I'm not sure of the point some are making here. Are you trying to show that Fitzroy were the lowest supported club in the AFL? They were. There's no argument.
Couple of things - they weren't that far south of other small clubs, and they also made efforts - including considerable changes to the club - to improve. they were ahead of the game on all those things. They wanted to sell home games to markets that didn't have AFL clubs - something plenty of clubs have since done. They independently sourced additional sponsorship. They organised a willing merger with their neighbours North Melbourne. At every turn they were scuttled and sabotaged by a league for whom no outcome other than death was acceptable.
An outcome which, as is the subject of the thread, has been glossed over by some league PR lackey. It's a bit of an insult.
Couple of things - they weren't that far south of other small clubs, and they also made efforts - including considerable changes to the club - to improve. they were ahead of the game on all those things. They wanted to sell home games to markets that didn't have AFL clubs - something plenty of clubs have since done. They independently sourced additional sponsorship. They organised a willing merger with their neighbours North Melbourne. At every turn they were scuttled and sabotaged by a league for whom no outcome other than death was acceptable.
An outcome which, as is the subject of the thread, has been glossed over by some league PR lackey. It's a bit of an insult.