Brisbane Lions and have been since 1997. I'm also a member of the Fitzroy -Brisbane Historical society. I've been to all five grand finals that the Brisbane Lions have competed in.

What Brisbane do, is to preserve the Fitzroy VFL-AFL identity and history at an AFL level and its great that there is some sort of Fitzroy identity in the AFL. They've done a reasonably good job with that, except for the occasional lapse such as the hideous paddlepop lion jumper between 2010 and 2014 which also landed Fitzroy and the Brisbane Lions in court against one another. So, if I was to continue to support any club in the AFL after 1996, it would have been the Brisbane Lions for those reasons.

Fitzroy will never be back in the AFL in their own right (now playing in the VAFA). So I don't see why one can't support the Brisbane Lions in the AFL and the Fitzroy FC in the VAFA. I'm a member of both. They don't play each other.

Do you see it as mire of spiritual merger rather than a legal merger

I don't see it as a 'merger' as such. But I do appreciate that Brisbane preserve Fitzroy's AFL identity both on and off the field and support them for that reason.

do you say legally not a merger but a club trying to embrace the Fitzroy history or what?

Pretty much.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I'm a paid up 2024 member of the Brisbane Lions and have been since 1997. I'm also a member of the Fitzroy -Brisbane Historical society. I've been to all five grand finals that the Brisbane Lions have competed in.

What Brisbane do, is to preserve the Fitzroy VFL-AFL identity and history at an AFL level and its great that there is some sort of Fitzroy identity in the AFL. They've done a reasonably good job with that, except for the occasional lapse such as the hideous paddlepop lion jumper between 2010 and 2014 which also landed Fitzroy and the Brisbane Lions in court against one another. So, if I was to continue to support any club in the AFL after 1996, it would have been the Brisbane Lions for those reasons.

Fitzroy will never be back in the AFL in their own right (now playing in the VAFA). So I don't see why one can't support the Brisbane Lions in the AFL and the Fitzroy FC in the VAFA. I'm a member of both. They don't play each other.



I don't see it as a 'merger' as such. But I do appreciate that Brisbane preserve Fitzroy's AFL identity both on and off the field and support them for that reason.

Pretty much.

I do find it interesting Roylion that you say you would have preferred to have seen Fitzroy merge with a Melbourne-based team to watch more Melbourne games, rather than relocate interstate to Canberra, Hobart or Brisbane.

Neither happened, naturally, so it's discussing two options that never eventuated.

In my eyes, a relocated team can continue on the history and the branding and the association of the old team (like Souths and Sydney) and be one continuous unit, maintaining a continual nature.

A merged team is not fully representative of the old team, as by definition, it is also half representing a different team, even if that team plays more games in its home traditional market.

To me it seems like a bit of an old-fashioned way of supporting the team, being present at 11 home games per year, rather than the overall values and history of the club across the country.

Maybe it's because I'm younger, but I'd much prefer to see a red, white and blue Bulldogs team play elsewhere in the country, rather than have the Bulldogs merge with another Melbourne team, and I'm not just saying this because I may be a person that watches my team more on TV rather than attendance or goes to local games or goes to the suburb of Footscray, I attend a vast majority of home games and have been to Footscray to watch AFLW and VFL games.

 

[mikey127]

I'm a paid up 2024 member of the Brisbane Lions and have been since 1997. I'm also a member of the Fitzroy -Brisbane Historical society. I've been to all five grand finals that the Brisbane Lions have competed in.

What Brisbane do, is to preserve the Fitzroy VFL-AFL identity and history at an AFL level and its great that there is some sort of Fitzroy identity in the AFL. They've done a reasonably good job with that, except for the occasional lapse such as the hideous paddlepop lion jumper between 2010 and 2014 which also landed Fitzroy and the Brisbane Lions in court against one another. So, if I was to continue to support any club in the AFL after 1996, it would have been the Brisbane Lions for those reasons.

Fitzroy will never be back in the AFL in their own right (now playing in the VAFA). So I don't see why one can't support the Brisbane Lions in the AFL and the Fitzroy FC in the VAFA. I'm a member of both. They don't play each other.



I don't see it as a 'merger' as such. But I do appreciate that Brisbane preserve Fitzroy's AFL identity both on and off the field and support them for that reason.

Pretty much.

Thanks mate really appreciate your reply.

Would you like to see a retro round one year where the Brisbane Lions are referred to as Fitzroy wear the Fitzroy jumper and run out to the Fitzroy song for a game in Melbourne?

 

[Roylion]

I do find it interesting Roylion that you say you would have preferred to have seen Fitzroy merge with a Melbourne-based team to watch more Melbourne games, rather than relocate interstate to Canberra, Hobart or Brisbane.

It would depend on the new identity of the proposed merged club.

The late Ian Ridley said one of his biggest mistakes in negotiating the Melbourne-Hawks merger in 1996 is that Melbourne ignored a key price of research advice in that members and supporters see as the enduring symbols of their club, their colours, the tradition [things like history, club song etc.] and the club emblem and will reject a merger if there wasn't enough of that retained in the new entity.

If the majority of those can be retained in the identity of the new club, then the supporters of both original clubs will feel there is enough of their original club's identiy to warrant their continued support.
.

A Melbourne-Fitzroy merger to form the 'Melbourne Lions" was very close in 1986 and a lesser extent in 1994 and probably would have worked. It was called off both times by Melbourne on the verge of a public announcement - especially in 1986 where it was 24 hours from being put to the members of both clubs. In 1994 according to Dyson Hore-Lacy, Fitzroy had an in principle agreement with Melbourne to merge in August 1994, which was taken to the AFL, leaked to the press (most likely by Hawthorn) and scuttled soon after.

In 1986, Melbourne pulled out when Fitzroy chairman Leon Wiegard asked for slightly more time to raise more money for Fitzroy in a planned gala event at Festival Hall. Melbourne also realised that many of Fitzroy's top players were due to come out of contract at the end of the year and may not have been playing for the new Melbourne Lions club.

The official name was going to be the "Melbourne-Fitzroy Football Club" (trading as the 'Melbourne Lions') with 6 Fitzroy directors and 6 Melbourne directors on the new 12 man board. Joint chairpersons - one from Melbourne and one from Fitzroy. The guernsey was going to be the Melbourne jumper with the Fitzroy lion logo added to the front. Very like the current Brisbane Lions jumper.

Maybe the 'Footscray Lions' playing out of the Western Oval could have worked too, instead of the failed proposal of the 'Fitzroy Bulldogs' playing out of Princes Park, which the overwhelming majority of Footscray supporters vehemently rejected.

The 'Footscray Lions' jumper might have been Fitzroy's red and blue jumper with a white Fitzroy FFC logo and possibly white horizontal stripes to evoke Fooscray's jumper but still primarily in the Fitzroy design. A gold Fitzroy Lion would have been added on the breast of the jumper. In any case it would have been a bit more equal than the proposed "Fitzroy Bulldogs" playing out of Princes Park and hence may have been accepted by a larger percentage of Footscray supporters.

I personally would have liked and supported the "Melbourne Lions" because of the similarity of the colours and the proposed jumper being close to Fitzroy's. Came close to happening. Could have got behind the "Footscray Lions" perhaps, depending on the final identity.

In my eyes, a relocated team can continue on the history and the branding and the association of the old team (like Souths and Sydney) and be one continuous unit, maintaining a continual nature.

That is true, but their supporters only get to see them play between four and six times a year, excluding possibe finals.

A merged team is not fully representative of the old team, as by definition, it is also half representing a different team, even if that team plays more games in its home traditional market.

True. But the supporter base gets to see them play at home and also can get more involved in the club (social functions, training etc.) given that its base is still in Melbourne.

It's very difficult to ensure a balance of two identities when negotiating a merger

The only Melbourne based merger that might work in terms of identity would be the North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs mainly on the basis of the similarity of colours. A name something like "North West Melbourne Bulldogs" might be accepted by both supporter bases. The name of North Melbourne would be retained. Reference to the western suburbs and Footscray's mascot would also be in the name. Western Bulldogs's colours of red, white and blue retained with North Melbourne vertical stripe guernsey design, or maybe a red yoke and royal blue and white vertical stripes. Would share the MCG, but football HQ and training base might be at the Western Oval and administrative HQ might be at Arden Street. VFL side could be the Footscray Kangaroos playing out of the Western Oval and wearing a Footscray jumper, with a white North Melbourne Kangaroo replacing the Bulldog logo.

To me it seems like a bit of an old-fashioned way of supporting the team, being present at 11 home games per year, rather than the overall values and history of the club across the country.

11 home games, plus 4-6 games against other Melbourne based clubs could see up to 15-17 opportunities to see their team play live. Not to mention the opportunity to attend AFLW games if desired.