Discussion Fitzroy Lion Logo Discussion

[Lagooner]

Brisbane just finished a failed attempt at dropping the Fitzroy lion, and my point is that this should be kept in mind during this discussion. All the casual "not fit for the current age, Fitzroy fans are living in the past and must move on" comments ignore the context.

It'd be easy to argue that PAFC should use much more teal to remove clashes with half the league, but that would be an ignorant comment that ignores the complexities of the club's history. The analogy is not perfect with Fitzroy, but not a million miles off.

I do think if it was not for the historical complications the flat rendering of teh Costa lion would be an improvement though.

Sure I agree that maybe the timing isn't perfect, but once again the teal jumper example doesn't really fit. The updated Lion is just a minor refurbishment of the existing design, not something completely new acting as a replacement.

FWIW I really wouldn't be bothered with a teal clash or any other colour for that matter, clubs need to grow up a bit with regards to this issue. But that's a well worn topic for another thread.

 

[_Damo_]

I'll post it at some point (and maybe it'll cause controversy but whatever) I played around with the lion logo and turned it into a lioness for Brisbanes woman's team

Sorry its sharing a picture with a design for the Crows Womans team (merged with the NT).

While I'm posting ideas, I remember having a chat with some people about a mooted merger with the Crows, and designed a possible jumper set for this team.
Top shows a nineties home and away idea, bottom a modern day version

 

[El_Scorcho]

Non-Brisbane people casually dismissing the club's history have no more credibility than someone saying PAFC should let the prison bars go and move on.

I guess most of the point that people advocating a clean up have been making in this thread is that people are putting too much credence into what this particular rendering of the lion means, historically.

Even before Mero revealed to us that this lion was actually designed by a footy card company and had only been the Fitzroy lion design for about half the time that had been claimed, it's really obvious that the nature of the current rendering is the result of a chinese whispers style string of people copying and redrawing it.

The fact that it was designed for footy cards means that it was probably drawn at a small size and it's gotten messier and messier as it's been blown up. Despite Roylion's insistence that it's meant to be how it is and was drawn deliberately that way, that clearly isn't the case. It was drawn for footy cards and lost it's clarity when it was blown up. The current version is the result of people vectorising a picture of the lion which had been blown up and lost it's clean lines.

The merger agreement also speaks about the Fitzroy lion, but doesn't speak about which Fitzroy lion. I'd suggest a professional cleanup similar to what i've posted is still absolutely recognisable as the Scanlens lion design. The insistence that this lion is the only lion and any change is a slap in the face to the history of Fitzroy is misguided. Fitzroy have a very rich history in AFL football that should be protected and celebrated, but the Scanlens lion is only a tiny fraction of that. This particular rendition of the Scanlens lion, even less.

The idea of having the lion on the guernsey is to represent Fitzroy, and to carry a visual representation of Fitzroy in the AFL forever. We can have a Fitzroy lion without the dodgy linework.

If the takeover happened 5-10 years later, Fitzroy would have already cleaned up the design themselves to be useful in the modern merchandise era, if they even kept the same lion at all.

 

[Timewaster]

False analogy is false.

No one is disrespecting either Brisbane or Fitzroy's history by adding a bit of polish.

I didn't even notice you were a Port fan or I'd have chosen another analogy. Glad it didn't descend into an endless debate. I think our opinions aren't too far part anyway...

 

[Roylion]

Despite Roylion's insistence that it's meant to be how it is and was drawn deliberately that way, that clearly isn't the case.

As I said, the current Fitzroy lion design was first designed in 1965 at the instigation of George Coates who had his art director at the company he worked for to design what is essentially the Fitzroy lion. From 1968 the Lion appeared on Fitzroy's jumper in embroidered form. Certainly the embroidered lion on the jumper was not line for line the same as the one that came to appear on Fitzroy merchandise and publications, but as I said, the lion that I have seen that was designed in 1965, is pretty close.

The merger agreement also speaks about the Fitzroy lion, but doesn't speak about which Fitzroy lion.

The merger agreement makes it clear that "the Fitzroy lion" is the same lion that Fitzroy were using from at least 1975 onwards.

"The Fitzroy lion logo" has been trademarked at least four times including:
1) Trade mark 415755, registered on 26 September 1984 by the VFL (when Fitzroy were part of the competition), - registered until 2025.
2) Trade mark 547027, registered on 15 October 1992 (again when Fitzroy were part of the competition);
3) Trade mark 751045, lodged on 16 December 1997 and registered on 8 September 2000 (after the 1996 'merger');
4) Trade mark 841774 lodged on 7 July 2000 (for the new Brisbane Lions logo) and registered on 15 March 2002;

For the 1984 one, see

http://trademarkalertz.com.au/trademark/415755-lions-fitzroy-football-club-a

The first two trademarks are referred specifically as LIONS FITZROY FOOTBALL CLUB A

And represented as such:

The Lion is described as:

(i) in trade Mark 547027 as “Lion, Paw on Football”; and

(ii) in trade Marks 751045 and 841774 as “Lion Standing, Paw on Ball;” and

The registration of this trade mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of the letter A, the device of a FOOTBALL, and the words FITZROY FOOTBALL CLUB. Registration of the coloured trade mark in the series is limited to the colours shown in the represent.....is depicted in the colours RED, BLUE, GOLD and WHITE.

So while I have no specific evidence that the term "Fitzroy lion" is used in the trademark, (other than what Dyson Hore-Lacy has told me), there is in my view, absolutely no doubt that the "Fitzroy lion" term referred to in the merger agreement signed by the AFL, the Brisbane Bears and the Fitzroy Football Club on 17 July 1996 and the Deed of Company Arrangement signed between the Brisbane Bears and Fitzroy Football Club dated 4 August 1996, refers to the above pictured lion.

"The logo of the merged club will be the Fitzroy lion logo"

What other Fitzroy lion could possibly qualify?

The insistence that this lion is the only lion

It is the only lion. Designed by George Coates and a slightly different version trademarked by the AFL. Ironically the Fitzroy Football Club can't use the "Fitzroy lion" without the AFL's permission.

and any change is a slap in the face to the history of Fitzroy is misguided. Fitzroy have a very rich history in AFL football that should be protected and celebrated, but the Scanlens lion is only a tiny fraction of that. This particular rendition of the Scanlens lion, even less.

It's not the Scanlen's lion, it's the official "Fitzroy lion logo", or if you're from Queensland "the Lion premiership logo"

If the takeover happened 5-10 years later, Fitzroy would have already cleaned up the design themselves to be useful in the modern merchandise era, if they even kept the same lion at all.

There's not much doubt Fitzroy would have kept the "Fitzroy lion" as it is (registered by the AFL until 2025), in the same way they would have retained the "FFC" logo. They may have enlarged it, used parts of it or done whatever to it for various pieces of merchandise such as clash jumpers, away jumpers, pre-season jumpers...whatever, but it still would have been the same lion.

The below image (which is Fitzroy's official logo) is what most of the footballing public associate with Fitzroy.

 

[mfcrox]

Left of centre thinking here:

I reckon if counterfeit jumpers or other merchandise were produced with El_Scorcho 's lion on it, there would be no doubt whatsoever that a court order would be produced by Fitzroy Lions/AFL to cease production of these items. Even though it isn't 'representative' of the Fitzroy Lion according to some, I am sure the reason being would be that it is too similar to the original.

That in itself says a lot I reckon in regards to this argument. We aren't talking about wholesale changes... we are discussing a clean-up of what exists. A tidy up of a few hundred pixels.


*** PS... I know this is a dribble post, but I am tired. Haha

 

[Freight Train]

If the takeover happened 5-10 years later, Fitzroy would have already cleaned up the design themselves to be useful in the modern merchandise era, if they even kept the same lion at all.

Absolutely this. Zero doubt about it, especially in a time where most clubs have modified their logos.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Absolutely this. Zero doubt about it, especially in a time where most clubs have modified their logos.

But what about in the 2010s, when most clubs have ditched their 2000s experiments?

Fremantle, Port have gone to much more classic designs.

Brisbane, the Eagles, the Bulldogs, Carlton, and even Melbourne with their logo have reverted huge parts of their identity to something much more classic.

If we want to play hypotheticals, which is actually pretty fun, I reckon we could've seen the lion replace the FFC for a few years before being returned back to the monogram a few years later.

 

[Freight Train]

But what about in the 2010s, when most clubs have ditched their 2000s experiments?

Fremantle, Port have gone to much more classic designs.

Brisbane, the Eagles, the Bulldogs, Carlton, and even Melbourne with their logo have reverted huge parts of their identity to something much more classic.

If we want to play hypotheticals, which is actually pretty fun, I reckon we could've seen the lion replace the FFC for a few years before being returned back to the monogram a few years later.

Once again I completely agree. Youd see the monogram still, maybe modernised, I dunno, but I'd say youd see the monogram.

 

[Dylan8]

Fitzroy's monogram is pretty timeless. There's not a lot you could do to change it and make it better.

 

[El_Scorcho]

What other Fitzroy lion could possibly qualify?

It is the only lion. Designed by George Coates and a slightly different version trademarked by the AFL. Ironically the Fitzroy Football Club can't use the "Fitzroy lion" without the AFL's permission.

But it isn't, as Mero showed.

The lion design that Mero showed was also the Fitzroy lion, and was a significantly different design.

It was eventually replaced by the design from the Scanlens footy cards.

But it's still a Fitzroy lion however you want to argue it and was used in an official capacity.

 

[rabbitoh21]

This discussion is less of a discussion and more of a "Fitzroy got seduced and r*ped so cry for us and leave us alone" thread

 

[Silent Alarm]

This discussion is less of a discussion and more of a "Fitzroy got seduced and r*ped so cry for us and leave us alone" thread

Didn't your rugby club get axed?

Surely you would have some empathy?

 

[rabbitoh21]

Didn't your rugby club get axed?

Surely you would have some empathy?

I'm referring more to the lack of actual discussion about the design-state of the logo and the over-emphasis of empassioned debate that's best left in 1996. Yes, Souths got axed. We also changed our jersey of most of our previous century of history, revised our logo and completely overhauled our structure which ensured our success and survival, and got a premiership out of it. If you're going to keep sidestepping the actual "Fitzroy Lion LOGO discussion" and talk about other clubs and merger agreements, rather than the logo itself, you might as well move to a Lions board rather than the FOOTY JUMPERS AND GRAPHICS DESIGN board. It's not that bloody hard.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I'm actually very pro Fitzroy and I'd be happy with a bye and 19 teams in order to give them their place back in the league, despite broadly believing there are too many teams in Melbourne.

The league would be more interesting with the Fitzroy Lions and Brisbane Bears.

My arguements certainly aren't anti-Fitzroy. I'm trying to argue that we can look after Fitzroy's visual representation in the AFL without doggedly sticking to a bad rendering of the lion.

 

[Andonis1997]

If there weren't already 10 Victorian teams in the AFL, I'd be pro-Fitzroy as well.
But there are 10 teams.

 

[NM_Mitchell]

Obvs all hypothetical.

I'd rather keep the Brisbane lions, but have them essentially as Fitzroy relocating, rather than Brisbane taking them over.

you'd have to get rid of one or two teams in Melbourne for them to come back, so it'd be better for the team already up there to remain, than to tear apart other teams for them to be here.

 

[HTT]

As I said, the current Fitzroy lion design was first designed in 1965 at the instigation of George Coates who had his art director at the company he worked for to design what is essentially the Fitzroy lion. From 1968 the Lion appeared on Fitzroy's jumper in embroidered form. Certainly the embroidered lion on the jumper was not line for line the same as the one that came to appear on Fitzroy merchandise and publications, but as I said, the lion that I have seen that was designed in 1965, is pretty close.



The merger agreement makes it clear that "the Fitzroy lion" is the same lion that Fitzroy were using from at least 1975 onwards.

"The Fitzroy lion logo" has been trademarked at least four times including:
1) Trade mark 415755, registered on 26 September 1984 by the VFL (when Fitzroy were part of the competition), - registered until 2025.
2) Trade mark 547027, registered on 15 October 1992 (again when Fitzroy were part of the competition);
3) Trade mark 751045, lodged on 16 December 1997 and registered on 8 September 2000 (after the 1996 'merger');
4) Trade mark 841774 lodged on 7 July 2000 (for the new Brisbane Lions logo) and registered on 15 March 2002;

For the 1984 one, see

http://trademarkalertz.com.au/trademark/415755-lions-fitzroy-football-club-a

The first two trademarks are referred specifically as LIONS FITZROY FOOTBALL CLUB A

And represented as such:

The Lion is described as:

(i) in trade Mark 547027 as “Lion, Paw on Football”; and

(ii) in trade Marks 751045 and 841774 as “Lion Standing, Paw on Ball;” and

The registration of this trade mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of the letter A, the device of a FOOTBALL, and the words FITZROY FOOTBALL CLUB. Registration of the coloured trade mark in the series is limited to the colours shown in the represent.....is depicted in the colours RED, BLUE, GOLD and WHITE.

So while I have no specific evidence that the term "Fitzroy lion" is used in the trademark, (other than what Dyson Hore-Lacy has told me), there is in my view, absolutely no doubt that the "Fitzroy lion" term referred to in the merger agreement signed by the AFL, the Brisbane Bears and the Fitzroy Football Club on 17 July 1996 and the Deed of Company Arrangement signed between the Brisbane Bears and Fitzroy Football Club dated 4 August 1996, refers to the above pictured lion.

"The logo of the merged club will be the Fitzroy lion logo"

What other Fitzroy lion could possibly qualify?



It is the only lion. Designed by George Coates and a slightly different version trademarked by the AFL. Ironically the Fitzroy Football Club can't use the "Fitzroy lion" without the AFL's permission.



It's not the Scanlen's lion, it's the official "Fitzroy lion logo", or if you're from Queensland "the Lion premiership logo"



There's not much doubt Fitzroy would have kept the "Fitzroy lion" as it is (registered by the AFL until 2025), in the same way they would have retained the "FFC" logo. They may have enlarged it, used parts of it or done whatever to it for various pieces of merchandise such as clash jumpers, away jumpers, pre-season jumpers...whatever, but it still would have been the same lion.

The below image (which is Fitzroy's official logo) is what most of the footballing public associate with Fitzroy.

OK, leave your jumper alone. But at least change the logo (if the Western Bulldogs banner compares it to the bloke from nickel back, you've got an issue). Then, a few years down the track when you realise a change doesn't have to be bad like the Paddlepop, you can change the jumper.
Also, I'm pretty sure your profile pic features two different versions of the lion.

 

[Fizzler]

But what about in the 2010s, when most clubs have ditched their 2000s experiments?

Fremantle, Port have gone to much more classic designs.

Brisbane, the Eagles, the Bulldogs, Carlton, and even Melbourne with their logo have reverted huge parts of their identity to something much more classic.

If we want to play hypotheticals, which is actually pretty fun, I reckon we could've seen the lion replace the FFC for a few years before being returned back to the monogram a few years later.

What does Freo and Ports change of jumpers have to do with Brisbane giving their logo a clean up? It is majorly needed, and if you don't think so, you're blind.

 

[Dylan8]

What does Freo and Ports change of jumpers have to do with Brisbane giving their logo a clean up? It is majorly needed, and if you don't think so, you're blind.

I don't think it's a pressing issue at all. Worth discussing here, worth doing, but it's not like they'll be unable to live without an update.

 

[El_Scorcho]

He's right that it's got absolutely nothing to do with Port or Freo though.

Plenty of clubs have changed their branding back to a more traditional style to what they had in the 90s and 2000s. None of those clubs have gone back to a poorly executed logo like Brisbane have. They've gone clean and simple.

 

[Roylion]

But it isn't, as Mero showed.

Your comment "The merger agreement also speaks about the Fitzroy lion, but doesn't speak about which Fitzroy lion." was what I was commenting on.

There's no doubt which "Fitzroy lion" was meant as per the terms of the merger agreement. It was the one the AFL had trademarked.

The lion design that Mero showed was also the Fitzroy lion, and was a significantly different design.

Well the lion that was used by Fitzroy in an official capacity isn't too dissimilar as these 1970 and 1972 Fitzroy membership tickets show. The Lion was designed in 1965 (eight years before) and first appeared on the jumpers two years before the top membership ticket was produced by Fitzroy.

It was eventually replaced by the design from the Scanlens footy cards.

When exactly was this done? By 1970?

But it's still a Fitzroy lion however you want to argue it and was used in an official capacity.

But in terms of the merger agreement, not THE Fitzroy lion. That's the one trademarked by the VFL-AFL.

 

[Mero]

I understand what you're trying to say.
I just don't understand how the lion from the membership tickets and the embroidered logo is not the Fitzroy lion when it's use was for a longer period, by Fitzroy, than the one licensed by the VFL Licencing Dept on behalf of Fitzroy.
In my opinion, while similar, and maybe the second is based off the first, the original is the better of the two.

 

[Roylion]

I just don't understand how the lion from the membership tickets and the embroidered logo is not the Fitzroy lion when it's use was for a longer period, by Fitzroy, than the one licensed by the VFL Licencing Dept on behalf of Fitzroy.

Personally I can't see much of a difference between the lion that is on the 1970 Fitzroy membership ticket and the lion that appeared in the VFL-AFL official Fitzroy logo. In my view they are virtually the same lion. As far as I'm concerned, its clear that both are THE Fitzroy lion.

However....if some want to distinguish between the two (because one or two lines are different in the tail, or what has been embroidered on the Fitzroy jumper differs slightly from what the lion looks like in printed form), then in the context of the "merger", the trademarked VFL-AFL Fitzroy lion is THE Fitzroy lion.

In my opinion, while similar, and maybe the second is based off the first, the original is the better of the two.

I guess that's where we might disagree.

 

[Lagooner]

I hadn't seen this Lion until Mero posted it earlier, but there are clear differences when compared to the current Fitzroy lion. While the general pose is the same almost all the lines are different, the edges are much smoother and there are lots of little details in the face, mane and tail that really set it apart. Even the football is different a shape!

Whether or not it's better that the current design is subjective, but it's clearly different.