The North Fitzroy Kangaroos

Oct 17, 2000
18,951
16,605
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
For reference here are the relevant terms of the proposed North Melbourne - Fitzroy merger.

2. The FFC (Fitzroy Football Club) and NMC (North Melbourne Club) will merge by whatever legally appropriate method into a new corporation (or other appropriate method)
3. The name of the new club shall be Fitzroy-North Melbourne Kangaroos. (later changed to "North Fitzroy Kangaroos"). The logo of the new club was to be a kangaroo and a lion holding a football together in a shield.
4. The new club will have a new jumper which substantially incorporates the present colours of FFC and NMC (in approximately equal proportions) in a style which is appropriate to the 1990's which will create an effective merchandising presence. The jumper will have a small gold Fitzroy lion on the left breast.
5. The new club will have a board of 12 directors with six persons nominated by each of the present boards of the parties. The Board of 12 shall include the Chairman.
6 The first chairman (who has been chosen by lot) shall be a former NMC director and the chairman shall have a casting vote.
7. In the event of the inaugural chairman retires within 2 years of his appointment, the new chairman shall be appointed by those members of the board nominated by the NMC.
12. The provisions of clauses 5, 6 and 7 will operate for four years from the date hereof (May 11th 1996). Thereafter appointments to the Board will be made by the shareholders of the new club.
14. The constitution of the new club shall enshrine the provisions of Clauses 3 and 4 so that they can only be amended by approval of 90% of the shareholders.

The agreement above was to last for twenty years (in other words until the end of the 2016 season)
 
In relation to the proposed jumper, I gather one was never 'officially' proposed? I tried a good old fashioned Google which didn't return anything 'official', unlike what you find if you search, for example, for the proposed Melbourne Hawks jumper.

However, the Google search did uncover this thread from two years ago which listed some potential designs:

North Fitzroy Kangaroos jumpers
 

Walter Sobchak

Senior List
Jun 25, 2012
296
571
AFL Club
Richmond
It's a strange name. Sounds very much they would be representing the suburb of North Fitzroy. "Fitzroy-North Melbourne" is a bit of a mouthful, but now we have Greater Western Sydney, which isn't far off.
 

Last of the Roys

Premiership Player
Sep 5, 2007
3,632
3,673
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
It's a strange name. Sounds very much they would be representing the suburb of North Fitzroy. "Fitzroy-North Melbourne" is a bit of a mouthful, but now we have Greater Western Sydney, which isn't far off.

My memory from the newspaper reports of the time is that Fitzroy-North Melbourne was the original proposal. However, the North side of things started to back-track on the name (and potentially other issues) as they thought they were in a the much stronger negotiating position and therefore their name should come first.

Dyson's book probably details it. Roylion will probably know it off by heart.

I don't think there was any official proposal that was going to be signed of by shareholders, let alone members. In that sense it never got to the stage of the Hawthorn-Melbourne deal.

However as Fitzroy (and North Melbourne) were not technically obliged to ask their members (due to their corporate structures), it was not going to be put to them anyway. Although I assume it would have to be put to the shareholders - the deal would have been effectively been an after the fact rubber stamp.

It was very close to be agreed within the AFL I think, and only a last minute rebellion by the Melbourne clubs (led by Richmond???) stopped it. This was due to North's onfield domination in the 90's, so the Melbourne clubs Thought the new club would be far too strong. That is when Brisbane stepped in (they had been interested in merging with Fitzroy for a while) with the AFL's help/blessing (as well as with the help of the circumstances that led to the appointment of an Administrator to control Fitzroy instead of the board).

The one issues that always pissed me off is that the Fitzroy board / Dyson was never really upfront with the rank and file members about the Club's circumstances in the few years up to and including 1996 (its dire financial position and its intention to seek mergers even in the years leading up to 1996 - both of which were always strongly denied in contrast to what was really going on).

Dyson and the board did what they thought was for the best, but I believe he should have been upfront with the members - he should have told everyone the Board was going to look at all viable merger proposals after the virtually forced move to the Whitten Oval in 1994 when it became clear Fitzroy was dying. He should have sort a vote of members on whether they would rather merge or go down fighting, and what a merger should look like (with who? what core aspects must be retained? etc.).

No he and the board didn't techncially have to do that, but common sense says it should have been done. While it could be argued that this wasn't done due to financial reasons - to not spook sponsors, creditors, etc. - that argument IMHO is weak. Creditors and sponsors knew what was going on anyway. It was constantly in the news and they had access to inside information as well.

Oh well, you can't change history. The board did their best, but IMHO it could have done better.

(By the way I would have supported whoever Fitzroy merged with - although I personally preferred a merger with Brisbane to North at the time - however it should have been persued before we were in our last death throws and still had some small bargaining power).
 

Last of the Roys

Premiership Player
Sep 5, 2007
3,632
3,673
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
A bit of extra info I just remembered:

- If my memory serves me correctly I think there was an extraordinary meeting of members called when the North deal was close to being finalised. It was at Dallas-Brooks hall I think??? I am not sure if the members were asked to vote on anything or not.
- Whatever it was about it was very late in the piece - far too late for the rank and file members to have any real say / or influence over events that were spinning out of control.
- I vividly remember my Mum getting on the all of the TV news channels that night with footage of her getting up at the meeting and berating Dyson for previously lying to the members about not seeking out / entering into merger talks. In retrospect it is clear the club had been occasionaly been speaking to potential merger partners over the years, but it was not open about this with its members. I believe at the 1995 AGM Dyson was still claiming Fitzroy would go it alone / would not seek to merge.
 

Soul1986

Senior List
May 16, 2011
213
12
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
My memory from the newspaper reports of the time is that Fitzroy-North Melbourne was the original proposal. However, the North side of things started to back-track on the name (and potentially other issues) as they thought they were in a the much stronger negotiating position and therefore their name should come first.

Dyson's book probably details it. Roylion will probably know it off by heart.

I don't think there was any official proposal that was going to be signed of by shareholders, let alone members. In that sense it never got to the stage of the Hawthorn-Melbourne deal.

However as Fitzroy (and North Melbourne) were not technically obliged to ask their members (due to their corporate structures), it was not going to be put to them anyway. Although I assume it would have to be put to the shareholders - the deal would have been effectively been an after the fact rubber stamp.

It was very close to be agreed within the AFL I think, and only a last minute rebellion by the Melbourne clubs (led by Richmond???) stopped it. This was due to North's onfield domination in the 90's, so the Melbourne clubs Thought the new club would be far too strong. That is when Brisbane stepped in (they had been interested in merging with Fitzroy for a while) with the AFL's help/blessing (as well as with the help of the circumstances that led to the appointment of an Administrator to control Fitzroy instead of the board).

The one issues that always pissed me off is that the Fitzroy board / Dyson was never really upfront with the rank and file members about the Club's circumstances in the few years up to and including 1996 (its dire financial position and its intention to seek mergers even in the years leading up to 1996 - both of which were always strongly denied in contrast to what was really going on).

Dyson and the board did what they thought was for the best, but I believe he should have been upfront with the members - he should have told everyone the Board was going to look at all viable merger proposals after the virtually forced move to the Whitten Oval in 1994 when it became clear Fitzroy was dying. He should have sort a vote of members on whether they would rather merge or go down fighting, and what a merger should look like (with who? what core aspects must be retained? etc.).

No he and the board didn't techncially have to do that, but common sense says it should have been done. While it could be argued that this wasn't done due to financial reasons - to not spook sponsors, creditors, etc. - that argument IMHO is weak. Creditors and sponsors knew what was going on anyway. It was constantly in the news and they had access to inside information as well.

Oh well, you can't change history. The board did their best, but IMHO it could have done better.

(By the way I would have supported whoever Fitzroy merged with - although I personally preferred a merger with Brisbane to North at the time - however it should have been persued before we were in our last death throws and still had some small bargaining power).

I agree with your comments about Dyson Hore-Lacy..he and the board did what they felt was best for the club..most fans backed him because we thought he was our 'lion' fighting the AFL but...

Here is a critical example, whereby Dyson and the board, stuffed up big time and werent clear with us fans:

Move to Western Oval- Despite promises this move would generate hundreds of thousands in additional revenue, I recall John Birt saying in an article in 1996 we were only slightly better off than the deal offered at Princess Park. Obviously our team was not AFL standard in 95/96 and crowds were well down..impacting revenue.

But in hindsight- this move should never have happened, it ripped our team apart, destroyed the fabric of the club, turned fans away etc. My main point: Dyson said the main reason we moved- after the merger was he was worried the AFL could close the club down, for not repaying a $250 000 loan which the bulldogs paid as part of our move.

Why didnt Dyson, be upfront about this in 1993?? I reckon us fans and sponsors would have raised the $250 000 to repay the AFL loan. End result?? We stay at Princess Park and most likely keep our emerging finals bound team intact....Lynch and others said they would leave the club if we went to Western Oval....which happened as we all know.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing..but the board failed the club and its supporter base by moving to Western Oval...we should have been given a chance to raise the $250 000 which would have kept us at Princess Park and possibly a totally different future....
 

tassielions

Debutant
Nov 12, 2009
122
35
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
I went to the
I agree with your comments about Dyson Hore-Lacy..he and the board did what they felt was best for the club..most fans backed him because we thought he was our 'lion' fighting the AFL but...

Here is a critical example, whereby Dyson and the board, stuffed up big time and werent clear with us fans:

Move to Western Oval- Despite promises this move would generate hundreds of thousands in additional revenue, I recall John Birt saying in an article in 1996 we were only slightly better off than the deal offered at Princess Park. Obviously our team was not AFL standard in 95/96 and crowds were well down..impacting revenue.

But in hindsight- this move should never have happened, it ripped our team apart, destroyed the fabric of the club, turned fans away etc. My main point: Dyson said the main reason we moved- after the merger was he was worried the AFL could close the club down, for not repaying a $250 000 loan which the bulldogs paid as part of our move.

Why didnt Dyson, be upfront about this in 1993?? I reckon us fans and sponsors would have raised the $250 000 to repay the AFL loan. End result?? We stay at Princess Park and most likely keep our emerging finals bound team intact....Lynch and others said they would leave the club if we went to Western Oval....which happened as we all know.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing..but the board failed the club and its supporter base by moving to Western Oval...we should have been given a chance to raise the $250 000 which would have kept us at Princess Park and possibly a totally different future....

I went to the meeting at the Fitzroy town hall when it was proposed to go to Whitten oval which was a bad move I liked Princes Park we had good crowds had a team up and running then lost players at the end of 93. I believe we cos hav challenged for e finals if we kept that team. The Whitten oval was a hassle to get to from hurstbridge and also as we lost all our good players there was no great crowds or atmosphere there.
 
just stumbed across this late at night, randomly started thinking about Fitzroy. I was out of Australia from 99 to 2013 so I was wondering how the journey went for the fitzroy supporters on the merger, three flags... did it mean the world to you or was it hollow?.

My memories of it as a North member we got a letter a few days after the story broke in the news, saying that it was the best way to ensure we survived into the future as a melbourne based force. It talked of the club being called the Fitzroy-North Melbourne Kangaroos, and how the club believed that in future the team would be referred to as the Kangaroos, the trend was going that way, Celtics, Lakers etc... it was the Kangaroo that was important.

There was a mock up club logo based on the north one at the time, with a gold kangaroo and red below it (like it was hoping on the red enter). i was against it when the story broke but bought into clubs reasons.

i think the other melb clubs objected to us having a bigger list, we would not back down on that as condition of merger. I think it was sad the way administrators were appointed to fitzroy and it was forced to brisbane against the wishes of its board and members.
 

OldLion

Club Legend
Oct 18, 2000
2,806
522
Melbourne - 3078 Lions
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Lions
But in hindsight- this move should never have happened, it ripped our team apart, destroyed the fabric of the club, turned fans away etc. My main point: Dyson said the main reason we moved- after the merger was he was worried the AFL could close the club down, for not repaying a $250 000 loan which the bulldogs paid as part of our move.
Spot on. Did me in.
 

adey115

Premiership Player
Nov 16, 2001
3,180
2,284
Vic
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy side of the family.
Princes Park felt like a Fitzroy home ground. Possibly because it had been or was home to both Carlton and Hawthorn, so it felt a bit 'neutral' to an extent. The stands (pre-Elliot's "Legends" stand) and terraces felt a bit like the Junction. From a suburban perspective it was neighbourly to Fitzroy. The Heatley Stand end felt really close to the game. It just had that Fitzroy "feel" to it that setup, nearly as good as the Junction.

The Junction just felt like Fitzroy 100%. It felt advantageous to play there, and welcoming for Fitzroy people. I'm not old enough to see games at Brunswick St.

But Victoria Park - we felt like "unwelcome guests", or words to that effect as per the Collingwood banner for an away game there. And the Western Oval was just not Fitzroy in any way. In hindsight, we would have been better playing all our home games on a Sunday at Waverley or Princes Park, so not to clash ever with the other homes teams or games at those locations. But just not Vic Park nor the Western Oval. Neither of those grounds felt right at all.
 

Alex_Y

Debutant
Sep 6, 2015
61
98
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
PAOK Thessaloniki
Fairly new to bigfooty, didn't know there was an actual Fitzroy sub forum until now. Good to see, and good topic :)

I remember this merger proposal happening as a 10 year. old This was by far the worst merger proposal of all time, for several reasons.

Name - What type of a name is ''North Fitzroy''? Calling yourself a part suburb is odd. North Carlton, instead of Carlton, East St Kilda instead of St Kilda, West Essendon instead of Essendon and so on.

North Melbourne - North Melbourne that year were the Premiers. Why would you merge the reigning Premiers? lol
Off the field, with crowds and all, North weren't doing that bad, were they?

Proposed Juersey - Apart from the worst proposed name in ''North Fitzroy'', the proposed jersey was by far the ugliest I've seen. People have said they can't find it on the net, and neither can I, but I clearly remember an artwork of the proposed jersey being shown on the Sunday Footy show at the time.
It looked like this:

w19u7l.png

I kid you not.

Now excuse the bad editing, I only have ''paint'', not photoshop. :p

Now I can't remember whether the top half was Fitzroy and the bottom half North Melbourne, or vice-versa, but I remember the top being top half of the jersey, being 1 club, the bottom half the other club. I remember seeing the artwork of the proposed jersey on the Sunday Footy show, and being like ''What are they thinking?''

Although I'm sure others here didn't like the merger with Brisbane, I remember a bit of relief, as the name and jersey, were alot better then the proposed name and jersey of the North Fitzroy Kangaroos.
 
Last edited:

Alex_Y

Debutant
Sep 6, 2015
61
98
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
PAOK Thessaloniki
My memories of it as a North member we got a letter a few days after the story broke in the news, saying that it was the best way to ensure we survived into the future as a melbourne based force. It talked of the club being called the Fitzroy-North Melbourne Kangaroos, and how the club believed that in future the team would be referred to as the Kangaroos, the trend was going that way, Celtics, Lakers etc... it was the Kangaroo that was important.

Interesting about the naming issue. While we do generally say Bulls, Lakers, Knicks etc. the club names, such Chicago Bulls, LA Lakers, Houston Rockets etc, is still often used by fans. I reckon the North's board thinking was abit off on that one.

Also thought at the time, that North being a strong on field club and the Premiers that year, were in a stronger position than Fitroy with the merger name.
I thought North Melbourne Lions, or Fitzroy - North Melbourne Lions would sounded better.

Here's a top I came up with:
North Melbourne Lions
rcllad.png
 
Last edited:

Alex_Y

Debutant
Sep 6, 2015
61
98
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
PAOK Thessaloniki
I think Fitzroy could of survived.
We always hear this thing every few years with clubs like North Melbourne, Melbourne, Bulldogs, and St Kilda.
In the 90's it was, ''they need to merge'', and in the 2000's and 2010's it's ''they need to relocate''.

These 4 smaller Melbourne clubs will obviously struggle a little financially and have low crowds, when they are in a period of an on-field slump.
But when they are in a period of finals footy, they do just fine.

Remember most recently, many people saying that ''North won't be able to survive unless they move to the Gold Coast''.
Even several North board members at the time thought the same. Well now that North have a period of finals, they are fine now.
Even Port Adelaide about 3 years ago were considered ''in dire straights'', with low crowds. Now they're doing well on field, and have near sellouts at the Adelaide Oval.

This thing comes up every few years, unfortunately, when a smaller club had a period of onfield slump. Profit making Hyenas, wanting clubs to merge/relocate for maximum dollar, that's all.
Pity the AFL didn't stick up for Fitzroy at the time, as Fitzroy could've being fine, just like North and other clubs that have beaten the on-field slump, if they had a bit of success.
 
Last edited:
Oct 17, 2000
18,951
16,605
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #15
Name - What type of a name is ''North Fitzroy''? Calling yourself a part suburb is odd. North Carlton, instead of Carlton, East St Kilda instead of St Kilda, West Essendon instead of Essendon and so on.

Fitzroy Football club was formed in North Fitzroy. The original name was going to be Fitzroy - North Melbourne, until North reneged on parts of the original deal. 'North Fitzroy Kangaroos' was the compromise.

North Melbourne
- North Melbourne that year were the Premiers. Why would you merge the reigning Premiers? lol
Off the field, with crowds and all, North weren't doing that bad, were they?

North were in financial trouble and a merger with a neighboring club that was similar in outlook and culture was seen as desirable at the time.

Proposed Juersey -
Apart from the worst proposed name in ''North Fitzroy'', the proposed jersey was by far the ugliest I've seen. People have said they can't find it on the net, and neither can I, but I clearly remember an artwork of the proposed jersey being shown on the Sunday Footy show at the time.
It looked like this:

w19u7l.png


I kid you not.

This was NOT the guernsey that was going to be used. Any image that appeared on The Sunday Footy Show was media speculation only. All that image showed is that whoever came up with the image hadn't read the agreement between North Melbourne and Fitzroy. No FFC logo was to appear on the jumper. A small lion was to appear on the breast of the jumper for a minimum of twenty years.

Now I can't remember whether the top half was Fitzroy and the bottom half North Melbourne, or vice-versa, but I remember the top being top half of the jersey, being 1 club, the bottom half the other club. I remember seeing the artwork of the proposed jersey on the Sunday Footy show, and being like ''What are they thinking?''

The media weren't thinking.

Although I'm sure others here didn't like the merger with Brisbane, I remember a bit of relief, as the name and jersey, were alot better then the proposed name and jersey of the North Fitzroy Kangaroos.

The name was a compromise. The proposed guernsey never existed.
 
Last edited:
Coburg changed their name (from Tigers to Lions) for a while. That's about as far as I recall as it wasn't "that" long ago

Was for two or three seasons (i think) before Richmond and Coburg joined forces.

Would like to know their official name, logo and what guernsey's they wore, were they playing home games in Coburg and Brunswick St?
 
Nov 20, 2011
6,253
5,909
South Australia
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Portsmouth
Would of been Coburg. Brunswick St is barely amateur level standard let alone VFL. I think they wore their blue and red (??) jumpers and just called themselves the Lions, and even kept the name after their partnership ended until they went back to the Tigers.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coburg_Football_Club

I've got my names mixed up. They started off as the Lions, changed to Tigers during alignment with Richmond then back to Lions again last year. Navy with a red sash and inverse away.
 
Oct 17, 2000
18,951
16,605
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #22
Oh and they called themselves Coburg - Fitzroy during their affliation with Fitzroy.

Yep. Coburg-Fitzroy Lions. Wore the Coburg jumper for home games and the Fitzroy pre-season jumper for away games (as below). Coburg City Oval was the home game. Watched a few games there in 1999-2000.

Fitzroy-Preseason-1995.gif
 
Last edited:

JPetro83

Premiership Player
Sep 25, 2014
4,815
3,371
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Adel United & Leeds United
I think Fitzroy could of survived.
We always hear this thing every few years with clubs like North Melbourne, Melbourne, Bulldogs, and St Kilda.
In the 90's it was, ''they need to merge'', and in the 2000's and 2010's it's ''they need to relocate''.

These 4 smaller Melbourne clubs will obviously struggle a little financially and have low crowds, when they are in a period of an on-field slump.
But when they are in a period of finals footy, they do just fine.

Remember most recently, many people saying that ''North won't be able to survive unless they move to the Gold Coast''.
Even several North board members at the time thought the same. Well now that North have a period of finals, they are fine now.
Even Port Adelaide about 3 years ago were considered ''in dire straights'', with low crowds. Now they're doing well on field, and have near sellouts at the Adelaide Oval.

This thing comes up every few years, unfortunately, when a smaller club had a period of onfield slump. Profit making Hyenas, wanting clubs to merge/relocate for maximum dollar, that's all.
Pity the AFL didn't stick up for Fitzroy at the time, as Fitzroy could've being fine, just like North and other clubs that have beaten the on-field slump, if they had a bit of success.
Of course they could have survived.. if the AFL wanted them they could have pumped money into them. they keep teams afloat these days.. Port Adelaide were kept getting handouts in 2012, plus others and not to mention all the cash that was pumped into the expansion teams. Fitzroy were just destroyed cos a team had to go at the time.. it wasn't really a merger.. never felt like it looking in from the outside.. if Fitzroy and a Victorian club merged it would have been more acceptable. Fitzroy/Footscray would have been ideal at time time or even ideal at the end of 88/89.
There is no turning back people.. yes its nice to chat about the what ifs and stuff but even if they did bring back Fitzroy as a stand alone team againall their fans have moved on/passed on. its been 20 years nearly. they wouldn't get more than 10K to a game.If the fans had came and supported them in the late 80s early 90s maybe they could have kept their player like Roos and Lynch and a few of the other. where were the fans in the early 90s?
 
Oct 17, 2000
18,951
16,605
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #24
Of course they could have survived.. if the AFL wanted them they could have pumped money into them. they keep teams afloat these days.. Port Adelaide were kept getting handouts in 2012, plus others and not to mention all the cash that was pumped into the expansion teams.

The AFL had $12 million to spare to give to clubs that merged, yet couldn't find $1 million to help Fitzroy.

Fitzroy were just destroyed cos a team had to go at the time.. it wasn't really a merger.. never felt like it looking in from the outside..

A team didn't HAVE to go. It was AFL policy to try and keep the league to 16 teams, if possible. With Port Adelaide due to come in 1997, the commission wanted to keep the pressure on small Melbourne clubs to go. Fitzroy were seen as the weakest at the time and despite some valiant efforts to seek alternatives so Fitzroy could remain in the competition, the AFL stymied them all to get their overall result.

if Fitzroy and a Victorian club merged it would have been more acceptable. Fitzroy/Footscray would have been ideal at time time or even ideal at the end of 88/89.

Fitzroy tried to merge with North Melbourne. An agreement was struck between the two clubs, but the AFL commission manipulated the situation so that the other 14 clubs voted against such a merger. The AFL commission therefore was left with "no alternative" (according to them) to recommend a Bears-Fitzroy merger which of course was accepted by the clubs. I thoroughly enjoyed the whingeing from the Melbourne clubs when Brisbane won a hat-trick of premierships early in the 2000s.

There is no turning back people.. yes its nice to chat about the what ifs and stuff but even if they did bring back Fitzroy as a stand alone team againall their fans have moved on/passed on.

Possibly. A few go out and watch Fitzroy in their current competition - the VAFA.

its been 20 years nearly. they wouldn't get more than 10K to a game.If the fans had came and supported them in the late 80s early 90s maybe they could have kept their player like Roos and Lynch and a few of the other. where were the fans in the early 90s?

Where were the fans? Don't forget that Fitzroy had one of the smaller supporter bases. Coupled with poor on-field performances, a lack of support from the AFL, continual negative media coverage on top of continual merger speculation and forced location in enemy territory (Carlton, Collingwood and the western suburbs), many fans became reluctant to turn up to watch their side be thrashed every week. The last time Fitzroy had reasonable crowds were the days at their own home ground at the Junction Oval.
 

Silent Alarm

sack Lyon
10k Posts
Jul 9, 2010
24,163
26,535
AFL Club
Fremantle
Why do you whinge about games at Optus Oval and Vic Park yet say the Junction could have been all the difference? Or that Fitzroy fans had no qualms about the Junction.

Although I get Carlton and especially Collingwood were the Lions' biggest rivalries, those grounds were so close to Fitzroy itself they might as well have been in Fitzroy. It would be a longer journey to the 'G let alone Etihad than those two places.

Don't forget the Saints were based at Junction Oval and that ground is thoroughly in their territory. You imply Royboys had no issue piggybacking on St Kilda's old oval (probably because there was no real rivalry) but there were issues with the Western Oval and Footscray (I don't think the Bullies were any more of a rival to Fitzroy than the Saints were). Both are not close to Fitzroy the suburb either (even if Junction Oval is probably 10 minutes closer).

In fact, Optus Oval was shared by everyone. I realise Kangas and Bullies fans didn't like going there in the 2000s but surely the lower crowds also have a bit to do with the opposition (and Victorian fans still have indifference toward playing interstate sides; even if it's a great, close looking contest). The Hawks were from the total other side of the city but ended up even building their own grandstand there in the 70s. The 'enemy territory' vibe you talk about (which apparently Western Oval had) was surely minimised at Optus?

If Fitzroy FC still played AFL footy, they'd have played at the Western Oval until the late 90s when the Bulldogs left.

Then, in the 2000s, they would've had Etihad as a home stadium but played 2-4 matches a season at Optus (ala North and Western Bulldogs).

There also would've been continued experimentation at North Hobart and Canberra. Or maybe they would've gotten in earlier and tried somewhere else – like NT or FNQ. Who knows, maybe they'd even be teeing up Ballarat right now...

Potentially, Fitzroy could have probably played just 5 or so games in Melbourne up until the Giants came in. If they'd have chosen Canberra as their second town, who knows what that would've meant for the Lions. The AFL wouldn't kick them out but I think it's realistically likely that they'd be fairly reliant on selling home games.

Which is no diss at all. Not many days go by when I walk through the Roy and imagine this place in September, all getting up and behind their team, just like you see in Freo.
 
Back