Talk about rewriting history

Remove this Banner Ad

Groo2

Groo2

All Australian
Veteran
Nov 11, 2006
903
1,102
Australia City
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/a-lions-lament-for-martin-pike/story-fn8ymmuy-1226081893086

Pretty good read in the HUN and agree with much of what Pikey said, but then they go and ruin it at the end with the following:

Former AFL chief executive Ross Oakley maintained the league had done everything in its power to assist Fitzroy over the years, but the creditors forced the issue.
"We saved Fitzroy about three times," Oakley said. "We gave them dividends 12 months ahead of time and we all agreed to all sorts of funding arrangements.
"In the end, it was the creditors who moved against Fitzroy."
Oakley said Brisbane had been the best fit for a merger with Fitzroy given all the circumstances.


The said thing is, people will read this tripe and believe it.
 
It's the job of the average supporter to ensure that the newspapers, the AFL and scum like Oakley don't get the chance to re-write history. Thankfully we've got a board like this one to get the message through.

That said, I hate to think that Brisbane people actually believe that it was all as simple as Fitzroy needing to merge with the Bears. Truth is that Brisbane was looking at a whole range of merger partners (including Sydney - a strong push for that option) and they didn't believe Fitzroy was the best one. It was only that suck Gordon who allowed Oakley and his cohorts to do the dirty on BOTH clubs.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ross Oakley said:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/a-lions-lament-for-martin-pike/story-fn8ymmuy-1226081893086

Former AFL chief executive Ross Oakley maintained the league had done everything in its power to assist Fitzroy over the years, but the creditors forced the issue.
"We saved Fitzroy about three times. We gave them dividends 12 months ahead of time and we all agreed to all sorts of funding arrangements. In the end, it was the creditors who moved against Fitzroy."
Click to expand...

What a load of absolute garbage Oakley!! Everything in their power? Bullshit. They did everything in their power to drum Fitzroy out of the competition.

For example 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. For example the club was told that Fitzroy's application to play 4 home games in Canberra (which would have netted the club $350,000 annually guaranteed) would not be a credible exercise in the Canberra market and would not be enough games to be worthwhile. Roos Oakley later said that Fitzroy was their 'worst product" and that it 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 $700,000 a year. 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 offered to upgrade Bruce Stadium. 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 wanted to keep the pressure on Fitzroy to merge.
  • refused to help financially assist Fitzroy's Tasmanian experiment. Fitzroy had to pay the whole cost themselves, inlcuding accomodation. Fitzroy had to even stoop to billeting players in supporters homes. Since that time, AFL support for Hawthorn and St Kilda in Tasmania has been significant
  • refused to guarantee on at least three occasions the annual club dividend to pay creditors; standard procedure for all other clubs
  • 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. They even threatened to reduce the dividend to other clubs by the amount Fitzroy received. This was the major reason the Lions had to consider a better financial deal at the Western Oval, which in turn alienated some supporters and players. That included Footscray loaning Fitzroy the $250,000 demanded by 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. Robert Shaw the Fitzroy coach lamented at the time that he'd just lost his next three club captains.
  • objected to a Fitzroy sponsorship deal with Schweppes because they were sponsored by Coca Cola. Fitzroy managed to raise $110,000 from this sponsorship.
  • it was later discovered that it had been the AFL that was 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 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. Guess who was the only club to get a solvency notice.
  • refused to allow millionaire Bernie Ahern to lend any more money to Fitzroy
  • 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 wouldn't get paid.
  • regularly leaked sensitive information provided by Fitzroy about their finances to the AFL, in order for their media flunkeys like Mike Sheahan to write negative stories about Fitzroy, which in turn scared off potential sponsors.
  • 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 organisation who had full access to Fitzroy's finances.
  • ....and even at the end, the AFL gave Fitzroy and North Melbourne until July 5th 1996 to complete their merger, only to give the go-ahead to a Brisbane - Fitzroy merger on July 4th, after a Richmond led protest over the North Melbourne merger.

And I find it amazing that Oakley shifts the blame for Fitzroy's exit to the creditors. The reason that Nauru appointed a creditor 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 merger money themselves. Thern the AFL would guarantee the merger momney, forcing Nauru to step in and recover the money themselves!

This was despite the fact that the Fitzroy directors had already done a deal to settle with Nauru out of the merger money. However North refused to authrorise Fitzroy to pay any more than $550,000 on the AFL's advice.

Quite frankly Oakley, Samuel, Collins and co. are scum.
 
Just saw the article myself, and came here to post it, when saw this thread.

Roylion sums it up exhaustively. The first things that came to my mind were the outlawing of beneficiaries on the proviso that the recipient is Fitzroy (new rule following Bernie Ahern loan), the new rule against matches being played in Canberra (which has been upheld consistently from that date), and the Galaxy rule.

Make no mistake, Fitzroy are vaguely responsible due to being in a vulnerable enough position for the AFL to abuse them (as would anybody not hiding under their couch with a loaded shotgun), and the AFL 100% responsible as it was they that perpetrated the crime.

These days, I feel that Fitzroy were "removed" from an abusive household and placed in a less poisonous pedagogy. How the AFL continued to be permitted custody of the other clubs, says much about the rights of clubs in a supposed 21st century.

Fortunately, there are powers watching over footy that reside much higher than the AFLC. I like what they did with the health of the DFOs.

And some day - the sooner the better - Fitzroy will be around to gloat after the man who failed to kill them, is dead.

Would rather kiss a Friedman.
 
Well said Roylion- everything covered off in great detail.

In addition, the AFL always seemed to provide Fitzroy with a 'dud' fixture each year. Our move to the Western Oval was greeted with games against the interstate teams like Adelaide, Brisbane Bears etc. If they wanted to assist Fitzroy make more money from our home games there, we would have played other Melbourne clubs, especially in our first year at Western Oval.

But, then again, the AFL did nothing to try and keep us at Princes Park, but rather send as Oakley stated our 'worst product' to Footscray.
 
Another article from today as well : http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ipad/death-in-the-suburbs/story-fn6bn7f4-1226082009421

A national competition heralded the end of suburban football

WHEN Ross Oakley was asked to give a snapshot to an AFL corporate strategy meeting last year of how the once-suburban VFL transformed into a national competition, he was surprised to find how little the audience knew of the game's struggles only a generation earlier.
The young faces around the tables asked the former AFL chief executive whether he thought the multi-million-dollar packages to set up Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney were going to be enough to ensure success.

Oakley stunned them by giving a history lesson of how the AFL initially charged a $4 million licence fee for new clubs.

"If we hadn't done that, and redirected it back to the clubs, we would never have got it through," Oakley recalled this week.
Click to expand...

(go to link for full article, is an interview with Ross Oakley and also queries Pike again, clearly there's some janitorial work being done with what they must perceive as some frailties in their chambering)
 
Wow excellent summary Roylion.

Would just like to add, if anyone is interested in a retelling of events from the club's perspective I suggest tracking down Dyson Hore-Lacy's "Fitzroy".
 
If only Oakley and his cronies at the time had focused their energies on catching clubs (Essendon, Carlton and correct me if I am wrong Melbourne being the main offenders) cheating the salary cap instead of getting rid of Fitzroy. Keep in mind these very same clubs - who outside the rules enjoyed an unfair advantage - ultimately decided Fitzroy's future or lack thereof.
 
well,

If it was Melbourne it did them no good at all so i forgive

If it was Essendon cheating they did a lot for us up here
travelling up to darwin every second year thru the
'80s and '90s so ditto

Carlton yes for sure they cheated the cap and should have had premierships
taken off them but water under the bridge. I hold no real grudges


but samuel and oakleigh - history will come back an bite you on the bum
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mobbenfuhrer said:
Fortunately, there are powers watching over footy that reside much higher than the AFLC. I like what they did with the health of the DFOs.
Click to expand...
Lol ;)

I think there was a typo in the original article. Surely they meant,
"Former AFL chief executive Ross Oakley maintained the league had done everything in its power to ASSASSINATE Fitzroy over the years".:p
 
It seems Ross Oakely has had a major brain fade. All footy fans know this evil and despicable maggot drove us out of the AFL. Summed up to perfection by RoyLion- great work.

Lets also not forget his right hand man- another maggot, in Ian Collins.

For those who havent heard the Fitzroy radio documentary on ABC website, Collins apparently, upon receiving a fax at the Fitzroy Club Hotel, that the merger was done, raised his hands and said something like...we finally got rid of them.

Both these twits are pathetic morons.
 
Roylion said:
Roos Oakley later said that Fitzroy was their 'worst product" and that it wasn't going to send their 'worst product" up to Canberra.
Click to expand...

Great write up there Roylion, but with the above quote I have a just two questions I hope can be answered:

1) Why was it Fitzroy that was picked as the club the AFL wanted to merge or fold? The AFL didn't treat Footscray or St. Kilda or even Geelong like that at the time, it was only the Roys, why did they specifically target the FFC?

2) Regarding the 'worst product' tag from Oakley, was this said in private and was leaked, or did he say this publicly? And are there any news links, or video on him saying it because that is quite an incredible thing for what was the CEO of the AFL at the time to actually say.

Cheers. :thumbsu:
 
Well written Roylion. Couldn't believe it when I read his comment!

Remember also the AFL brought in the rule that all clubs must pay a minimum percentage of the salary cap and all the teams agreed this was there just to make sure the Lions didn't survive?
 
Tim the Toolman said:
Well written Roylion. Couldn't believe it when I read his comment!

Remember also the AFL brought in the rule that all clubs must pay a minimum percentage of the salary cap and all the teams agreed this was there just to make sure the Lions didn't survive?
Click to expand...

Yes, great comment.

Most people thought of this rule as the 'Fitzroy Rule' so we couldnt save lots of cash by paying i.e. half of the salary cap!

Of course, always denied by the AFL too.
 
The Ross Oakley article was a disgrace. It just brings up bad memories how we were sticjed up. What gets me going is how al these club ie Carlton carry an 8 million dollar debt which was over 10 million two years ago and allowed to take part in the comp. When was the Afl going to alert the ASIC about them trading whilst beoing insolvent. And today Port and the crows have been gifted 12 million over 3 years to help them out.
 
Maybe Roylion (or someone else) could try sending the Herald Sun a response to the Ross Oakley article and see if they publish it. Yeah they are sort of in bed with the AFL, but there not above publishing the odd attack and seem to like publishing stories about Fitzroy. They are also doing their look back at last 20 years right now.
 
Last of the Roys said:
Maybe Roylion (or someone else) could try sending the Herald Sun a response to the Ross Oakley article and see if they publish it. Yeah they are sort of in bed with the AFL, but there not above publishing the odd attack and seem to like publishing stories about Fitzroy. They are also doing their look back at last 20 years right now.
Click to expand...
They didn't publish my response on their website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top