Sydney FC's team coach, Branko Culina faces the media after their match against Persik Kediri during the AFC Champions League game in Manahan Stadium Solo, Indonesia, Thursday, April 12, 2007. Persik Kediri beat Sydney FC 2-1 AAP Image/Ardiles Rante
Oh, Branko Culina, how I love thee. The Newcastle Jets coach might regularly suffer from a case of foot in mouth disease, but he’s often not wrong.
The man knows football even better then he does coffee (before moving to Newcastle he used to drive from one side of Sydney to the other every morning just for “the best brew in Sydney”).
He also has a real passion for the game.
So when he makes comments about Australian football, it comes from a good place.
While a couple months back Culina was wrong to take a pot shot at Viteslav Lavicka, this week, when critiquing the A-League, he was right on the money.
“We’re only a finals team because all the teams around us are pretty shit as well,” Culina was quoted as saying. I’m still laughing at that comment as I write it.
The old adage of “it’s funny because it’s true” is appropriate here.
The tightness of this season’s competition has been hailed by many, but not me. I think there’s an element of charm that things aren’t always predictable in the A-League, but I also think it is one of the key problems with the competition.
Amongst all the celebration from Football Federation Australia over the A-League’s openness, I wonder whether it has occurred to the governing body that maybe there is a link between the low crowds and the unpredictability of the competition.
Sounds farcical? Well, hear me out.
The English Premier League has never been more predictable then over the last few years, but it is also as popular as ever before. The English top flight is so successful that it has diluted the ‘magic’ of the FA Cup, once an English institution, to a passing interest.
Furthermore, fans turn out when their side is winning and if they don’t expect their team to win when playing at home, then many will, and do, stay away.
I am certain in my belief that the league is worse off for not having any great sides.
In fact, there has never been one in the A-League’s five seasons (don’t even mention Melbourne Victory in season two. Any team with Steve Pantelidis in it isn’t ‘great’).
I’ve spent most of the last week hopping between AC Milan’s Milanello training centre and the San Siro, and trust me when I say grandness inspires others. As I write this, I’m in Florence at Fiorentina’s Stadio Artemio Franchi.
The city was a buzz ahead of French giant Lyon’s visit. Just as it was before Liverpool arrived and is when any of the Serie A’s big names visit (especially Juve).
Clubs and cities ‘get up’ for these sort of games.
While the A-League can’t just create teams with that kind of history (though arguably Lyon’s ‘history’ is only a recent one), we can see quality A-League sides be assembled.
The presence of such a club would draw in fans both at home and away.
Whether it’s those who like to indulge in a bit of tall poppy syndrome, or neutrals that will turn out to see the country’s best club side in the flesh, it will help draw crowds across the country.
I don’t believe allowing a club like Melbourne Victory to flourish will see them dominate every single season, but really I don’t care too much either way.
A bit of competitiveness is good, but football is still the ‘world game’ despite it being dominated by a select few in nearly every domestic league and at international level.
Still, I’m not proposing we scrap the salary cap, but those who have the means to go beyond its limitations should be permitted to do so. At least, to an extent.
I’ve been speaking to a lot of players across Europe and the sounds about the new Melbourne Heart side are promising.
The biggest problem will be fitting all the interested players under the salary cap. You could have one very special club next year, but it probably won’t happen thanks to these limitations.
All of this without mentioning the continued risk that Asia is providing to the quality of our competition.
So FFA should drop their campaign of political correctness, which they are continuing by pulling up Culina for expressing his opinion (do they want players and coaches to say nothing at all? That’ll be great for headlines).
Instead, Ben Buckley and company should spend that time focusing on how to improve the football in the league.
We don’t need another debate on whether we should ‘speak no evil’ when it comes to frank opinions of the A-League. However, we do need a debate about whether this concept of ‘evenness’ is actually one of ‘blandness’.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Phoenix need more than flash in the pan crowds (133)
- ‘New football’ fans may help save the game in Australia (124)
- Does Tasmania have a case for A-League inclusion? (119)
- What happened in Port Said was not a football riot (118)
- Is the ACL the FFA’s Achilles heel? (70)
- Magilton struggling to make a mark (68)
- A-League needs to entertain more consistently (61)
- Why Manchester United are never really beaten (0)
- Die Löwen a chance for a Bundesliga rise? (0)
- Hey, Victory! Give them kids a go (0)
- The problem with Melbourne Victory’s ‘hole’ season (25)
- Time for a Sydney FC clean out (23)
- Perth Glory vs Gold Coast United: A-League live scores, blog (94)
- Is Lampard or Gerrard the more valuable midfielder? (16)
Freud of Football said | November 26th 2009 @ 5:40am | Report comment
This is slightly off topic but does Hungary have a salary cap? I thought I heard the commentators mention that last night during the Debrecin – Liverpool game?
It would be interesting if they do have one as they still have some excellent talent in the league.
Davidde Corran said | November 27th 2009 @ 6:24am | Report comment
Interesting I hadn’t heard that! I have just sent an e-mail off to a colleague of mine who is Hungarian about this. I’ll let you know when he gets back to me.
Freud of Football said | November 27th 2009 @ 6:42am | Report comment
Very good Davidde, would be much appreciated. I tried but Google wasn’t helping me out much and unfortunately, the few Hungarians I know don’t have a great deal of time for football.
Davidde Corran said | November 27th 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Hey Freud apparently Hungary doesn’t have a salary cap. Which doesn’t surprise me seeing as there’s enough problems within the country’s football to limit it’s potential as it is!
Freud of Football said | November 27th 2009 @ 4:13pm | Report comment
Davidde, I believe the commentators said they were limited on what they could spend, that for me could have meant they have a limit on transfer fees, the salary cap that they don’t have or perhaps they simply don’t have a great deal of money, there was some financial limitation mentioned.
Quite frustrating as it piqued my interest but I hadn’t being paying attention properly, Liverpool playing to such a poor standard can have that affect.
Davidde Corran said | November 28th 2009 @ 6:20am | Report comment
Yes there is very little money in Hungarian football and like most of the region what money there is can often end up ‘chaneled’ to the wrong places.
Anyone interested in Eastern European football should read Jonathon Wilson’s ‘Behind the Curtain’. Great writer, gread read and fascinating area. Can’t wait to make it to Eastern Europe for the first time next year.
Mahony said | November 26th 2009 @ 5:46am | Report comment
Season 2 Melbourne absolutely ripped up the A/League. So I will mention them as the greatest team the league has seen. They are to reach those hights since.
danny said | November 26th 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
greatest relative to the competition. last year’s melbourne side would have embarassed that of season two, yet only won the premiership on goals for. the rest of the competition caught up.
mahony said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:18pm | Report comment
Fair point (on last years team) danny – but the A-League is the A-League, so it is reasonable to conclude that Melbourne had a “great” team. The relativity argument could be made about some “great” European clubs that could not cut it for 5 minutes in English, Italian, French, German, Spanish and Russian leagues.
Pippinu said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
You have to admit, when you look back at that Melbourne team in season 2, it’s not really a stand out team.
Take a look at the grand final winning team:
* Panta at LB (a makeshift full back if I’ve ever seen one)
* Caceres was in front of him, a passable winger
* we played with two DMs: Brebs and Muskie
* Storey was the right back, had a solid season, but hardly a world beater
* a very young Leijer had a good season (leading to being signed by Fulham)
* Danny and Arch scored 21 goals between them (excluding Arch’s 5 in the grand final)
* Fred did pretty much everything else (but not consistently well, although he ripped AU apart that day)
danny said | November 26th 2009 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
granted you can’t compare between generations (how would bradman fare in a professional era?) but i think it’s valid to compare teams two years apart. although in such a young league, 2 years is just about a generation. the change in overall calibre of the league since season 1 is just phenomenal, and something a-league bashers would do well to appreciate.
Davidde Corran said | November 27th 2009 @ 6:25am | Report comment
No they are the most successful team in from the A-League so far. WIth the progression of the league it is even debatable if they were the best. ‘Great’ however isn’t a word I’d use.
True Tah said | November 26th 2009 @ 7:01am | Report comment
Arguably Melbourne would have to be the best team in the competition since the start, two premierships, best crowds and best connection in their home city. Whilst they would not be a great club in the sense that the likes of Real Madrid, Manchester United, et. al are, they are a successful club.
If you got rid of the salary cap, it would kill overall interest in the HAL, you would have Sydney, Melbourne and Gold Coast dominating to an insane extent, and that would be about it. The HAL teams are not seen as part of their community to the same extent that the likes of the English sides are over there, or the AFL sides are in Australia.
One thing that the clubs have really dropped the ball on is the quality of the marquee players. You had Dwight Yorke for Sydney FC and now Robbie Fowler for North Queensland. Whilst the likes of Aloisi and Culina are established Socceroos, they are not ‘global’ names like the other two guys, and arguable lack the drawing power of these guys. I always figured that with Lowys millions behind it, Sydney FC should have been to get a global superstar, maybe David Beckham, but it doesnt seem to have been the case.
Tom said | November 26th 2009 @ 7:43am | Report comment
I had a bit of a laugh at Branko’s comments, but this is the wrong conclusion to draw.
The Melbourne Victory and Sydney FC provide as much ‘greatness’ as the A-league can handle at the moment. They are big enough and successful to stimulate interest in other markets, but if they were dominating the competition each year Australian sporting fans would simply not bother turning up to watch uncompetitive games.
Killer_Tomatoes said | November 26th 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment
Gibberish, this is not Europe and we don’t have 100 years of history and connection for fans to fall back on. The sooner some of the so-called football ‘experts’ in this country get that into their brains the better. This is the type of garbage I expect to read from the endlessly bitter Craig Foster or Les Murray, who seem to be like a jaded ex-girlfriend with the way they talk about domestic football.
The situation with sport here is unique, people do not want to come and watch competitions where one or two team win everything and the others compete for third or fourth best, that’s even more relevant considering we don’t even have relegation to play for, so what to keep the interest at the bottom of the table? So many pundits in Australia have a total failure to grasp the context within which we live here and that football in this context will never directly resemble the European leagues some so desperately want it to.
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:07am | Report comment
history??? vs connection???
you have over 120 years of history of the sport in this country…….just, some people want to be very selective about what ‘history’ they choose to connect with.
Killer_Tomatoes said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
To true, I don’t disagree at all, but the author of this article is not referring to the old giants of Australian football like South Melbourne here, that’s pretty clear, he’s talking about the likes of Sydney or Melbourne becoming the Real Madrid and Barca of the A-League. Personally, I would love to see the FFA re-engage some of the old clubs preferrably through inclusion in the league (but I’m a realist so i’m not gonna wait for that) or an FFA Cup type comp. Would love to see Victory verse South at an abslotuely packed Bob Jane Stadium. But that’s not really what this article is about considering the clubs in question, being A-League clubs, have no real history or fan connections as of yet and so after a ten year lean patch fans have nothing keeping them attached to the club like the Greek community had with South Hellas or the Croatians had with Melbourne Croatia, that’s my entire point of why the whole contention of this article is flat out wrong.
If your saying that these old clubs with history have a chance of being those great or huge clubs in the modern day football context in Australia then you’re living in a fantasy land.
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:41am | Report comment
Not at all,
just stressing the difference between a history and connection,
you should probably rephrase it thus “we don’t have 100 years of history of connection for fans”
Pippinu said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Melbourne Croatia Mk II is joining the comp next season.
Killer_Tomatoes said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:52am | Report comment
Let’s try and refrain from this topic of discussion for a fortnight
mahony said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
130 years of amazing unprofessionalism……
Gibbo said | November 26th 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
“so what to keep the interest at the bottom of the table?”
Well, for one, i’m sure fans of whoever happens to be on the bottom (it might be NQLD, but for this example lets assume not) might turn out to support their team when Fury come to town to see Robbie Fowler, right? That’s one of the ideas of a marquee. Well lets say Melbourne Victory had robbie fowler up front, even if your team was on the bottom you might consider going to see your team most likely lose while also catching a quality striker play at your home park. Further, lets now say melbourne victory have robbie fowler, mark viduka and mark bresciano all starting. Or perhaps patrick klievert. Or Edgar Davids or Slyvian Wiltord or Nakamura or whoever. Just a quality side with big names and good quality support. Surely this would be even more of a drawcard for fans of say the Nix or whoever’s on the bottom, fair call? And then what would happen if after you’ve seen this quality melbourne vicory side whip your local boys a couple times, then one day Paul Iffil puts in a decent display, kicks a hat trick and you send the victory back home with nil points… surely the enthusiasm in the community would go up…
your argument is bogus.
Davidde Corran said | November 27th 2009 @ 6:32am | Report comment
It is a misconception that fans in England support their clubs because of tradition and history and that this is why they will still go to games even when their team does poorly.
Such ‘loyal’ fans are in the minority (about a third of all spectators). Read any research into the matter and you will find that to be true. This group of fans exists but it is generally made up of young men. Once these young men get other priorities (girlfriends/wives, families, demanding jobs) they tend to fall away from the club.
Another example of this is in Italy with Ultras where members tend to disappear once they get their first serious girlfriend.
Apparently the biggest threat to Italian ultras is not an ethically amoral Identity card system but attractive females!
Club crowds fluctuate in most of England with success and failure just like in Australia.
I also find it a shame to see Craig Foster referred to as “bitter”. Having worked with him he is nothing other then passionate and utterly professional (though he gets a bit carried away by his emotions when doing live broadcasts of the Socceroos). He calls it as he sees it with complete honesty and, unlike many others in the media, has no agendas other then how he believes football should be played. Fozz loves debate and discussion. Instead of being angry at someone for disagreeing with him he will be grateful for the opportunity to discuss it with them. Few agree with him on everything but he is still one of the good guys.
Freud of Football said | November 27th 2009 @ 6:40am | Report comment
I see the word agenda there Davidde, you weren’t thinking of going down that path again were you?
Further, I’m not sure you can simply go by research into football fans as to how many stay true to a club for life. I’ve heard the story (from Italians, well Sicilians) that the Ultras settle down and leave the scene when a girl comes on to the scene but there are still millions of football fans, people don’t stop caring or stop supporting, they simply don’t give their life to the club and follow them around the country any more and there is a big difference between that and not attending because a team isn’t at its peak.
Mr cheese said | November 27th 2009 @ 7:17am | Report comment
I think you have a point, Freud.
There is great loyalty to football clubs over here in the old country.
You have to appreciate ( and not every reader of this site does ) that it’s much more expensive to watch football at the top level these days.
Look at Bolton. The NW is the most congested region of England in terms of football teams at every level. The Bolton style since Allardyce has been as pretty as modern classical music. People will watch that stuff if the team is winning AND if it’s affordable.
Bolton is not a wealthy town and there are people from there who support other clubs. The BBC Radio 2 DJ Mark Radcliffe comes from Bolton but supports Man City.
It’s a combination of things but the price of tickets is important.
Freud – do you have a rough idea of the difference in ticket prices between our Premier League and the AFL ???
Cheers,
Paul J said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment
The EPL is successful despite the fact a few select teams always win. The Poms love football and will follow it regardsless.
If you lose the salary cap 2 teams would win everything and the rest would simply make up the numbers.
Who wants to see Collingwood or the Broncos win 6 out of every 10 grand finals except for those clubs fans?
ren said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
but collingwood would just get the colliwobbles every september
LT80 said | November 26th 2009 @ 8:53am | Report comment
Great article Davidde. In Australia it’s become pretty much accepted as an article of faith in all codes that measures to equalise the competition are a good thing. So we have the salary caps, and the draft in the AFL.
I’m a non-believer. Why is it so great if a competition is kept artificially even? The danger for the A-League, as you point out is that the only way to keep things equal might be to pull all the clubs down to a very poor and boring level.
Pippinu said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
LT
The AFL learned everything it did from the NFL, the one comp in the world where the dollars are pretty much on par with the EPL.
Two incredibly successful comps in terms of dollars, two very different approaches.
The evidence, on the face of it, is that if the A-League shunned the “NFL way” for the “EPL way”, we’d most likely need a Crawford report Mk II within a decade – unless – the two wealthiest men in Australia were willing to fund the league to levels that would otherwise be completely unsustainable – which is possible and could work for a while.
Robbos said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
It is good that the AFL learned from the NFL. Both are very strong & dorminant sports within their country but insignificant outside of it. It would be stupid fo the FFA to follow these approaches.
While at the same time it would be stupid for the HAL to also follow the EPL approach, because they do not have the history nor the popularity of the EPL both within the country & outside of it.
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 11:41am | Report comment
and so,…….the preferred pathway is???
you’ve taken one foot off the ground on the north side of the fence, and one foot off the ground from the south side of the fence,……..do you still have a leg to stand on? or are you taking in the view from a perch upon the pickets??
(and so, the HAL is this curious little construct)
Robbos said | November 26th 2009 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
They have modelled themselves on the likes of the MLS & the J-League or K-League, which is more akin to the status of our game here.
The main sports in this country has little or int’l flavour & hence not the models we would want to follow.
mahony said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
Spot on…
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
artificial?
artificial is outside interests coming in with billion dollar cheque books.
what the AFL does, is provides a structured environment, a level playing field (of sorts) – - and within those parameters, clubs must operate and look to achieve a competitive advantage by means other than just cheque book recruiting.
Is that so artificial? To me, it seems more like a set of rules, simliar to what the combatants on the pitch are subject to…..that, then, to my mind, IS sport.
And, sport IS ‘artificial’ after all, because, where in the ‘real world’ is a rule saying I can’t use my hands??? So, yep, it’s all artificial at some point.
The HAL needs to be careful of not getting too far ahead of itself. Remove the measures and the league would collapse and the 2 dominant teams with fat chequebooks would have to try to join the J-League full time.
Pippinu said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Yes – I too find the use of the term “artificial” and odd thing.
Australia could have a scenario where, say, two billionaires own two clubs that put together such strong squads that they fight it out for the championship for the next 20 years.
I’m not quite sure why that is viewed as “natural”?
As you say, the AFL lays down the parameters for clubs to enter the competition – and from then on – it’s up to them to use their recruiting and coaching nous to win the competition – which remains a pretty tough gig.
Why is that artificial exactly? Everyone follows the same rules – pretty much like the rule that there should only be so many players on the field at any one time. Is that rule artificial?
LT80 said | November 26th 2009 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Well it is artificial in the sense that it is imposing a requirement or restriction that would not otherwise be, that is not required to play the game.
Teams need to agree how many players will take the field. Not every club will agree with the salary cap, and you certainly don’t need a salary cap in place to play the game.
Pip, why not extend your equalisation to the coaching ranks? Perhaps the AFL should take the initiative to allocate the premiership winning coach to the wooden spooners for the next year? Where do you stop?
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 10:37am | Report comment
There is a logical question mark around a cap in off-field spending, because, presently, it’s the off-field spending that can tend to dictate the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’.
It’s effectively the question of whether you want – for example – a bicycle race where the lowly team has one support person, and a K-Mart bought clearance bike, vs teams with NASA materials and huge support staff……oh…..hang on, that’s been happening in the Olympics for some time now!!!
The reality is – the ‘science’ of the sport get’s extended via the off field spending. Now, the Olympics kept pushing this flimsy ‘amateur’ clause, as a ruling about people in the contest.
A salary cap effectively ensures that greater innovation, both sports science wise, strategy wise, person-management wise etc etc is encouraged.
However, the other key distinction is that AFL for example does not have privately owned franchises. The private owners of HAL sides, such as a Clive Palmer – would no doubt argue that he owns it so he should be able to throw as much money into it as he wants……on or off the field. (I could accept that argument if he first was willing to invest funds in his stadium too, otherwise, we continue the sad trend of public funds building stadia for super wealthy owners who throw copious amounts of money at their plaything…..it’s all just a bit artificial).
AndyRoo said | November 26th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
There is a logical question mark around a cap in off-field spending, because, presently, it’s the off-field spending that can tend to dictate the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’.
Exactly, this In fact one of the main reasons I like the cap is that the two teams reported to be financially ok MV and CCM can now spend more money off the field instead of spending more on wages.
CCM are building a center of excellence that looks fantastic for the game. MV can improve their back room staff and scouting network and I think they have the best track record for bringing in players from outside the league. GCU actually sent Miren to Brasil and these are fantastic developments.
CCM don’t actually use their full cap (they have no Marquee) but with only a 4.5 year old league their is a lot of infrastructure to build and it’s important to realise strong clubs need strong foundations. If MV were stuck in an arms race with Clive Palmer then I doubt they would be able to do things like the MV 5 a side comp which is growing the game.
build a strong healthy and sustainable domestic comp and hopefully CL success will come… Towsers post shows that the clock is ticking though.
Pippinu said | November 26th 2009 @ 10:42am | Report comment
LT
I’m comfortable about the present rules surrounding salaries and drafts.
Clubs make it work within those rules.
If they can get advantages with coaching staff, new coaching techniques, good scouting, better equipment, new tactics – so be it.
At the end of the day, 18 play 18, you have to win the footy, and use it better than the other mob.
That basic principle does not change regardless of the number of coaching staff squashed into the coach’s box.
LT80 said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Michael,
I can see your point. But by your argument, the “business” rules of the league, effectively becomes part of the rules of the game. You might like this, but I do not.
Everyone loves to see a close game or season, but when this is brought about by removing the advantage that is developed by better clubs and players, then it becomes contrived.
Sport is meant to be competitive, there are winners and losers, that is why people enjoy it.
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 11:01am | Report comment
Ah, but, in the past, I hated the false superiority of the clubs backed by the (most) wealthy(-iest) individuals.
Liking it is subjective – - just so long as people don’t try to preach absolute correctness. It’s a bit of a horses for courses.
What I find ironic though, is, that ‘contrived’ closeness is actually the domain of the rule set of soccer itself, i.e. an overly restrictive rule set that ensures generally closer results.
And so, back to horses for courses…….salary caps may not be so critical for a soccer league as, a team can just park a bus across the goalmouth and play for a draw from the outset…..not so in Aust Football by contrast.
That’s why I don’t suggest that salary caps etc are absolutely necessary or perfect – - – however, I do reckon that for this particular phase of the HAL, that, it is perhaps most prudent…….for now.
ANd then, personally…..again……I am no fan of private ownership and the way many EPL clubs have whored themselves out to the highest bidder from wherever with whatever credentials. Artificial or not – I don’t like it……..but, perhaps again,….just another subjective viewpoint.
KB said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:17am | Report comment
I agree LT80 — 100% correct…
KB said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
The HAL has a great club and that’s Sydney FC… Branko Culina was never up to the task of managing a great club like SFC and his ridiculous comments are a reflection of his poor managerial expertise and sportsmanship… Start winning at home Branko and stop blaming your players for their poor form… It’s just possible that you are the one that is at fault…
~~~~~~~
KB
Chop said | November 26th 2009 @ 5:23pm | Report comment
You can’t be serious KB? Sydney FC are not a great club, with a different manager each year, almost the biggest turnover of players they have not established any sort of lasting tradition or legacy. Even their results aren’t close to being the best of the clubs….
KB said | November 26th 2009 @ 5:45pm | Report comment
Chop,
I am a SFC and Chelsea supporter … we change our managers every six months, the player’s roaster and whatever needs to be done, and owners if need be … yes I follow the two best clubs on planet earth …
btw I live on the Gold Coast so you can also throw in the Gold Coast United FC as well…..
Midfielder said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:15am | Report comment
Davvide
You make a mistake of applying European standards to our little league…
Nothing can exist without it’s past and the environment it exists in.
Football in Australia does not get much media, although better today from mainstream media, Football own media often point out how poor it is against leagues.
In Australia we are used to a final series and salary caps…. wishing football in its present state could break from this is over estimating it’s ability and setting unachievable expectations meaning football will fail…
The money in football is so small 17 million per year from it’s media deal…
Me thinks and maybe I am wrong but it would be better for journalist to accept the environment we work in and look to ways of growing within that environment…
Your comment on crowds… how could a team be expected to grow if it had no chance of winning in the Australian environment.
Finally a child wishing it was Christmas tomorrow needs to be told you need to wait… Christmas day will come..Also remember we need to get cross coders to games for the league to work the football following alone is not strong enough to make it work.
Football will survive I hope the next four and a half years and if we have in place the proper building blocks the next phase can begin… with the next media deal and some FTA TV.
Killer_Tomatoes said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:17am | Report comment
Ah well, at least nobody has compared the salary cap to communism yet, that’s a personal favourite of mine. The league will not survive without a level playing field in terms of money spent on wages, anybody who thinks different is again failing to truly understand the Australian sporting context and football’s place within it. Look at Newcastle, when they were flying they were regularly pulling crowds of 12k in a small town, now, when they’re struggling, they’re lucky to draw 6k. If that struggle became a perpetual one, whereby the fans knew before the season even started the best they were competing for was 3rd bottom (which they would be given relative resources, just look at the massive quality player drain they’ve faced since winning the GF) they would be hard pressed to find 2k fans willing to fork out for the privelledge of watching a side without hope week in week out.
Michael C said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
That’s part of the hole that the FFA and HAL are digging for themselves,
too many ‘regional’ teams,
and to further expand the HAL to 12 and perhaps 14 teams……if you then went a large scale relaxation on the salary cap, suddenly that’s exactly what you’ll get,
perhaps the envisioned natural evolution would be that these regional sides might be expendable, or be bought and relocated to major metro centres etc etc……..but, this is Australia, the worlds most competitive sports/football market and soccer structure theory 101 is not operating in a sporting vacuum.
The NBL has had that problem too – - of too many regional sides, the irony then, is that they’ve helped constrict the competition and made it hard for the big city teams to be marketable…….really, who cares about playing against Townsville outside of QLD????
AndyRoo said | November 26th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Ah but MC if the Hal is to accept it’s lot as a development//retirement league these regional teams providing coverage on the map for aspiring Socceroos to have a top flight team on their doorstep is key. In ways it’s somewhat similar to the NRL who want to have teams near their key nurceries and Sydney based teams that aren’t producing enough of their own players cop flak.
And placed near the coast in sunny climates will help those retirees
Once half the teams in the comp can comfortably reach the cap amount then it will be raised. As it stands now through the advent of the NYL the standard is rising each year and we can wait until the teams are on better footing financially before raising it any more than the annual 100k rise.
The Bear said | November 27th 2009 @ 9:32am | Report comment
I am leaning towards Davvidde’s idea that if the team is losing, and playing patchy football, the supporters may accept it – and go anyway. But the HAL has been groomed of late as a “any body can win it” competition. That expectation will let a lot of fans down. It’s unreasonable for a handful of teams to carry the burden of being table toppers. The FFA should cut the BS and lower the overall focus on “winning”. It is about participation. That is a far more valuable message and marketing tool, imo.