Unbelievable.....
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Oakley on SEN now restating history
- Thread starter western royboy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
salty parish
Senior List
yeh i heard him spewing his lies. He said the decision to get rid of the Roys was a 'no brainer'. Showed no remorse at all the prick.
I would be interested in more details in exactly what he was saying.
Saw a Twitter comment / conversation related to this that was responded to by the FFC twitter feed - was a bit over the top from an old Royboy, but it seems like Oakley provoked it through his comments.
Saw a Twitter comment / conversation related to this that was responded to by the FFC twitter feed - was a bit over the top from an old Royboy, but it seems like Oakley provoked it through his comments.
- Oct 4, 2007
- 5,171
- 1,863
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I listened to the whole thing. What he said was pretty much what I had already read through the books. Narau the creditors wanted the best return for the money they were owed. They had not been offered much from north so went with Brisbane who offered to honour past players wear lion jumper use same song...
He also mentioned he gave advance payments to fitzroy for dividends. He was not a prick to fitzroy. The afl was 20 million in debt itself. Not like nowadays when the afl are flying.
It annoys me that people have this vendetta that Oakley personally wanted to fold fitzroy. It was out of his hands.
Btw Oakley also allocated fitzroy office space to use their administration headquarters at afl house. He went over & beyond. But Narau was the ones who wanted their money back for loans
Here it here
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-1/8115
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-2/8114
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-3/8113
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-4/8112
He also mentioned he gave advance payments to fitzroy for dividends. He was not a prick to fitzroy. The afl was 20 million in debt itself. Not like nowadays when the afl are flying.
It annoys me that people have this vendetta that Oakley personally wanted to fold fitzroy. It was out of his hands.
Btw Oakley also allocated fitzroy office space to use their administration headquarters at afl house. He went over & beyond. But Narau was the ones who wanted their money back for loans
Here it here
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-1/8115
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-2/8114
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-3/8113
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Ross-Oakley-on-Jesaulenko-You-Beauty-Part-4/8112
- Moderator
- #5
So did I. The section on Fitzroy was the biggest load of crap I've listened for a long time. Ross Oakley talked absolute s**t.
That is not correct. North Melbourne's final offer to Nauru matched and indeed surpassed Brisbane's. It was the AFL commission's recommendation that was put to the clubs to vote on. The AFL's recommendation to favor Brisbane was made in John Kennedy's exact words to Dyson Hore-Lacy "for strategic reasons". In other words the aim was to strengthen the Bears and the game in Queensland.
The bottom line was that the board of Fitzroy wanted to merge with North Melbourne NOT the Brisbane Bears
Oakley is talking absolute and utter garbage. So the league was prepared to shell out $12 million to affect two mergers (one involving Melbourne - Hawthorn and the other involving Fitzroy), but couldn't:
a) Give $1 million to Fitzroy to preserve one of the competition's foundation clubs from having to merge or exit the competition.
b) Or make up the difference in offers (and in the end there was no difference) so that the Fitzroy board could merge with the club of their choice.
The total Fitzroy debt to Nauru in 1996 was $1.25 million.
Oh please! Oakley along with Graeme Samuel and Ian Collins was at the forefront of blocking every effort Fitzroy made to generate extra revenue. It was official AFL policy to reduce the number of club's in Melbourne. That was admitted by an AFL commission member after the commission knocked back Fitzroy's application to play four home games in Canberra.
How generous of them.
And when was this? 1991? Fitzroy had their own office space after 1992 at their Club Hotel.
Only because Fitzroy was seeking a merger with North Melbourne and Nauru wanted their debt paid out of the $ 6 million merger money. North Melbourne (with the encouragement of the AFL) refused to allow any more than $550,000 out of the $6 million to be paid to Nauru.
Apparently there's a book coming out about the transition from the VFL to the AFL. Let's hope they interview a few Fitzroy directors to explain the AFL's role in the deliberate removal of Fitzroy from the competition.
Oakley, Samuel, Collins and anyone else on the Commission in 1996 can all rot in hell as far as I'm concerned.
- Thread starter
- #6
May I direct you to "Fitzroy" by Dyson Hore-Lacy, you might reconsider your post if you read it. Time heals all wounds - no amount of time will ever heal these ones I'm afraid.
- Oct 4, 2007
- 5,171
- 1,863
- AFL Club
- West Coast
So he got on live radio & talked absolute bullshit?
I am struggling to understand why you feel he does bul crap stories.
Yes I've read dhl's book with the lion on the front.
Please answer me these questions
1 Did fitzroy owe money to Narau? If yes as a business their main objective is to recover funds for their stakeholders?
2if the north melbourne option was more "viable" why was it not approved? The administrators wanted the best return they were calling the shots. As Ross said in the chat today fitzroy were gone either way. Why would you not want the Brisbane option? A club going into its 9th year vs a club that had just won the flag & knowing that maybe none of the whole fitzroy playing list would get a game rd1 for north (those who north decide they even want)
If the north option was actually approved fitzroy would be less of a identity than what it actually is today.
Did fitzroy not have 4,000 member in 96? Now as Ross said sadly fitzroys supporter base was small.
As a business plan sense what positives could be achieved? They owed more money than they had how could they honestly survive?
Now as to say Ross is a s**t talker that's a shock.
In 89 at footscray the supporters rallied & with the help of Peter Gordon doing the hard yards & getting the funds needed they survived. Back in 89 they were proposed to merge with fitzroy. What financial state were the lions in , in 89?
Who was the face of the lions survival in 96? Who offered to be the "white knight" I don't think anyone chucked their hand up did they?
Why would Ross lie is all I'm asking.
I am struggling to understand why you feel he does bul crap stories.
Yes I've read dhl's book with the lion on the front.
Please answer me these questions
1 Did fitzroy owe money to Narau? If yes as a business their main objective is to recover funds for their stakeholders?
2if the north melbourne option was more "viable" why was it not approved? The administrators wanted the best return they were calling the shots. As Ross said in the chat today fitzroy were gone either way. Why would you not want the Brisbane option? A club going into its 9th year vs a club that had just won the flag & knowing that maybe none of the whole fitzroy playing list would get a game rd1 for north (those who north decide they even want)
If the north option was actually approved fitzroy would be less of a identity than what it actually is today.
Did fitzroy not have 4,000 member in 96? Now as Ross said sadly fitzroys supporter base was small.
As a business plan sense what positives could be achieved? They owed more money than they had how could they honestly survive?
Now as to say Ross is a s**t talker that's a shock.
In 89 at footscray the supporters rallied & with the help of Peter Gordon doing the hard yards & getting the funds needed they survived. Back in 89 they were proposed to merge with fitzroy. What financial state were the lions in , in 89?
Who was the face of the lions survival in 96? Who offered to be the "white knight" I don't think anyone chucked their hand up did they?
Why would Ross lie is all I'm asking.
- Moderator
- #8
Yep.
Because he totally misrepresented the situation. The statement that all North were going to offer was the name "Fitzroy" on the back of the jumper and the collar was going to change to one of Fitzroy's and that's all North were going to offer is just complete bullshit.
If you've truly read Dyson Hore-Lacy's book you would know this already. The terms of the North Fitzroy merger (agreed to by both boards) was clearly spelt out.
You mean their 'shareholders'. I am a shareholder of the Fitzroy Football Club. I was a shareholder of the Fitzroy Football Club in 1996. I've already explained the circumstances in which Nauru called in their loan. Fitzroy had negotiated a settlement with Nauru before the administrator was called in.
In the words of the chairman of the AFL commission John Kennedy to Ron Casey and later to Dyson Hore-Lacy. "For strategic reasons."
Then if Fitzroy were gone either way why wouldn't the AFL allow a merger with the Fitzroy directors' and shareholders' preferred option which was with the North Melbourne Football Club. In the end Fitzroy wasn't merged anyway, because the directors opposed it. Brisbane just rebranded themselves and received $6 million as a reward.
- 11 Home games in Melbourne (instead of five)
- Training base in Melbourne (instead of in Brisbane
- Opportunities to attend club functions in Melbourne)
- Retention of the name "Fitzroy". Club was going to be called "North Fitzroy Kangaroos".
- Merger conditions guaranteed for twenty years.
That is very debatable. Go and re-read the conditions of the North Melbourne - Fitzroy merger.
Or this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_VFL/AFL_clubs
More support from the AFL commission for a start.
I can provide a list of all the actions the AFL commission took to remove Fitzroy from the competition as per their official policy.
Better than Footscray.
Bernie Ahern. Bernie was refused permission by the AFL to lend money to Fitzroy.
Because he's trying to justify an AFL commission decision to remove Fitzroy that even Graeme Samuel has since admitted was wrong.
- Thread starter
- #9
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/sanfl-makes-the-tough-call-on-afl-reserves-teams.1010333/
Move down the page a bit to Post #16 the part about Dr Allen Aylett.
BANG!
Move down the page a bit to Post #16 the part about Dr Allen Aylett.
BANG!
- Moderator
- #10
It's no secret the AFL wanted us out of the competition.
It'd be interesting to know if Allen Aylett did actually say that. He was chairman of the VFL from 1977 to 1983 and President of North Melbourne from 2001-2005 after a first stint as President in the 1970s.
- Thread starter
- #11
I'd be majorly disappointed if he did, because I have always respected him, however I reckon it's odds on he did say that, it's funny how life turns, he's now walked away from the Roos because they wouldn't move to the Gold Coast.
People forget that the AFL had already given the green light to Port to come in and we were surplus to requirements. I find it perverse that in an attempt to paint themselves out to be good blokes after the fact, the three protaganists all say if it happened to day we'd be ok.
Lockhart Road
Cultural Attache
- Mar 26, 2013
- 5,424
- 27,765
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Port Adelaide Magpies
Well, Allen didn't actually say it, he whispered it. For my ears only but not off the record, all but twenty years ago. Allen would've naturally thought he was on safe ground being in Dingo Corner in some northern hemisphere place called Hong Kong.
And as I've pointed out in my post, I'm going by memory. But what he said was so close to what I've reported in quotes that the meaning was no different, and I've never forgotten it as it made such an encouraging impression on me, being a Port Adelaide person and being desperately keen at the time for Port to be admitted to the AFL. (So keen that on a visit to Adelaide in 1995 I did my bit to finance their quest by buying membership in the Magpies for the first time in my life even though I was only passing thru.)
My impression was that Allen Aylett was a good bloke, as well as a great footballer, having seen him play in the late 1950s / early 1960s on Adelaide Oval wearing the hated Big V.
- Moderator
- #13
I think that's a convenient excuse to cover their own shortcomings. Ross Oakley's duplicity in today's SEN interview is borne home by the fact that he makes a big deal about how the League was $20 million in debt when he came into the job as CEO and that the League could subsequently not afford to prop up Fitzroy. I don't buy it.
That may have been the case in 1986, but was certainly not the case in 1996. The very fact the League could offer $12 million to support two proposed mergers in 1996 and paid $6 million to the Bears show they had the wherewithal to support for Fitzroy. All that was lacking desire. What they truly wanted was to reduce the number of Melbourne based clubs and they were prepared to put undue pressure on their desired target to leave the competition by hook or by crook. In the 1990's the target was Fitzroy.
- Oct 4, 2007
- 5,171
- 1,863
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Edited for accuracy.
- Moderator
- #15
In the 1990's the AFL target to reduce clubs in Melbourne was Fitzroy. I can provide an extensive list of all the actions the AFL took to keep pressure on Fitzroy to exit the competition, if you like.
No other club, including Richmond, was subject to such persecution. In fact Richmond' s Leon Daphne was one of the clubs at the forefront of seeing Fitzroy exit the competition. Richmond sought to take over Fitzroy in 1996 making a very poor offer which was immediately rejected by the Fitzroy board.
Melbourne and Hawthorn sought a merger of their own volition and not at the behest of the AFL. Fitzroy was actively encouraged to merge by the AFL several times. I can detail those requests too if you like.
Doss
Ass
- Aug 1, 2011
- 75,214
- 112,305
- AFL Club
- Essendon
It's extremely insulting to people's intelligence that Oakley is still trying to rewrite history all these years later.
The evidence is abundantly clear; the VFL and then AFL wanted Fitzroy gone, and would stop at very little to see that come to fruition.
For Oakley to try and portray that eventuality as being inevitable (and even worse, to try and suggest the AFL tried to help them) is complete rubbish.
If Oakley is just going to keep spinning propoganda on the issue, he'd be much better just saying nothing at all- Fitzroy fans don't deserve to keep having these lies about their club perpetuated and spread.
The evidence is abundantly clear; the VFL and then AFL wanted Fitzroy gone, and would stop at very little to see that come to fruition.
For Oakley to try and portray that eventuality as being inevitable (and even worse, to try and suggest the AFL tried to help them) is complete rubbish.
If Oakley is just going to keep spinning propoganda on the issue, he'd be much better just saying nothing at all- Fitzroy fans don't deserve to keep having these lies about their club perpetuated and spread.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
From what I have heard and read about how the AFL expanded in the 1990s it was as much a case of Fitzroy being the victim of circumstance being the weakest club financially and on the field rather than deciding that Fitzroy had to go. In 1993 the AFL decided to expand to 16 teams and bring in 2 new clubs one from SA to be Port Adelaide and establish a new team in Perth from scratch (Fremantle). This would still of left the draw with a bye which they didn't want so they needed to get two teams to merge, hence the $6m incentive for the first two clubs to do so.
What really annoys me about those in the AFL administration from that time (Oakley, Collins & co) still try and paint a different picture to the whole thing to make it seem like they had no control of the situation. It is an attitude that is still causing the current AFL administration problems, by failing to admit the truth and deal with it properly and publicly.
- Moderator
- #18
Yep, I agree. They had plenty of opportunity and the means to follow a different path than the one they did. The AFL deliberately manipulated the North-Fitzroy merger to make it fall over so they could give $6 million to the Bears and give the Bears a Melbourne supporter base. Even the administrator of Fitzroy was manipulated into doing what the AFL ultimately wanted.
Then of course 10-15 years later, having got what they wanted, the AFL can then disavow the terms of the merger, leaving thousands of Fitzroy fans with less and less representation of their club in the AFL.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
And with a club that for the last 6 years has done its best to disenfranchise the remain Victorian supporter base further, by holding events at times unsuitable to most and even then only providing access to a very limited number of players. Add to this the Victorian Brisbane Lions cheer squad is a disgrace, but then again I got kicked out of the Fitzroy one for drinking whilst underage.
So all that will remains for the 'boys from old Fitzroy' is for them to catch a tram up Brunswick St on a Saturday to watch the proper footy that is premier B in the VAFA.
royboy 29
Debutant
Well said Slax,see you @ Brunswick streey
Mobbs
A Large Portion, Yes
Unsurprising. The power wielded by the AFL knows few peers within our shores. Merely from their access to media alone, through the immense amount of airtime traded, they have in the past been able to force at least one major industry to take blame for incidents which were purely the fault of the league. This is no less than corruption and standover. The fact that the Fitzroy brand has actually survived thisleviathan's eradication pressure to any extent at all, is a massive victory against the perpetrators.
- Oct 29, 2012
- 4,565
- 7,667
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Parramatta Eels, Arsenal, The Exers
My thoughts on this issue (and Toss himself) have been pretty well covered by most of the previous posters.
I have never understood his pathological desire to reduce the number of Melbourne clubs to his arbitrary magic number of six. Especially considering the money he was willing to provide to make the mergers go ahead. Why didn't the tosser (who I won't mention by name) just use the money to pay Fitzroy's debts?
But do you know what shits me the most? Carlton were allowed to remain in the league. They decide to systematically cheat the salary cap on multiple occasions and weren't penalised at all for it. The tankers were much worse run than Fitzroy ever were, and their debts in the early 2000s dwarfed Fitzroy's. They still haven't paid their $1.5 million loan to the AFL. The tosser, during his whiteanting campaign, called Fitzroy the AFL's "worst product", yet they only won 2 spoons, and Carltank won 3 (with 2 15th-place finishes to go with them). The tankers were much worse for much longer. If the criteria which Fitzroy were removed under were applicable across the board, Carlton would've been out of the AFL faster than you could say "salary cap cheats". It reminds me of the NRL's disgusting, unfair and illegal criteria that favoured Super League teams (kicking out Balmain, North Sydney and St. George while keeping Cronulla, Penrith and Canberra).
Oh, and to the bloke who said Fitzroy was the only target, that was untrue, and the Melbourne Hawks merger was as much of our own volition as the North Fitzroy one was of Fitzroy's own volition. I could write a book on what the AFL has done to make Hawthorn's life hard since the 1990s, and much of it echoes what happened to Fitzroy (such as being kicked out of our home ground).
There is simply no rational reason to remove a club from the competition. When you do that you remove the fans that make the game what it is. I don't know a single Fitzroy fan who supports the Brisbane Lions. At least Graeme Samuel has admitted his mistake. Fitzroy should be readmitted ASAP; this would provide the biggest possible immediate boost to the number of AFL fans.
UP YOURS OAKLEY.
I have never understood his pathological desire to reduce the number of Melbourne clubs to his arbitrary magic number of six. Especially considering the money he was willing to provide to make the mergers go ahead. Why didn't the tosser (who I won't mention by name) just use the money to pay Fitzroy's debts?
But do you know what shits me the most? Carlton were allowed to remain in the league. They decide to systematically cheat the salary cap on multiple occasions and weren't penalised at all for it. The tankers were much worse run than Fitzroy ever were, and their debts in the early 2000s dwarfed Fitzroy's. They still haven't paid their $1.5 million loan to the AFL. The tosser, during his whiteanting campaign, called Fitzroy the AFL's "worst product", yet they only won 2 spoons, and Carltank won 3 (with 2 15th-place finishes to go with them). The tankers were much worse for much longer. If the criteria which Fitzroy were removed under were applicable across the board, Carlton would've been out of the AFL faster than you could say "salary cap cheats". It reminds me of the NRL's disgusting, unfair and illegal criteria that favoured Super League teams (kicking out Balmain, North Sydney and St. George while keeping Cronulla, Penrith and Canberra).
Oh, and to the bloke who said Fitzroy was the only target, that was untrue, and the Melbourne Hawks merger was as much of our own volition as the North Fitzroy one was of Fitzroy's own volition. I could write a book on what the AFL has done to make Hawthorn's life hard since the 1990s, and much of it echoes what happened to Fitzroy (such as being kicked out of our home ground).
There is simply no rational reason to remove a club from the competition. When you do that you remove the fans that make the game what it is. I don't know a single Fitzroy fan who supports the Brisbane Lions. At least Graeme Samuel has admitted his mistake. Fitzroy should be readmitted ASAP; this would provide the biggest possible immediate boost to the number of AFL fans.
UP YOURS OAKLEY.
tassielions
Debutant
- Nov 12, 2009
- 122
- 35
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Fitzroy Football Club
What craps me off is how certain clubs like Richmond Carlton Sydney have received help along the way in the way of priority draft picks money when we had to battle in the old fashion way if we weren't road blocked by the afl by making up a new anti Fitzroy rule. When we finished 14th in 91 we had a good nucleus of players and moved up the ladder and finished promisingly in 93 with 10 wins and 10 losses people forget that we had the heart of our team ripped out that summer due to the Afl funding lynch's move up north. I always wonder what that team would have been like if it had a chance to mature. .
- Jul 9, 2010
- 24,163
- 26,536
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Do you guys resent Roos and Lynch and co. for leaving Fitzroy? I mean surely the impact of them leaving had a further effect on the team and club.
- Thread starter
- #25
Roos, no - the jig was well and truly up by the time he pulled the pin and he gave more to the club than anyone, Lynch - his move probably precipitated the final exit and I was dirty on him for a long time, but with the benefit of hindsight it was a on offer similar to the one's that have gone down for the expansion club's recently and you couldn't blame him.
