Talk:Fitzroy Football Club

Yes, it is the same club

There was no "merger" between Fitzroy Football Club and Brisbane, Brisbane took Fitzroy's AFL operations and rebranded. Fitzroy Football Club itself was never merged with Brisbane, and continues as an entirely separate club in its own right.

Fitzroy Football Club is not Brisbane Lions. Fitzroy Football Club is and has always been a separate entity in its own right, called Fitzroy Football Club, and it is entirely the same club which held an AFL license until the end of 1996.

As ASIC and ABR registration data for Fitzroy Football Club and for Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club (trading as Brisbane Lions) proves. And as the Deed of Arrangement between Fitzroy and Brisbane Bears (https://viclions.wordpress.com/news/the-deed/), the legal document describing what actually took place in 1996, states, and as the official Fitzroy account also states, as published on the Fitzroy website. Fitzroy's AFL operations were "merged with" Brisbane Bears, which is precisely what "merge" and "merged club" legally means in the Deed of Arrangement.

At which point Brisbane Bears members voted to change their name to Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club, again, as spelt out in the Deed of Arrangement. Fitzroy didn't somehow become part of Brisbane.

Additional proof also coming from subsequent assessment of the Deed by the Supreme Court of Victoria, showing that Fitzroy Football Club never ceased to exist as a separate club, and the fact that Brisbane Bears Football Club is listed in ASIC registration information as being a "former name" of Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club (trading as Brisbane Lions).

And Fitzroy Football Club merged with Fitzroy Reds in 2009, that is an easily verifiable fact.

Denying Fitzroy's continued existence as a club is not right. JayBee00 (talk) 03:58, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

In any merger there is a continuing legal entity, that was the Brisbane Bears (who changed their name). However the claim that Fitzroy continue the old Fitzroy is ridiculous. All they did was get hold of dormant company. Their actual heritage is the University reds. 120.21.181.128 (talk) 06:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that claim doesn't seem to be based on anything at all except your own personal assurance.

Do you believe ASIC are somehow lying about their published records in this regard perhaps?

Do you believe the 1996 Deed of Arrangement between Brisbane Bears and Fitzroy Football Club has somehow been falsified?

Do you believe Brisbane Lions (BBFFC) were somehow aiding and abetting a deceitful conspiracy of some type when they engaged with Fitzroy Football Club in 2009 in the Supreme Court of Victoria about the details of that 1996 Deed? Do you believe Supreme Court Justice Muhktar was somehow acting illegally by recognising Fitzroy as the plaintiff in that case?

Do you believe countless media reports and a wide array of other published documents about the continued existence of Fitzroy are also part of some kind of elaborate conspiracy to deceive the public?

In any case, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. What it is not is a vehicle for anyone's unsupported opinions. Wikipedia articles are based on reliable sources, and WP has a clear no original research policy. This claim doesn't even count as "original research", it just appears to be made up out of thin air. JayBee00 (talk) 10:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Your argument is purely based on the legal entity but that is not consistent with how people generally view organisations.

In fact if the legal entity is all that counts then every VFL team started no earlier than 1983 as that is when they all incorporated. This is verifiable by a company search

I am trying to be more realistic. Very few supporters think the club calling itself FFC is the same. (probably verifiable) There is no continuity of playing or tradition (complete lack of evidence) between 1996 and 2009. The group of people running as Fitzroy Reds took over the IP of a dormant company in 2009 but it does not make it the same club in anything other than a narrowly legal sense. 120.19.131.91 (talk) 15:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

How is it "realistic" to be making claims that are completely without basis and contrary to actual fact about this? Fitzroy Football Club absorbed Fitzroy Reds, and it is the same Fitzroy Football Club that was in the AFL until the end of 1996, very easily proven as such. That's the reality. JayBee00 (talk) 06:04, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Milton Keynes dons are the same football club (legally) as Wimbledon FC and have continuity in the same league Yet have a different Wikipedia page.

Yet there is no continuity and between 1996 and 2009 of anything other than a name and the legal entity. The players, officials etc in 2009 were all from Fitzroy Reds.

Most supporters don’t think it’s the same thing, Fitzroy in the VAFA might get 100 spectators. Versus 10,000 plus for FFC in the VFL/AFL 101.119.76.147 (talk) 16:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

What you believe "most supporters think" - again based on nothing factual that I can see - isn't relevant here either. Fitzroy FC is the same club, the same organisation as when Fitzroy was in the AFL. It's that simple. And you have no evidence to back up the claims you're making, you haven't even tried to find any evidence because I'm guessing you also know there's no basis for those claims, let alone a basis that passes WP article content standards. End of story. JayBee00 (talk) 06:35, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Here are links to ABR and ASIC details for Fitzroy Football Club, being a separate club, with ASIC registration beginning in 1981:

ASIC page for Fitzroy Football Club - https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchText=005881201&searchType=OrgAndBusNm&_adf.ctrl-state=8y9p4xbpx_32 ;

CreditorWatch page - https://creditorwatch.com.au/credit/profile/20005881201/fitzroy-football-club-limited

And links to ABR and ASIC details for Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club (trading as Brisbane Lions), with ASIC registration beginning in 1991:

ASIC page for Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club (trading as Brisbane Lions) - https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchText=054263473&searchType=OrgAndBusNm&_adf.ctrl-state=8y9p4xbpx_15 ;

CreditorWatch page - https://creditorwatch.com.au/credit/profile/43054263473/BRISBANE-BEARS-FITZROY-FOOTBALL-CLUB-LIMITED

JayBee00 (talk) 12:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Not the same club

Fitzroy football club that played in the VFA and VFL is now the Brisbane lions.

The current Fitzroy football club is a different club that was originally University Reds, then changed its name to Fitzroy Reds, before changing a it’s name to Fitzroy Football club.

Conflating the two different entities is not right 115.166.1.230 (talk) 05:00, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

They are the same club. The original FFC Ltd took over the pre-existing University Reds and incorporated into it. 194.66.186.235 (talk) 10:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

not sure why my previous comment was removed, everything mentioned in it was verifiable by an internet search. Maybe the cosplay bit was unfair. But Wikipedia should not be complicit in propaganda. Prior to 2009 the club currently calling itself Fitzroy Football club was the Fitzroy Reds and before that the University Reds. Fitzroy Football Club Ltd was just a dormantcompany and had been for 13 years. They started to run under that entity so they could claim the heritage (a heritage they’d never claimed before). And if a continuous legal entity is what counts that logic they only exist since 1983 as that is the date they Fitzroy Football Club Ltd incorporated (do a company search), and they should stop claiming the premierships won by Reds before then.

In reality the relationship is a marketing play. Their heritage starts as the University Reds and are closer of the old University VFL club.

Fitzroy Football club died in the 90s and most supporters agree. RIP 120.19.131.91 (talk) 14:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Again a bunch of claims here which don't even have enough substance to qualify as WP:OR, let alone ever meeting the standards of WP. Claims which are and have repeatedly and very easily been proven untrue. The only available basis for any of this again is your own personal unsubstantiated word. You are literally seemingly requesting that an article on WP be written in accordance with your personal belief rather than with recorded verifiable fact.

And claiming "most supporters agree with me" certainly doesn't even remotely amount to any kind of meaningful factual evidence-based statement either of course. Another claim that has no basis except your own personal assurance. Again, WP is an encyclopedia, not a message board. Honestly... JayBee00 (talk) 06:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Glasgow rangers are regarded as the same club after their liquidation as before except by the most mad Celtic fans, there is one Wikipedia page, that case may be relevant here. 2A00:23C8:9C28:9A01:507D:844E:7C61:C574 (talk) 21:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC)