Article Fitzroy's Long Slow Death (AFL.com.au)

[footyfan1978]

You're quoting a year when they were broke, the place had gone **** up, and fans had given up because there was nothing left to save. The merger announcement was made in the first week of July - so half way through the season - and you still expected them to be able to draw large crowds?

I can only imagine that you're quoting away crowds only because it serves your argument better?

If you want a genuine apples with apples comparison, go back to about 1993 (before they were condemned to the western suburbs where their fans never wanted to go) and compare all crowds. I dunno what it'll show - but it'll be a far more reasonable comparison than the one you've used.

It will show below that they compare with North in terms of support and North are still around and won two premierships since and during this 1993 season of the figures some have been using to serve their argument, North at times were on top of the ladder.
For a bunch of fans that make a lot of noise of sticking loyal through tough times take note of Richmond drew even worse at the same venue against an interstate club than Fitzroy.
I noticed that number was not mentioned by the posters before from interstate as I presume it did not suit their argument ?

Unlike nomadic Fitzroy that had not played in their own suburb for decades , Footscray had never moved home and were playing home games in their actual suburb in 1993 and yet barely drew more than a thousand more supporters than Fitzroy were drawing against Sydney that season.

Dare say Fitzroy support was in same realm as North and Footscray. The two clubs they came closest to merging with.
These are two clubs at various times talked as possible premiership contenders in 2016.

Fitzroy's home crowds against non-Victorian teams in 1993:

6,214 vs Brisbane
8,545 vs Adelaide
10,257 vs Sydney

North 9,230 v Sydney at same venue Fitzroy played Swans of Princes Park
What is more, North were top of ladder and kicked 35.19 (229) that day against Swans

North played Brisbane at the much bigger and public transport friendly MCG and drew a crowd of 8,653
Richmond themselves at MCG drew 14,497 against Brisbane by the way.
Hawthorn drew 14,397 at Waverley Park against Brisbane (This is a ground that could hold over 70,000)
Hawthorn drew 13,397 at Waverley Park against Sydney
Carlton drew 21,900 at Princes Park against Sydney in final home and away round after Swans won only one game all year.
St.Kilda drew 11,748 at Waverley Park against Brisbane.

Footscray drew 11,797 v Sydney at their traditional home of Western Oval
Footscray drew 15,397 v Brisbane there too.
Carlton drew 16,934 v Brisbane at Princes Park
Essendon drew 20,454 v Brisbane at the MCG
Melbourne drew 15,664 v Brisbane at the MCG
Richmond drew 6,025 v West Coast at Princes Park (worse than Fitzroy v Brisbane at same ground)
Footscray drew 12,444 v West Coast at Western Oval

 

[footyfan1978]

Ya know, sometimes you look back at blokes like Oakley and think "he was the man that was needed, it was a tough time for tough decisions, he did was necessary, he had to be the unpopular one" etc etc

Then you see stuff like he kept that cartoon "decorating" his wall, and how much he revelled in it.

And yeah you remember, he really was the piece of excrement we all thought he was.

A true enemy of football.

Wayne Jackson for mine is of the excrement ilk too.

 

[footyfan1978]

Not that long ago Port Adelaide had tarps at their homeground to try to hide the fact the crowds were well below 20,000 for many home games in a ground that held over 50,000 seats.

 

[Sausages]

Unsure why there is any doubt - the AFL killed off the Roys in the pursuit of business interest, ie expansion.

They'll do it again too, IF it ever suits their policies. I've a long history on this board of being anti-AFL administration and the day will never dawn that I don't view the entire apparatus with absolute cynicism and derision.

I cannot think of a single positive that came from stabbing a foundation club in the manner the AFL did. It was manipulative, punitive and awash with machiavellian artifice.

All in all, a disgraceful display by sports administrators in Australian sporting history.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Unsure why there is any doubt - the AFL killed off the Roys in the pursuit of business interest, ie expansion.

They'll do it again too, IF it ever suits their policies. I've a long history on this board of being anti-AFL administration and the day will never dawn that I don't view the entire apparatus with absolute cynicism and derision.

I cannot think of a single positive that came from stabbing a foundation club in the manner the AFL did. It was manipulative, punitive and awash with machiavellian artifice.

All in all, a disgraceful display by sports administrators in Australian sporting history.

Are you an NRL fan by any Chance?

 

[exe ex machina]

North Sydney Bears

 

[MSB ROYS]

North Sydney Bears

South Qld Crushers..Newtown Jets... Adelaide Rams...

 

[exe ex machina]

South Qld Crushers..Newtown Jets... Adelaide Rams...

Both leaguea had no idea how to set up a national comp.

 

[Doss]

You can't though because it's not that simple. Many other clubs were also in debt at that time and would have be unable to come up with the money.
Plus that would have been just to erase the debt and get them back to zero. They still would not have been profitable. And with the situation of players leaving, changing grounds every other year, the AFL shafting them at every turn, it would have been throwing good money after bad.

Of course it wasn't as simple as that, I guess I was more pointing out that it was far from an insurmountable situation if the will had been there.

Unfortunately for Fitzroy, the league's will was very much in the opposite direction and had been for years.

 

[Kram]

Not that long ago Port Adelaide had tarps at their homeground to try to hide the fact the crowds were well below 20,000 for many home games in a ground that held over 50,000 seats.

True Port fans are notorious bandwaggoners that disappeared for a bit when they were losing. But Fitzroy were still minnows in comparison that would have have been lucky to have even half the amount of support out there that Port ever had even when things were bad.

 

[Kram]

As sad as it was for a team to get taken over ('merger', just lol) and the way the AFL treated them was an absolute disgrace, for mine Fitzroy still had to go. They just weren't viable in Victoria, barely anyone supported them and if they had hung around for another 20 years in an over-saturated market they just would have been a constant financial drain on the league that probably drew crowds of 10-20k per match.

With the benefit of hindsight it was a massive stuff up them not doing a South Melbourne and moving up north in 1987. Sure that wouldn't have been without pain for supporters but it would have been a hell of a lot better than what happened in the following decade.

 

[Broken]

True Port fans are notorious bandwaggoners that disappeared for a bit when they were losing. But Fitzroy were still minnows in comparison that would have have been lucky to have even half the amount of support out there that Port ever had even when things were bad.

From memory Fitzroy drew good crowds at the Junction Oval and Princes Park.
Moves to hated Victoria Park and the Western Oval didn't appeal to a lot of Fitzroy supporters and crowds seem to drop off. The decade long relocation/merge scuttlebutt mixed with poor form didn't help either.

 

[Doss]

As an aside, and Fitzroy fans could confirm, I believe that when Fitzroy tried its Tasmania experiment in 1991-92, the AFL refused to cover accomodation and possibly flight costs also. The players had to lodge with supporters in Hobart who volunteered their homes- just farcical.

It's when you hear things like this that the blood really boils. They also played the first game in Canberra in 1995, and had some designs of switching half their home games there in time, but again the AFL wouldn't have a bar of it. There were also rumours of potentially interested sponsors being discouraged or even warned off by the AFL. It's not as if they didn't try different things to help themselves, but they were stymied.

 

[Kram]

From memory they actually lost money trying to play games in Tassie?

 

[Doss]

From memory they actually lost money trying to play games in Tassie?

Yes they did. The AFL more or less refusing to bankroll any of it would be a good reason as to why.

Can you imagine that today?

 

[raskolnikov]

Having been through the same with my NRL team, the North Sydney Bears, I can understand the anger of Fitzroy supporters. I still feel a lot of anger with what happened to the Bears and my love for the game has been greatly diminished. When the Bears were in Rugby League was my first sport. Now it's more of a mild interest. I follow the Bulldogs now but don't have nearly the same passion for them as I did the Bears. I can fully understand Fitzroy supporters who gave up on the AFL when Fitzroy were merged.

 

[Roylion]

Although people tend to mock Damien Barrett I recall a couple of years back he asked Ian Collins whether the AFL should say sorry for past wrongdoings against Fitzroy. I don't recall Collins' specific answer, however, I'm sure we can all safety assume the tone.

Damien Barrett also wrote this back page story about Fitzroy returning to the playing field.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/fitzroy-lions-to-roar-again/story-e6frf9jf-1111118260152

 

[Bunk Moreland]

As sad as it was for a team to get taken over ('merger', just lol) and the way the AFL treated them was an absolute disgrace, for mine Fitzroy still had to go. They just weren't viable in Victoria, barely anyone supported them and if they had hung around for another 20 years in an over-saturated market they just would have been a constant financial drain on the league that probably drew crowds of 10-20k per match.

With the benefit of hindsight it was a massive stuff up them not doing a South Melbourne and moving up north in 1987. Sure that wouldn't have been without pain for supporters but it would have been a hell of a lot better than what happened in the following decade.

Hence the continued attempts to innovate and remake themselves, whether that be playing interstate, or relocating, or merging with North.

The AFL actually actively thwarted these attempts. It's shocking stuff when you read about it.

 

[Big Blood]

As sad as Fitzroy's death was the 'AFL' is still a glorified VFL with a few aberrant interstate clubs (officially known as 'interstate clubs') to bulk up TV revenue. Half of the clubs are in the one city - a joke for an allegedly national competition. Even the NRL is more diversified. The result is a parochial, uninformed, backwards-looking monoculture that maintains the status quo through occasional cash-seeking forays into other parts of the country. It really should be re-named VFL Plus.

 

[SgtSchulz]

Not that long ago Port Adelaide had tarps at their homeground to try to hide the fact the crowds were well below 20,000 for many home games in a ground that held over 50,000 seats.

There is a difference between below 20,000 and averaging below 8,000.

 

[Stopher]

It would've been great if the AFL had even offered them a chance (albeit by force) to effectively relegate themselves back into the VFA and maintain their original identity. A one-off financial compensation (as opposed to trades and picks) could've been allowed for other clubs to pay for the players wanting to stay in the national competition, thus removing the majority, if not all, of their remaining debt. The costs of being a stand-alone club in the state league would've been far more manageable than in the AFL. It could've even allowed them a return to their roots at Brunswick Street Oval.
Of course, that would've prevented the league from siphoning off the cream of the talent into their desired clubs in Brisbane and Port, so going by some of the disgraceful tactics they actually managed, this was never going to happen, sadly.

 

[Roylion]

It would've been great if the AFL had even offered them a chance (albeit by force) to effectively relegate themselves back into the VFA and maintain their original identity. A one-off financial compensation (as opposed to trades and picks) could've been allowed for other clubs to pay for the players wanting to stay in the national competition, thus removing the majority, if not all, of their remaining debt. The costs of being a stand-alone club in the state league would've been far more manageable than in the AFL. It could've even allowed them a return to their roots at Brunswick Street Oval.

Once again. Fitzroy Football Club IS back at the Brunswick Street Oval. The very same football club as the one that once held an AFL licence.

 

[Mr Ripper]

Once again. Fitzroy Football Club IS back at the Brunswick Street Oval. The very same football club as the one that once held an AFL licence.

Hahahaha. This post should be stickied to the top of the Introductions sub-forum.

 

[Roylion]

Hence the continued attempts to innovate and remake themselves, whether that be playing interstate, or relocating, or merging with North.

Yep.

As many know, Fitzroy attempted to play home games in Tasmania, had a deal done in 1995 to play at least four and possibly up to seven home games in Canberra, only to be refused by the AFL, attempted to enter a merger with Footscray in 1989 to form the Fitzroy Bulldogs, with Melbourne in 1994 to form the Melbourne Lions and with North Melbourne in 1996 to form the North Fitzroy Kangaroos. Details of what was done to force Fitzroy out of the AFL are below.

The AFL actually actively thwarted these attempts. It's shocking stuff when you read about it.

The following is a list of some of the measures that the AFL took against Fitzroy in the years leading up to 1996.

• Fitzroy were forced to move from the Junction Oval in 1984 as part of VFL's ground rationalisation policy, beginning the process of the Club depending on other clubs such as Carlton and Collingwood (their traditional rivals) to generate significant revenue from a home ground. Not surprisingly Fitzroy recorded losses every year from 1985 to 1992 largely because of a lack of ground revenue. Interestingly in 1981, Fitzroy had the fourth largest membership of any of the twelve VFL clubs.
  
• the VFL refused to allow Hecron in 1987 to take part ownership of Fitzroy as part of a sponsorship deal, wanting them to pay a full fee for an AFL licence, that had seen Fitzroy reject a relocation to Brisbane in 1986.
• the AFL refused permission for the club to play four home games per year in Canberra from 1995 onwards. The club even offered to play up to seven-eight home games a year in a partial relocation. Upon their application to play four games in Canberra the Club was told that Fitzroy's application to play 4 home games in Canberra (which would have netted the club at least $350,000 annually guaranteed) would not be a "credible exercise in the Canberra market" and would not be enough games to be worthwhile. Ross Oakley later publicly said that Fitzroy was their "worst product" (great for attracting sponsorship) and that the AFL wasn't going to send their "worst product" up to Canberra. Fitzroy then offered to play 7 home games in Canberra, which would have netted Fitzroy at least an extra $700,000 a year on top of what had already been negotiated. This was refused as well. In fact when adding in corporate sponsorship, and ground rights at Bruce Stadium (which would have been upgraded), Fitzroy's projections were they could have made $1 million extra per season. Fitzroy's application had the support of 'AFL for Canberra' organisation, the Canberra Raiders, the Ainslee Football Club and the ACT chief minister who had offered for the ACT government to upgrade Bruce Stadium, if Fitzroy relocated home games there.. However the AFL point blank refused to entertain the idea. An AFL commissioner later admitted that the reason why the AFL knocked it back was because they wanted Port Adelaide in the competition and therefore wanted to keep the pressure on Fitzroy to merge, so there could be a maximum of 16 teams.
• the AFL refused to help financially assist Fitzroy's Tasmanian experiment in 1991-1992. Fitzroy had to pay the whole cost themselves, including accommodation. Fitzroy had to even billet their players in supporters' homes. Since that time, AFL support for Hawthorn, St Kilda and North Melbourne home games in Tasmania has been significant.
• in order to pressure Fitzroy to merge or liquidate, the AFL refused to guarantee Fitzroy's 1992-1993 dividend (which they were going to receive anyway) which Fitzroy wanted re-directed to Westpac, despite AFL club directors agreeing to do so. Westpac wouldn't accept the re-direction unless the AFL guaranteed that Fitzroy would receive at least $1.1 million (which they were). It took the threat of legal action and the support of other clubs for the AFL to finally relent.
• In 1993 the AFL threatened to sue Fitzroy for $250,000 that had been paid to Fitzroy by CUB as part of a club sponsorship, which included selling CUB's product in the Fitzroy Club Hotel. CUB was the AFL's sponsor and the AFL thought they should have received the money instead of Fitzroy. This was despite the fact that CUB had been a minor sponsor of Fitzroy for over ten years previously. The AFL even threatened to reduce the dividend that was due to other clubs by the amount Fitzroy received. This lack of support from the AFL was the major reason the Lions had to consider a better financial deal at the Western Oval, in order to try and raise more revenue which in turn alienated some supporters and players. That new deal included Footscray loaning Fitzroy the $250,000 demanded by the AFL, which was then paid to the AFL. Alistair Lynch later said that Fitzroy's forced move to the Western Oval was the major reason why he decided to leave Fitzroy and sign with the Bears. Broderick, Gale, Elliott and Dundas followed Lynch shortly after with Broderick also citing the move to the Western Oval as a factor in his decision to leave. Robert Shaw the Fitzroy coach lamented at the time that he'd just lost his next three club captains.
• the AFL objected to a Fitzroy sponsorship deal with Schweppes because the AFL were sponsored by Coca Cola. Fitzroy managed to raise $110,000 from this sponsorship.
• it was later discovered that it was the AFL that had been advising player manager Damian Smith on the best way for the Bears to acquire Alistair Lynch from Fitzroy.
• From 1993 the AFL issued a number of solvency notices to Fitzroy where the club had to satisfy AFL criteria that they could meet their financial debts for the next 12 months or their AFL licence would be withdrawn. Fitzroy was the only club to receive a solvency notice, despite several others being in considerable financial difficulty.
  
• the AFL refused to allow millionaire Bernie Ahern to lend any more money to Fitzroy, after he saved them from merging / folding in 1991. He lent money to Fitzroy for a second time later on, because in his words, he felt Fitzroy had been treated unfairly.
• From 1994 onwards the AFL presented several proposals to the Fitzroy directors to surrender Fitzroy's licence to the AFL and thereby liquidate Fitzroy Football Club Ltd., if it could not effect a merger, in return for "assistance packages" to keep the club going. That way Fitzroy's creditors (including Nauru) wouldn't get paid. One of these AFL proposals included a merger with the Port Adelaide Football Club to form the (I kid you not) "Port Adelaide Power Lions." derisively nicknamed by many as the "Power Lines"
  
• the AFL regularly leaked sensitive information provided by Fitzroy about their finances to the media, in order for journalists like Mike Sheahan to write negative stories about Fitzroy, which in turn scared off potential sponsors.
• the AFL regularly informed potential sponsors who would make inquiries about the possibility of sponsoring Fitzroy that not to bother because Fitzroy would not be in the competition for much longer (That's from a Fitzroy director at the time)
• Fitzroy's auditors KPMG were even raided by the Australian Securities Commission, under a warrant to investigate Fitzroy for 'suspect trading while insolvent' for 1993 and 1996. The ASC claimed they were acting on information passed to them. Naturally Fitzroy believe it was probably the AFL, who were the only external organisation who had full access to Fitzroy's finances. Nothing ever came of the raid.
• ....and even at the end, the AFL gave Fitzroy and North Melbourne until July 5th 1996 to complete their merger (which was done at 2 pm on July 4th), only to give the go-ahead to a Brisbane - Fitzroy merger (about 7 pm) on July 4th, after a Richmond led protest over the merger conditions (originally agreed to by the AFL and the clubs and communicated as such to both North Melbourne and Fitzroy).
• The reason that Nauru appointed an administrator to recover their $1.25 million loan was because the AFL was telling North that if they held out against Nauru, they wouldn't have to pay them at all and would receive the entire merger amount themselves. Then the AFL threatened to not guarantee the merger money. Faced with the prospect of getting none of their loan, back this forced Nauru to step in and recover the money themselves by appointing an administrator. This was despite the fact that the Fitzroy directors had already done a deal to settle with Nauru out of the merger money. However on the AFL's advice and urging, North Melbourne refused to authorise Fitzroy to pay any more than $550,000, instead of the $1 million asked. The debt to Nauru did not have to be paid back in full until October 2001, given it was a seven year deal. In other words the AFL actively intervened to ensure an administrator would be appointed to Fitzroy, so that they could manipulate the administrator into doing a deal to benefit the Brisbane Bears.

 

[Stopher]

Once again. Fitzroy Football Club IS back at the Brunswick Street Oval. The very same football club as the one that once held an AFL licence.

Sorry, I didn't properly state what i intended to. I did mean it would've meant a return there years earlier than what eventually occurred, though it is great for the old supporters that it happened in some capacity. It'd be interesting to get a % breakdown of what Fitzroy supporters did after 1996 too. How many gave up footy? How many got on board with the Lions? How many simply went to follow other AFL teams altogether? I wonder how these numbers would've been affected had they gone straight into the VFA/VFL after 1996. It's not really a question of what is right or wrong, but what felt right to supporters at that time.

In hindsight, I shouldn't have said it'd be 'great' for them to go back to the VFA/VFL, given they maintained some form of representation in the AFL through Brisbane and that there are many supporters who got on board with the merger who would be glad they did. I guess I was trying to say it'd have been nice for the club to have kept its identity through the whole ordeal without all the bloodshed and shithouse tactics by the league. There's no way that should need to happen like that.