Remove this Banner Ad

Roylion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dan26
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Ok, my first post here! And being a Royboy for 32 years (and counting!), it's good to hear the voice of you other Roys out there. Keep it up!

Congrats Tom FC and Olmy on your brilliant postings. Keep it up!
 
well said roys_galore!. seems to most of us that kaz, davo, and scarpetta are out of their depth on this one. not surprising when you read what they have to say (which isn't much at any rate).

must be a pretty lonely "roy-life" in perth!
 
Wasn't DAVO one of the people who got kicked off the forum for indecent language earlier this year?

I recall a DAVO posting on the forum a while back, mentioning that he'd support an alternate AFL side out of Brisbane, as opposed to the Lions, if one existed.

Not forgetting the bagging of A.Lynch, which, as I recall, was down to DAVO.

Yep. The more I think of it, the more DAVO fits into the shape of that person who consistently abused others on the forum, and just as frequently consistently got his facts wrong! No wonder he was kicked off.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

We Victoians wonder why interstaters have reservations about us.
These Lions seem to hate their own. Bagging them for being dumb Queenslanders.
Seems to me, they are the ones with the problem here.
 
Kaz, now you're getting into the spirit! P.A.'s - Prince Alfred for short
wink.gif
is also a top place.
smile.gif


John - if you're taking things in this topic seriously, then you're missing the point. People disagree on things in every club. I think it's good, that within a club, supporters can discuss football issues. If people disagree - so what! It's a sign that the Brisbane Lions are maturing as a football club. Wouldn't it be a bit boring it we all sat around telling each other how great we are and agree with each other all the time?

Besides, you can bet that those comments directed toward QLD'ers are nothing but stirrers. And why not! It's not 'that' serious.

It's just that some of our own are easier to stir than Bulldogs supporters! :P
 
Dan, Apologies for the delay in replying to your initial message. I've been reading the messages on this thread with a great deal of interest from Fitzroy and other Brisbane Lions supporters in the meantime.

The mishmash of information that pertains to the reporting of Brisbane Lions records by various groups such as the media outlets, the AFL and even the club stems is caused largely by the events of 1996. Even some of the media and certainly 90% of the footballing public don't fully understand what went on.

In my mind there is no doubt that a 'merger' occurred, but we are talking about club operations here (ie. football operations, coteries, existing finances, past players associations etc.) There are ALL sorts of reasons which I have posted elsewhere before, why the Brisbane Lions should be considered a derivation or spin-off of Fitzroy. To ignoramuses that continually state that Brisbane has no connection to Fitzroy whatsoever are just plain blind, stupid, ignorant or possibly all three. Sadly. This I have also argued before....I think successfully. Certainly no-one on these boards has put up any logical, convincing, supported with facts, counter-arguments as to why Brisbane should not be considered just one derivation of Fitzroy as it existed in the AFL.

However the Brisbane Lions are not 'Fitzroy' and I think every Fitzroy supporter or member whether supporting the Brisbane Lions or not would agree with this. It was a merger not a relocation. Personally I consider that Brisbane has enough of Fitzroy for me to support them to the point of becoming a member. Obviously several thousand other Fitzroy supporters, judging by the good support at Lions Victorian games feel the same way...although there will always be those who disagree...that is their decision.

Muddying the waters still further is the continued of the legal entity the "Fitzroy Football Club Ltd." of which I am also a current member and shareholder. The "Fitzroy Football Club Ltd." as such has no playing operations. It is a legal entity, not a football club, despite the name. It's club operations were merged in 1996 with that of the Brisbane Bears.

I have written to various media outlets before like many other Lions supporters, complaining about the way they report the figures...for little result and rarely a reply. However for such 'intelligent' people, it's obvious they struggle with the concept 'merger'....or just have little idea what went on in 1996. On one hand the various media outlets still refer to the 'merger'and use the term liberally, yet on the other hand they refuse to recognise that there is a 'new' club whose records are supposed to start in 1997.

Regarding the Bears, legally the same company that existed for the Bears, still exists for the Brisbane Lions. However the fact that the company has changed it's name to incorporate Fitzroy, the fact that the company is legally bound by the terms of the merger document...for at least seven years and in some conditions... for perpetuity, such as the use of the Lion symbol.....again suggest that in effect a new 'club' has been created.

The AFL licence that Brisbane holds has also been changed to reflect this. The club itself also begins it's records in 1997, and regards the Brisbane Bears records as something completely seperate, although all players who hve played in seasons 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 and beyond also have any Fitzroy or Bears records counted in the games for the 'Brisbane Lions.' If this is the case then the AFL and the media should reflect the Brisbane Lions' wishes.

One shudders to think how the media would have treated any other merger such as the Fitzroy-Footscray proposal of 1989, (Fitzroy records included, while Footscray's forgotten maybe) the Melbourne-Fitzroy proposal of 1995, the North Fitzroy Kangaroos or the Melbourne Hawks. (Melbourne records included, while Hawthorns forgotten probably). MY guess is the media in any of these cases would probably have completely disenfrachised one of the core supporter groups of the merged entities, unless they report only from the year of the merger. Certainly while the AFL still refers to tthe merger, therefore they should at least do us all the courtesy of reporting Lions records from 1997 only!
 
Originally posted by Davo:
eems to me, you only answer selected questions you hope you have some inkling about.
And when things start to heat up in the kitchen, your response is simple.
End of topic. Go back to the Lions footy forum, you're out of your depth here
Click to expand...

So DERO, err, I mean DAVO, just which questions in this topic haven't I answered? Whichever one it is, I am happy to answer it for you (bearing in mind, that I have already stated my case - I don't see why I should have to repeat myself).

As I see it, Kaz and I are quite entitled to disagree on any selected issue. Or can't you handle difference of opinion? Freedom of speech threatening is it?

Anyway, as another person correctly pointed out, you also had grounds for extreme disatisfaction with the club earlier in the year, and voiced this on the forum (even having a go at the admin.). Just a touch hypocritical there, don't you think? (Stick to the thug-ridden wharves, buddy, it's the only way you know).

Scarpetta - how am I showing my age by my posts? I think you're the one with the problem (ie: not being tolerant of another person's opinion). After all, I am entitled to my opinion aren't I?
 
Olmy,

You remind of the American Democrats.
You say that the Lions are not doing all they can for the supporters in Melbourne.
Someone replies, that hey they are doing this and that, which is really very good for us. But you don't like that answer, so you say the same thing.
Will you continue on here and lions.com.au until you get what you want.

Also I have noticed that you critised someone for saying something about our Melbourne based directors.When they pointed out that hey you had got it wrong. You bag them.

Olmy and everyone else.On the Lions website, it says under directors, that Ken Levy and Laurie Serafini are Melbourne based directors, its also says that Mac Tolliday is a long time supporter of Fitzroy and resides in Queensland.

You show your age Olmy, buy being so immature to bag a fellow supporter, and when she proves you wrong , you are not able to say hey I got it wrong.
 
Roylion, the Melbourne Hawks may have failed to include Hawthorn's player histories, but I reckon they would have kept our flags!!!
 
I am a Fitzroy supporter who chooses not to follow Brisbane Lions. I have no resentment towards the Brisbane Lions, but I do not support them.

Given that Brisbane Football Club would be well served to win over basically every old Fitzroy supporter, and given that I am not currently sufficiently pursuaded, Brisbane have therefore not done enough to win Roys.

Brisbane have done a heap, but there's more that could be done. They are the Lions, and they have a social club presence in Melbourne (at the Manningham), for a couple of simple examples.

I admit that it is possible no amount of change might make Brisbane an attractive proposition to me.

One example of the things that fail to win me is the theme song. Taking the Fitzroy song, and changing it to represent the two original clubs, may be looked on as a winner, by some fans who 'crossed over'. To me, it had the opposite effect. They may as well have Kenny's head on a stake outside the QLD headquarters, and try to call that representation. (For thos who don't know, Kenny is a lovable supporter who appeared at all games, jotting full statistics into an exercise book). In clarification, it appears to me as an adulteration, not as a concession.

Obviously, the only true satisfaction is to have one's own team, without any adulteration. In the case of Fitzroy, short of a civil war, this is impossible. But a drive to win more Roys would be in Brisbane FC's best interest.

Olmy once posted, on the Brisbane Forum, a set of possible incentives that he continues to suggest. I can't remember them now, but there were some good suggestions amongst them.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

They shouldnt incorporate Brisbane Lions and Brisbane Bears and consider themn one team.

Justas I have said all along, South Melbourne have won 3 flags, but Sydney have not won any and lost 1 GF.

Records of different teams should not be combined.
 
Kevin Sooky, How about some real factual evidence from you supporting the fact that South Melbourne and Sydney are different clubs? I posted the below under another topic, a few weeks ago, but never received any reply from you, refuting any of it. So for your benefit, I'll repeat it here.

- The Swans are launched at the Sydney Opera House on 22nd February 1982. They are still known as the 'South Melbourne Football Club' officially.

- A report by commissioned by the South Melbourne Football Club in July 1982 stated that the "South Melbourne Football Club Ltd., currently playing out of Sydney, [and trading.......my addition] as the 'Sydney Swans' is on the verge of bankrutpcy, as a result of playing 11 games at the SCG." This quote is from the actual report which was sent to me by a friend who used to be involved with the old South Melbourne club and was involved with the 'Keep South at South' movement.

- On the 14th May 1983, the then VFL agreed to subsidise the "South Melbourne Football Club Ltd." to the tune of $900,000. Because of this the VFL wanted to make sure the club was run according to their wishes and six VFL administrators were in addition to the eight man board. On that date also the legal entity that was the "South Melbourne Football Club Ltd", changed its name to the "Sydney Swans Ltd." A new company was NOT formed, the existing company merely changed it's name. It was also a year and half after they had moved to Sydney.

- On 31st July 1985, the "Sydney Swans Ltd." was sold to Geoffrey Edelstein's consortium, "Powerplay"

- On 7th May 1988, Powerplay sold "Sydney Swans Ltd." back to the VFL for $10.

- On 12th December 1988 control of the "Sydney Swans Ltd." was given by the VFL to a new group of 16 businessmen led by a Peter Weinert.

- They nearly pulled out in 1992 and as result of Carlton attempting to play some of their 'away' games, the other AFL clubs agreed to prop up the Swans (Sydney Swans Ltd.) by re-directing nearly 2 million dollars of their licence agreement into the club. The owners agreed to step back also and re-structure the club/company into a largely membership club as it was when the SAME company was called the SMFC Ltd. That is the current situation.

If you can refute any of this, Kevin Sooky with hard evidence, go right ahead. However it appears that you are incorrect and that South Melb. and Sydney are the same club, with their last premiership in 1933. I suppose you believe the VFL and AFL are different competitions also. If you do, then I hope you don't claim any premierships for your club before 1990.
 
Originally posted by scarpetta:
Olmy,

You show your age Olmy, buy being so immature to bag a fellow supporter, and when she proves you wrong , you are not able to say hey I got it wrong.
Click to expand...

Gee Scarpetta, I never knew that people took all this stuff so seriously. So what if I have a go at someone! It wasn't 'that' serious (ever heard of tongue in cheek?). If you compare me to the American Democrats, then surely you must realise this! Anyway, it's football!

Anyway, seeing you took such offense to something I said to another person (!?), I'll be sure to send you a cheque in the mail in order to fuel the process of reconciliation.

(That was tongue in cheek by the way).
 
Scarpetta, seeing you are so up on American politics, here's something else you might be interested in:

To the citizens of the United States of America,

In the light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective today.

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchial duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except
Utah, which she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The rt.hon. Tony Blair, MP for the 97.85% of you who have until now been
unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed.

To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminum". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how incorrectly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up "vocabulary". Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. Look up "interspersed".

2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know on your behalf.

3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn't that hard.

4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys.

5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through.

6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world
outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at least a US rugby sevens side by 2005.

7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if they give you any [trouble]. The 98.85% of you who were
not aware that there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky. The Russians have never been the bad guys. [...]

8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 8th will be a new national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecisive Day".

9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are junk and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

Thank you for your cooperation.

-----------

(Btw - If you read what I've said about the BL Board members, instead of what you 'think' I've written, you'll see that I am correct!).

[This message has been edited by Olmy (edited 20 November 2000).]
 
Oh thanks for that Roylion

I was going to drag up your rather excellent post from a few weeks ago to shove that in Sookys face - but you have done the spadework for me - ta.

Kevin Sooky - Don't bring up that Red Herring again - I thought we had all agreed to draw a line under that one ?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Apart from Tom FC, OldLion, Olmy, Roys_Galore! and yourself RoyLion (and a few others), there have been very few other logical responses to this topic as a whole. You know the ones . . .
 
Originally posted by scarpetta:
Olmy,

Also I have noticed that you critised someone for saying something about our Melbourne based directors.When they pointed out that hey you had got it wrong. You bag them.

Olmy and everyone else.On the Lions website, it says under directors, that Ken Levy and Laurie Serafini are Melbourne based directors, its also says that Mac Tolliday is a long time supporter of Fitzroy and resides in Queensland.

You show your age Olmy, buy being so immature to bag a fellow supporter, and when she proves you wrong , you are not able to say hey I got it wrong.
Click to expand...

Scarpetta, what EXACTLY did I get wrong in regards to the above? I suggest you point it out, if you can (which I doubt you can, as I haven't mentioned anything wrong). I'll be interested to see what you come up with.

If you re-read this topic, and make note of what I've said (instead of what you 'think' I've said) you'll find that I didn't get it wrong at all! I think you're a bit mixed up!

No-one PROVED that I got anything wrong! In fact, I am correct in what I've said about the Victorian based directors.

To verify most of what I've said, you can even check it up in the Lions 2000 yearbook (which you got when you renewed your membership), as well as the Lions website (not to mention some of the changes to the Lions board were also mentioned in the HS earlier this year). Reviewing this, I still can't see what I've got wrong.

Still, I'll be interested to see what you can point out in regards to what you 'think' I've got wrong, Scarpetta.

Until then, assume my correctness!
 
Well BSA and Cousin Roy Lion, if you want proof that this Sydney team is not the same legal entity as what was the South Melbourne Football Club, here it is.

1. I will assume only for the sake of brevity (but I do not concede) that the company Roy is talking about re his articles from the early 80s changed their name to Sydney Australian Football Club Limited.
2. This Company had an A.C.N. of 003 545 079 and was registered it appears in 1988. This would suggest that it is not the same company as Roy and BSA allege but let us assume that it is. I will call this Company A.
3. Company A shows as its directors at various stages Ron Joseph, Ken Gannon, Peter Weinert, Geoff Slade, Barry Rogers, Michael Willesee, William McCartney, Richard Colless, Basil Sellars, Maurice Koop, Max Horsell, Melcolm Spry, and Alan Schwab among others. It was the registered proprietor of the business name “Sydney Swans” from 1990 to 1994.
4. Company A changed its name to Red & White Nominees in February 1994 and from that date has no current directors or company secretaries so for all intents and purposes whilst still existing this company if it was the original South Melbourne (and that is arguable) is no longer trading.
5. Along comes a new company Company B WHICH ONLY CAME INTO EXISTENCE ON 8 FEBRUARY 1994 and was able to grab the name Sydney Australian Football Club Limited after company A released it by changing its name. This company is a different company and has a different A.C.N. of 063 349 708. Therefore there is no connection with Company A. Therefore as I said before even if Company A was South Melbourne Company B is not and so we are talking about a new legal eneitiy.
6. Company B is the new registered proprietor of the business name Sydney Swans as of 15 February 1994, and its current directors include Ron Barassi, Andrew McMaster, Richard Colless, Ricky Quade, John Yates and Graeme Pash.

This is reasoned and researched and irrefutable.
You can still argue the toss if you like BSA and Cousin Roy if you like, but facts are quite stubborn.

Please dont challenge me again, it wastes my time.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom