Joe, Framed, I basically agree with you. (I don't buy into the RA "line-pushing"/"meeting packing"/"ruse" position; sorry if I gave that impression!) The point about the branches is important.
I think in the mid-1990s when AFA was at its peak, Fighting Talk listed 30-something branches. (There are 31 listed in 1997
http://libcom.org/files/FIGHTING TALK - 16.pdf for example, including Wigan, York, Southampton, Colchester, Exeter, Ipswich.) On the one hand, some (quite a few?) of these were probably tiny or defunct; on the other hand, there were actually always 3 fairly sizeable London branches, as well as several isolated individuals in places like Kent or Somerset that bought into the AFA "brand" and could be mobilised for it, but weren't organised in branches.
I think AFA was unusual in the sense that the "brand" (as created through the 1989 relaunch and its clarification of a militant, two-track position) was endorsed by many more people than ever signed up to the organisation formally, and the loose national structure enabled considerable autonomy for local groups that were barely semi-detached at a national level (although sometimes regionally networked). And on a more local scale, AFA was able to mobilise people for actions who never came to meetings. (My understanding - I'm not sure if this is right - is that even in London there were members of the Stewards Group (or people who be drafted into it for specific actions) who never went to branch meetings.) It was in this very large outer layer that the shock of the game being declared over took longest to reach but hit hard. This was probably more apparent to those outside London, but even in London it did create "recriminations", even if not on the scale the "revisionist" line suggests.
It seems to me that, for all of its successes in the early 2000s, the shift of energies to IWCA without maintaining some structure that could keep this wider movement alive and connected to it meant that a lot of the energy was lost - and this contributed to IWCA's unability to sustain itself on the same high level for too many years. In other words, AFA was at the heart of, and set the agenda for, a <b>movement</b>, whereas IWCA wasn't, and the loss of that movement is something we are paying the price for now.