Born 1883, murdered 1996

[GWW]

I think the term "murdered" is too emotional, the removal of Fitzroy from the AFL was certainly the right thing for the game at the highest level. I dont know enough about their memberships, sponsorship, supporters etc, the fact is more Victorian clubs should have actually gone under by now. On onfield performances alone, Fitzroy didn't deserve to stay in the league. I'm 100% certain they wouldnt have won a flag before 2004 when Port, who took their place, became premiers. Thats only one thing to consider, but having Port in the comp sparks a bit of interest both here in SA and in the comp in general.

All Fitzroy inspired was pity and ridicule!!

[Punk Rooster]

I'd prefer watching Fitzroy get thrashed each week than watching anything Port Power have to offer...

[GWW]

I'd prefer watching Fitzroy get thrashed each week than watching anything Port Power have to offer...

Yeah but your view is prejudiced by your anti Port views but then i can see why you say that after Port beat the Lions in their first attempt in a GF after your mob failed dismally twice in a row

[am Bays]

*Cough* *Splutter* *Hack*

Yeah, but Collingwood got there in 2002-03 because you lot couldn't beat them at home???? Cost us a home final in 2002 v Melbourne (which we won by the way, only SA club to win a final away from home that year.....)

*Cough* *Splutter* *hate defending Collingwood* *need to lie down* *failing feint* *hack* *Cough*

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Bluntly, Fitzroy brought it on themselves..

Phil, may I suggest you read ''The Death of Fitzroy'' by Rick Hore-Lacy'' a bit of what you printed may be refuted. Also ''Football LTD'' by Garry Linnell has a chapter or two on the subject. Read these publications Phil & I think you'll agree that Fitzroy were killed by Oakley & his cronies.

I wouldn't touch that book by Hore-Lacy. The name says it all. Biased to the max and then some. No one in that family knew what was REALLY going on any more than they claim Oakley and whoever did. I stand by my statement. "The Death of Fitzroy" is bound to be a pack of lies designed to exonerate the Fitzroy board from blame. Which history will record (hopefully) that they can't.

]Fitzroy never had a large supporter base due to their location in inner Melbourne.

Rubbish. Their supporter base was wonderfully competitive until they moved out of Brunswick Street in the 1960's! They managed because of support in their zones. I grew up in their zone even though I followed Collingwood. There were a number of Fitzroy supporters in my school.

Of course there's bias in Hore-Lacys book, but that's a suprising view of yours seeing that you deem yourself a bit of a footy boffin going by your web site. I would suspect some inner seated angst considering that you can't be bothered reading the material before coming forward with such a strong view.

Sorry but I'll take the word of various football historians whose works I've read & the old supporters I've met on Fitzroys membership numbers woes over someone who sat with ''a number of Fitzroy supporters in my school.''

[Rik E Boy]

I'd prefer watching Fitzroy get thrashed each week than watching anything Port Power have to offer...

LOL. Someone who hates Port more than me Nah, Fitzroy was a nothing game for decades...besides, the bastards used to win no matches all year and then beat the Cats when we were friggin top of the ladder..they did it to us a few times!

regards,

REB

[PhilG]

..

[Roylion]

I wouldn't touch that book by Hore-Lacy.

So let me get this straight. You make unsupported statements such as “Bluntly, Fitzroy brought it on themselves.”, and almost in the same breath refuse to read the other side of the story. How do you know it is "biased crap" if you haven't read it?

By the way the book “Fitzroy” is by Dyson Hore-Lacy, who was, and is today, the chairman of THE Fitzroy Football Club. Fitzroy Football Club still exists and in 2006 has 1,200 members. I am a current shareholder member.

I stand by my statement. "The Death of Fitzroy" is bound to be a pack of lies designed to exonerate the Fitzroy board from blame.

How would you know? You haven’t read it. The book which by the way isn’t called “the death of Fitzroy” backs up pretty well what I experienced in 1996. In 1996, as now, I was a shareholder of the Fitzroy Football Club and involved in various meetings to discuss the proposed merger with North Melbourne.

Rubbish. Their supporter base was wonderfully competitive until they moved out of Brunswick Street in the 1960's! They managed because of support in their zones. I grew up in their zone even though I followed Collingwood. There were a number of Fitzroy supporters in my school.

Fitzroy had no choice, but to move out of Brunswick Street after the Fitzroy Council refused to help repair the crumbling facilities, despite repeated requests from Fitzroy FC to do that. In fact at the time cricket was preferred by the council to having a football presence at the ground.

They had several chances to cut and run - and make the shift down to the then VFA. They should have seen the signs that there just wasn't the room financially for 10 Melbourne clubs.

They did see the signs. Fitzroy were always keen to maintain a presence in the AFL, preferably in Victoria. Why do you think Fitzroy agreed to a merger in 1989 with Footscray at the AFL’s request? Why do you think Fitzroy played home games in Tasmania in 1992, with a view to possibly partially or relocating there? That failed because of no support from the AFL. Why do you think in 1995, the Fitzroy board applied to play seven home games in Canberra with a view to relocating there also? (That was knocked back by the AFL as well). Why do you think Fitzroy pursued mergers with Melbourne (1986 and 1994), to form the Melbourne Lions. Both came very close to being concluded. On both occasions, Melbourne called the merger off. Why do you think the Fitzroy board agreed to a merger with North Melbourne? (only to have that knocked on the head by the AFL as well). Why do you think the Board voted to move to Brisbane at the end of 1986 but were stopped by one man Chairman Leon Weigard (a decision Leon now regrets).

If Fitzroy had shifted to the VFA, and maybe reclaimed Brunswick Street, they could still be alive today.

Fitzroy are alive today. http://www.fitzroyfc.com.au

As I said I’m a 2006 member.

The Fitzroy board in 1993 had actually come to an agreement with the then Fitzroy City Council to return to the Brunswick Street Oval, as their training and administrative base. However they didn't have the spare money or the time to make that plan a reality.

The lower demand on the finances would have allowed them to concentrate on eliminating their debt and get out of the pickle they were in.

Easy in hindsight isn’t it.

In 1996, Fitzroy was $2.7 million in debt of which $1.25 million was owed to the Nauru Insurance Company. Fitzroy was servicing its debt, but could see that it was going to be very difficult to drag themselves up to the level where they felt they could compete with the powerhouses of the competition. The directors themselves resolved to seek a merger unless they could raise $1 million to bring their player list up to a competitive level and they could improve their facilities which included a return to Brunswick St Oval, which has been successfully negotiated with the then Fitzroy Council in 1993, as their HQ. The Fitzroy social club was operating at a profit. With a little support from te AFL could have continued to operate in the AFL in their own right, perhaps as partly relocated team in Tasmania or Canberra. When all other avenues failed they then sought a merger with North Melbourne.

But pride prevented them from doing it. The very pride that killed Fitzroy.

As I said Fitzroy is not dead. What they did was surrender their licence and leave the AFL. Even 10 years later Fitzroy entering, or should I say re-entering, the VFA-VFL is not out of the question. Stay tuned on that one.

I'm not so sure even the Lions board really understood the concept of "fully understanding some of the emotional and traditional issues associated".

I think the Fitzroy board were very aware of the issues involved. They were naturally very keen to continue in the competition they had been a part of for 100 years and, quite rightly, were prepared to look at every avenue to try and make that happen before they looked at other alternatives such as a merger, dropping down to the VFL or the like.

As the 'expert' do you know why Fitzroy went into administration? It wasn’t because they were unable to service their debt.

If they had, they would have put the survival of the club before the status of it - and shifted down. Plenty of local clubs did it, and a lot are better for it.

Fitzroy were very prepared to relocate to Canberra or Tasmania as their main base, but on both occasions the AFL refused to assist or support. This is in marked contrast to the efforts made to support the Kangaroos in Canberra or the Gold Coast, Hawthorn in Tasmania or the Bulldogs in the Northern Territory. As I said Fitzroy wanted to maintain a presence in the competition they haad been part of for 100 years and were prepared to merge with a similar Melbourne based club tn ensure that part of their identity remained in that competition, which they had helped to found.

I have no sympathy for Fitzroy. I sympathise with it's supporters, but they shouldn't blame the AFL.

Why shouldn’t we blame the AFL.? It is galling for a Fitzroy supporter to see the level of support given to other Melbourne-based clubs to remain in the competition in Melbourne. We were even prepared to move out of Melbourne in part, but the AFL (eager to bring in Port Adelaide) were keen to see a club out of the competition.

Fitzroy attempted a number of initiatives as an alternative to merger in order to remain a stand alone entity in the AFL, including playing home games in Tasmania and Canberra. All were stymied by the AFL for the above reasons. 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. Ross 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. Had they been able to do that, Fitzroy would not have needed to merge.

7 home games in Canberra, 5 games interstate and 10 games in Melbourne (4 home) would have been a viable option for Fitzroy members and supporters. The Canberra-Fitzroy Lions with an interstate home at Bruce Stadium and a base at a redeveloped Brunswick Street Oval and all the history and traditions retained could have been very sustainable.

It could have happened with a modicum of AFL support.

Despite the 'AFL for Canberra' organisation, the Canberra Raiders, the Ainslee Football Club and the ACT chief minister supporting Fitzroy's application, the AFL point blank refused to entertain the idea.

The AFL simply wanted Port Adelaide in the competition and they wanted a competition of 16 teams. They wanted a Victorian team to go and Fitzroy was seen as the weakest.

Quite apart from the above AFL opposed or blocked every effort of Fitzroy to re-invent themselves or to raise money for the club in their mission to stay in the competition.
For example:

* refused to help financially assist Fitzroy's Tasmanian experiment. Fitzroy had to pay the whole cost themselves, including accommodation. Fitzroy had to even stoop to billeting players in supporters’ homes. AFL support for Hawthorn and St Kilda is of course mandatory.
* refused to guarantee on at least three occasions the annual club dividend to pay creditors, standard procedure for all other clubs.
* the AFL threatened to sue Fitzroy for $250,000 that had been paid to Fitzroy by CUB as part of a sponsorship. CUB was the AFL's sponsor and the AFL thought they should have received the money. They even threatened to reduced the dividend to other clubs by the amount Fitzroy received.
* objected to a Fitzroy sponsorship deal with Schweppes because they were sponsored by Coca Cola. Fitzroy managed to raise $110,000 from this sponsorship.
* 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 after a very successful first loan
* 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.
* 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.
* ....and even at the end, the AFL gave Fitzroy and North until July 5th 1996 to complete the merger, only to give the go-ahead to a Brisbane - Fitzroy merger on July 4th. Having said that some of the blame for that though must be laid at North Melbourne's door.

And of course the administrator of Fitzroy signed an agreement with the AFL which stopped the Fitzroy Football Club from suing the AFL under Section 52 of the Trade Practices Act for "alleged deceptive and misleading conduct". As the Fitzroy Football Club still exists, perhaps this MAY still be option once the time frame for the agreement expires.

They should be blaming their own.

No doubt the financial mistakes made under the leadership of Frank Bibby in the late 70s were crucial. Fitzroy was on the back foot from that time. Year of failure and a dwindling support base merely exacerbated the problems especially as the competition moved from being semi-professional to full professional. Fitzroy wasn’t the only club that struggled in this regard and in fact some clubs have had far larger debts than Fitzroy ever had.

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Sorry Roylion, it was me who misquoted Rick for Dyson (horse trainer ) & also went on my memory of the books title.

Thanks for clearing that up with your post, all the above has been discussed at various times over a few beers at the Lowry & at Brunswick oval with the likes of Fletch, Kev, Pete & others (maybe you?). One thing I can say is that I've always left Brunny oval with a smile on my face & the experience of meeting so many footysmart & downright friendly people a highlight of my trips over there, that includes two or three AFL games.

We rarely hear or were informed of the goings on over here at that sad time, God knows we may have missed out on an important announcement on Modras new haircut or Ben Harts school results.
Thanks for your post, it should at least enlighten a few die hards of the underhanded ways of the AFL under Oakley & his ilk, not that the current clown factory would do it any different.

[Roylion]

Given that only eight players continued in the AFL directly after 1996...

This is not correct either. Eight players went to the Brisbane Lions, but others such as Martin Pike (North Melb), Matthew Primus (Port Adelaide), Matthew Dent (Western Bulldogs), Rowan Warfe (Sydney) and Stephen Paxman (Port) went on to play quite a few games with other clubs. Brad Boyd, Jarrod Molloy, John Barker, Scott Bamford, Shane Clayton and Chris Johnson of course played quite a few senior games for Brisbane and other clubs as well. Others such as Brett Chandler, Anthony Mellington, John Rombotis and Jason Baldwin also played a handful of senior games for other AFL clubs after Fitzroy left the competition.

On Fitzroy Reds, I think both of you are right in a way. What remains of the Fitzroy Lions does have a claim on the Reds - but not to the extent that it was a merger of the Lions and Uni Reds. More like a verbal agreement if you like.

Fitzroy Football Club sponsor the Fitzroy Reds (formerly the University Reds). Fitzroy has no legal claim on the Fitzroy Reds, except that they allow them to wear the famous Fitzroy jumper as their official uniform in the VAFA.

[PhilG]

..

[Roylion]

Because Hore Lacy was an idiot. I have no time for the moron.

Why? Why don't you give the background of your beef with him?

Why would I want to read a book written by an established whiner?

Because you might gain another perspective. From my reading of your comments in this thread, I don't think you know what you are talking about. My credentials/experience? Shareholder of Fitzroy Football Club since 1986. Ordinary Member since 1978. Coterie member - Lion Hunters. Social club member from 1992. Cheersquad member in early eighties. Enough for you?

What about before 1996? In 1996 it was way too late to save the club in the form it was in.

Rubbish. Upon what basis do you claim this? As I said Fitzroy was servicing its debt in 1996. With more support from the AFL they could have survived as a stand alone club in the AFL. Yes they may have had to play some home games interstate, but so do Melbourne, Hawthorn, St Kilda and Western Bulldogs. They're still the same clubs as they were before the movement of games..

What do you know about it before 1996 - apart from the biased claptrap Hore-Lacy would have been spouting.

What do you want to know exactly? Anyway I thought you were the ''expert", given the nature of the comments you've made so far.

Whether or not they had a choice is beside the point. The fact is that Fitzroy were in trouble from that point -

No they weren't in trouble from that point at all. Fitzroy had quite a few successful years down at the Junction Oval and has built quite a following. The real trouble began in the 1970's when like many other clubs, Fitzroy overspent on gaining a number of top players. It was badly tiimed as from the early eiighties the competiition began to move froma semi-professional to professionsal. Some clubs, includign Fitzroy, were caught short. Some due to veruiious factors managed to recover, some continued to struggle.

and their survival beyond that point was because of the support in their zones. I was debunking the argument put forward about local (as in the suburb of Fitzroy) support.

Fitzroy had a small supporter base in any case, because of a sustained lack of success in the 1960s. This made it far more difficult for Fitzroy to recover from any financial setbacks,, relative to other VFL-AFL clubs.

The merger with Footscray - if it was going to work - would have been no different to the merger (takeover) by Brisbane. I've always said the AFL would have got away with it if they'd called it the Footscray Lions instead of the Fitzroy Bulldogs.

That's a matter of opinion. Footscray was in a far worse financial position than Fitzroy was in 1989. It was the AFL (then VFL) that approached Fitzroy about merging...not the other way around. Fitzroy wanted to keep their name "Fitzroy" and the Footscray board agreed.

The Tassie move would only have worked if they'd moved lock stock and barrel from day one - although in hindsight it would have killed local footy in Tasmania given what's happening down there now.

I disagree. Playing 4 or so home games games down in Tasmania in the same manner as Hawthorn are doing would have added considerably to Fitzroy's smallish supporter base, generated extra revenue, which was lacking in their current home ground arrangement at Princes Park.

If they saw the signs - once the merger was KOed, they should have realised that their desire to stay in the AFL was IMPOSSIBLE!! It would kill them!

In 1989, Fitzroy certainly had financial difficulties, but it was nothing compared to the poor finances of the Bulldogs. The Bulldogs had the latent supporter base of the west to bale them out of trouble.

I was saying that in 1993 for goodness sake! The AFL were actually doing them a favour in a way - even though they erred in not making the suggestion of shifting to the VFA.

Yeah well I won't go on about Wiegard (I said enough above).

What's your problem with Leon Weigard?

The fact is that all of this was when Fitzroy were in major financial trouble (except the Melbourne 1986 merger proposal) so the AFL was telling the Lions to get their house in order before doing anything else.

They'd already had a bad experience with the Swans and they were sick of bailing them out. Why add to it?

When did the AFL ever bail Fitzroy out? When were they ever asked to?

Again - the answer to the Lions survival was a shift the VFA!!

That's your opinion. One I don't share. And one that successive Fitzroy boards didn't share. Their preference was to merge with another Melbourne based club and maintain a Fitzroy identity in the top football competition in the country, which they helped to found.

Not on the field in their pre 1996 form they aren't. They would be if they moved to the VFA.

THE Fitzroy Football Club still exists. As for VFA-VFL involvement...stay tuned.

Everything you said after that was TOO LATE! Between 1993 and 1996 the Lions wrecked themselves (and local football clubs as well) trying to stay where they couldn't. I believe they were in debt in 1993,

They were in debt from 1977-78. Other clubs were in as much, if not more debt. Geelong for example have been $8 million in debt. Fitzroy never exceeded $2.7 million in debt.

but it was more manageable then than what it was in 1996. THAT was when they should have shifted to the VFA. By 1996 it was too late.

In 1993 Fitzroy were doing quite well financially on and off the field. The Fitzroy Football Club Hotel was doing well, the Fitzroy Football Club Social Club was making a profit aand even the club itself was made a profit. On fiield the Roys were very competitive with Lynch, Roos, Osborne, Gale, Broderick and Armstrong making up the nucleus of what could have gone on and been a very good side.

They weren't.

This is nothing more than your opinion. An unsupported opinion too.

Otherwise they would have moved to the VFA. I stand by it. The AFL was beyond them and they ignored the signs that pointed towards it.

They didn't. I've given you my reasons for saying that. I've cited the various attempts to effect a merger or relocation from 1986 onwards. You've cited nothing apart from repeating your mantra that they should have dropped down to the VFA and because they didn't, somehow using this as an excuse that the Fitzroy board ignored the signs. It's garbage and until you give me some concrete, specific evidence that they ignored the signs, apart from your opinion that they should have gone to the VFA, I will continue to say it's garbage.

What other reason is there?

You're the "expert". Don't you know? Ever heard of the Nauru Insurance Company?

*sighs* Read my lips. Trying to maintain a presence in the AFL is what wrecked the Fitzroy FC.

Read what I type. I am saying that if Fitzroy had received a modicum of AFL support from 1991 onwards, then it most likely they would be in the AFL today as a stand-alone entity. The AFL actively worked against Fitzroy, unlike their present attitude towards Melbourne based clubs such as Footscray which to date has received over $4.5 million in donations from the AFL over the last three years. Not loans that have to be paid back. Donations. North and Melbourne ave also received multi-million dollar donations while the AFL also recently bailed Carlton out.

In 1993 there was only one option. Not relocation. Not merger.

That is your opinion. One I don't share. And one not shared by the Fitzroy board for reasons I have already stated. Their reasons may be be incomprehsible to your narrow view of what the Fitzroy world should be, but they were of the opinion that they were doing the right thing. Some of the Fitzroy board were amongst the greatest of Fitzroy players (David McMahon for example played 200 games and was in the Fitzroy Team of the Century), so their opinions about the future form of their club carry far more valid weight than yours. They had a lot more to lose than you did, in whatever decision they took.

The VFA. I'm not just talking in hindsight. I was saying it then. Don't try to paint this "presence" issue because that's what killed the VFL/AFL club as it was. There are plenty of clubs who had a long presence in the competition they were in - and they still moved down to survive.

Who from the AFL?

That's why pride was not an appropriate emotion when it came to preserving the club.

Appropriate to who? You? Were you a member, supporter, board member, shareholder and/or former player of the Fitzroy Football Club? Unless you were/are how can you determine what or what is not appropriate? Do you think the Fitzroy directors might have been swallowing their pride when they sought various mergers with Melbourne, Footscray and North Melbourne?

They were only keen to see you out when you became a major liability.

No they were keen to see a side out when Port Adelaide were due to enter the competition. That was admitted by a AFL commissioner in June 1996.

And they were sick of you carrying on about this "presence" BS. They were sending you a message - even if they didn't actually say so (and they should have) - to get out of the AFL and move to the VFA for the sake of your club's survival!!

It's rubbish. At no point did the AFL ever suggest moving to the VFA. They did however suggest many mergers with other clubs. Why's that? So they could keep Fitzroy supporters within the confines of the AFL. Why do you think the Commission was so keen on a merger with brisbane? So Brisbane could have a Melbourne support base. The Commissions' preference for Fitzroy was a merger. They even suggested a merger with Port Adelaide to form the "Power Lions". But of course you knew that.

This had nothing to do with Fitzroy. At the time the AFL didn't see a market in Canberra (which has subsequently proved to be a mistake) and they were keen on a second Sydney licence. Still are which I completely object to.

Where are you getting this from? Why did the AFL allow Fitzroy to play there in 1995, where they drew the sixth largest AFL crowd ever to play in Canberra? 12,782 in fact. Only four games with Kangaroos vs Sydney and another one Kangaroos vs Collingwood have drawn larger crowds. Fitzroy played West Coast. That was enough of an indication that there was a market and Fitzroy could have been successful. The AFL didn't want Fitzroy to be successful as a stand alone entity. Graeme Samuel has since admitted that and has also stated that they may have been wrongg to force Fitzroy out of the competition.

It had everything to do wiith Fitzroy. One AFL comisioner (not Samuel) was reported as saying that while they were looking to establish a presence in Canberra, they weren't going to send their weakest product there. Two years later in 1998, North Melbourne played the first of their games in Canberra.

No matter who proposed a shift to Canberra it would have been knocked on the head by the AFL.

Fitzroy had already played a very successful game in Canberra and the AFL at first was apparently keen to repeat the experiment. When Fitzroy negotiated support from the government, Ainslee, the Canberra Raiders and other bodies, the AFL suddenly weren't so keen (especially with Port Adelaide's entry looming). The AFL wanted to keep the pressure on Fitzroy to merge so that the competition remained at 16 sides.

But Fitzroy didn't have the back up of top line sponsors - which weren't available because the best were already tied to the other Melbourne based clubs. Hence it's grabbing of smaller sponsors (killing some local clubs in the process) which was never going to work.

So this is the real beef is it? The "killing" of local clubs. Somehow Fitzroy was responsible?

Yet another reason why a move to the VFA would have saved the club - because the smalled sponsors would have been more appropriate and even then they wouldn't have needed as many.

Quite possibly. However the Fitzroy board was of the view that it was preferable to have a diluted presence in the AFL competition, in conjunction with another club or to relocate, rather than leave the competition. Even when $8 million in debt Geelong had no intention of moving down to the VFL. Neither does Carlton, even though they have a debt that dwarfs any debt that Fitzroy ever had. Same with North Melbourne and the Bulldogs. Both have stated they would prefer to relocate in preference to leaving the competition.

Just quickly - when I said eight players I was in fact referring to going to Brisbane, not the AFL as a whole (an ommission on my part).

The agreement with Brisbane only accounted for eight Fitzroy players for two reasons...
1. The other clubs didn't want the Lions to become too powerful. They insisted on a maximum of eight.
2. Salary cap constraints

The young Fitzroy list had quite a bit of potential so it's not inconcievable that Fitzroy could have been competitive over the next few years. Mick Nunan was definitely moving in the right direction with the list. One of the reasons that Fitzroy was so uncompetitive in 1996 was that he preferred to get senior games into the young players, rather than playing older more established players (not that there were many of those left)

[MW]

Who's got time to read all that?

[Rik E Boy]

Who's got time to read all that?

You should try it some time. It is quite an interesting debate.

regards,

REB

[Booney]

Great debate,one player has some real facts,passion and incredible knowledge of the goings on,from the late 70's to the time when the VFL/AFL on-field version of the FFC became defunct.Well written,researched (although it appears Roylion lives this every day) and in some way makes me feel a little responsible (being a Port fan who was thrilled at our entry to the AFL) for the demise of the Fitzroy FC.Although,Oakley and co,in fact ,the AFL certainly have alot to answer for,Bulldogs,Hawthorn,Kangaroos and Melbourne should hang their collective heads in shame,the hand outs keeping their clubs afloat spelled the end of the Fitzroy team playing AFL football.Im glad I took the time to read this,and with out a doubt I will be keeping up with any further debate.

MW,sit down and read it.

[smac]

Who's got time to read all that?

You should try it some time. It is quite an interesting debate.

regards,

REB

Couldn't agree more REB. Nothing like passion for your club, I applaud your loyalty Roylion - well done. Hopefully for the sake of yourself and those like you, Fitzroy get back to the VFA-VFL.

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Who's got time to read all that?

Me, good stuff.
Maybe you should, you can't just live in your little sheltered Crow world forever. Read about some history of the game.

[Punk Rooster]

Who's got time to read all that?

Me, good stuff.
Maybe you should, you can't just live in your little sheltered Crow world forever. Read about some history of the game.

[Rik E Boy]

Punk Roosters???

regards,

REB

[Booney]

Punk Roosters???

regards,

REB

Punk R**ters mate..