Related coverage
Football Federation Australia CEO Ben Buckley during the launch of the A-League season in Sydney, Monday, Aug. 2, 2010. (AAP Image/Dean Lewins)
Football Federation Australia was already having a bad week before former A-League boss Archie Fraser stuck the knife in with a remarkable attack on the governing body and CEO Ben Buckley (above) on The World Game website.
Fraser, who quit as CEO of the A-League in April and worked to save the North Queensland Fury, didn’t mince words in his attack, addressing a number of issues of great concern for football in this country.
Fraser’s attack is important for a number of reasons: for raising and openly discussing the leadership at the FFA and Ben Buckley’s role; what impact the World Cup bid is having on the league; asking why there has been so much personnel change at the FFA; raising questions about the Sydney Rovers’ viability; asking why it took so long to step in and help the Newcastle Jets; and shinning a light on the major issues of scheduling and promotion.
The “Archie Fraser manifesto” deserves a deeper examination as we need to understand the reasons why the A-League is faltering (and so we can challenge the fallacy that it’s the sole result of a lack of interest).
Archie said:
- “The only focus right now at the FFA is the World Cup bid and the A-League has been left to become a basket case.
“The A-League is suffering. Hopefully it will still be there in December when FIFA decides whether we do or don’t get the World Cup.
“The structure of the league is wrong. It needs more autonomy and to be separated from the FFA and allowed to look after its own affairs.”
Without autonomy within the FFA, the A-League has become the forgotten child.
The attitude that the league will grow on its own has corrupted the FFA’s thinking since the very beginning. They underestimated the task of developing the league and the extent of the shift of resources and attention from the A-League to the World Cup bid has exposed that flawed logic – failing to secure its foundation, which it should have been doing.
All new leagues in the modern football era, from the USA to Japan to China, have suffered a dip in popularity after the initial boom, so it was imperative that the A-League was nurtured during this period rather than ignored.
We can only hope the bid is successful or that the FFA’s resources and finances are switched back to the A-League before it’s too late.
One shudders to think what will happen if the bid in unsuccessful. With all its eggs in the World Cup basket, what will become of the A-League?
- “It needs some grunt in a competitive market at a critical time for the game. Right now the league is paralysed. The FFA has taken its eye off the ball and that’s why I quit.
“The other codes must be looking at us and thinking how good is this? They will be saying, ‘Thank God they haven’t been able to get it right yet. Because when they do we will be in a bit of trouble’.
“My question is why are the directors not doing anything about it? Why is the FFA board sitting back and allowing this to happen?”
This speaks for itself.
Where is the “grunt” in competing in the overcrowded Australian market and determination to address the issues around the decrease in crowds?
- “There is no promotion of the game and no cohesive strategy. When I was head of the A-League I couldn’t make any decisions, and no decisions were ever made until the last minute. Everything went through Ben Buckley.”
If this is true then it’s little wonder the A-League’s promotion has been so non-existent.
The A-League’s running, therefore, needed to be more autonomous during this World Cup bid period, and more power given to current boss Lyall Gorman (who has been almost invisible throughout this crisis).
Promotion and marketing, when compared to the A-League’s launch, is completely inadequate.
More needs to be done and Buckley must be more proactive in outsourcing that promotion if the FFA cannot handle it.
- “The organisation is purely reactive and never stands up for the game. We never take on the other codes and a lot of people within the FFA seem to be happy with that.”
We saw this when the likes of Andrew Demetriou so easily hijacked the World Cup bid agenda.
Where was the equivalent amount of chest beating from the FFA supporting their cause?
The FFA had the higher moral ground – trying to win the rights to host an event bigger than the Sydney Olympics that would be for all Australians to enjoy – and yet that message was buried in semantics dictated by rival codes (Etihad Stadium’s availability, the impact on the AFL/NRL seasons, etc).
- “Questions need to be asked over why (chief commercial officer) John O’Sullivan, (operations manager) Matt Phelan left, and why were (head of corporate and public affairs) Bonita Mersiades and (chief financial officer) Ian Lewis given the heave-ho.”
The FFA is a desperately understaffed organisation. A staff of 106 is not enough to handle the Socceroos, A-League and the World Cup bid.
So any clashes or tensions within that staff need to be addressed and overcome immediately if those 106 people are to maximise their abilities for the cause of growing football in this country.
They need to be working beyond their means to compensate for the shortfall, not in a poisonous environment.
- “The dire financial straits at Newcastle have been brewing for nine months. The FFA knew all about it. Nobody sat down and talked to them and offered to help until the very last minute. It’s really a disgrace.”
Was Con Constantine’s uneasy relationship with the FFA the cause for their lackluster response to the Jets’ financial situation?
Only they know.
But with North Queensland Fury and Adelaide United in the FFA’s hands, and clubs such as Gold Coast United needing more than just a helping hand, how can the FFA, with its modest size and financial clout, support so many clubs?
When the MLS went through its financial crisis, it had the support of a few corporate high flyers who could bankroll the clubs.
The FFA needs to keep the likes of Constantine and Clive Palmer involved in the game and actively reach out to corporate Australia, for it cannot bankroll the whole competition itself – certainly if it doesn’t have the prospect of an Australian World Cup in 2022.
It needs to be cutting down the $25 million loss it makes per season.
It also needs to release the shackles on clubs so they can be more active in finding their own revenue streams.
The clubs will be able to do their own apparel deals next season, which will help in a small way, but they need to be given more freedom in other areas.
- “They (Melbourne Heart) only got 4,000 odd and the game should never have been played. The draw is nothing like the one that was under consideration back in April.”
Scheduling needs to be maximised in this crossover period between the A-League and the AFL/NRL seasons.
As fans now concede, the league can’t compete with these rival codes and the A-League is being buried in terms of attention.
So why have idiosyncrasies in the schedule such as Adelaide United hosting Newcastle Jets twice in the first six rounds, giving Gold Coast United (struggling at the best of times) two byes within the opening month of the season and scheduling a Melbourne Heart home game so close to an AFL finals match (knowing it would more than likely be staged in Victoria)?
Why hurt your cause by giving the media and fans even more reason to switch off or take no interest?
They need to accept the crossover into the AFL/NRL seasons just doesn’t work with the limited amount of promotion they can give the league.
- “I don’t think you will see them (Sydney Rovers) next season because the backing just isn’t there at the moment. There were other more deserving causes for an A-League licence.”
The circumstances in which the Rovers were handed the 12th A-League licence are deserving of their own investigation. But now they are in and set to make their debut in less than twelve months, we must ask where are they at in terms of backing and how the can learn from the Fury, Gold Coast and Melbourne Heart and build a sustainable supporter base before their entry.
Unlike Heart, they do have a wide and distinctive geographical base to their cross-town rivals, but with the NRL notching up record numbers in western Sydney, and the AFL making serious noise in the region with a seemingly bottomless pit of reserves to throw at Greater Western Sydney (GWS), how can an A-League franchise survive and prosper with feeble support from the FFA?
Fraser certainly provided us with some serious questions to ponder.
And what’s even more concerning is there remain some issues he didn’t touch on, such as the limitations of the Fox Sports television deal and the options for the next, the concerns over ticketing prices relative to the product, the viability of Gold Coast United, and the reasons why A-League crowd numbers are down.
These issues need to be discussed in a public forum, and Fraser should be praised rather than condemned (just as football fans that discuss these issues shouldn’t be branded as anti-A-League).
The crisis is real and to say nothing is to allow the FFA to steer the A-League down a path where it appears doomed.
Sitting idly by and expecting the A-League to grow of its own volition is the sort of shortsighted thinking that’s led the league into its current malaise under the FFA’s control.
Also, by not shinning a light on and openly discussing the various reasons why crowds remain lackluster, the football community will only fuel the anti-soccer brigade who argue a lack of interest is solely to blame for the stagnation.
Fraser’s attack should act as the impetus for the custodians of the game – and many of its fans – to wake up before it’s too late and the A-League morphs into the NSL Mark II.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
September 9th 2010 @ 9:15am
AndyRoo said | September 9th 2010 @ 9:15am | Report comment
So why have idiosyncrasies in the schedule such as Adelaide United hosting Newcastle Jets twice in the first six rounds, giving Gold Coast United (struggling at the best of times) two byes within the opening month of the season and scheduling a Melbourne Heart home game so close to an AFL finals match (knowing it would more than likely be staged in Victoria)?
I think this is a bit contradictory . I would prefer the league just provided a fairer draw and that after round 22 in an 11 team comp everyone had played each other home and away….but you start worrying about AFL and changing games because of that is how you get a wonky schedule in the first place. You can’t have everything and there is no window where you can magically fit an 8 month soccer season into the Australian sporting calender and nothing else is on.
The season is eventually going to be 8 months long, there will be crossover and the league has two real choices. Align with the other big Asian leagues (Japan and Korea) which would mean playing the whole season in winter or align with Europe. AFL is going to expand the length of it’s comp soon anyway…do you then change the whole schedule again? The big bash/ashes is potentially just as scary if your worried about such stuff.
Planting the flag for starting in August is one of Buckleys better moments in my opinion. The only good argument I have heard for moving it back is the clash with lower level football finals.
Everyone seems keen to put the later rounds of the HAL up against the start of the NRL and AFL but I think those are the times when they are the strongest PR wise as all the teams are still in contention and you have Super Rugby Finals. If football really needs to get some media oxygen in August/September then that is the time to have mid week games something League/AFL can’t really do.
September 9th 2010 @ 9:34am
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Any company performing as poorly as FFA should and would replace its CEO. Ben Buckley has been a failed experiment, and the code desperately needs to see the back of him. However, with the WC bid in process, Lowy will not be able to sack him. It would simply not be viable to bring a new player into the mix now. So we are stuck with him for this season. I don’t expect him to be with FFA after this season ends.
Thank God Fraser has spoken out and put the agenda what many posters, myself included, having been saying for the last 12 months. What he has done is made the issue impossible for Lowy to ignore.
September 9th 2010 @ 10:16am
rob said | September 9th 2010 @ 10:16am | Report comment
If everyone took a mate to each game the problem would be fixed. Get off your ass and go to a game.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:56pm
Mega said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
Would it though? Would that cover $25 million? Think the problem is a bit more serious than that, although that would help a little.
September 9th 2010 @ 1:17pm
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
I think you are speaking to those who already do.
September 9th 2010 @ 11:21am
keeper13 said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:21am | Report comment
BB’s only media appearances are infront of a qantas plane for some Socceroo promo..
otherwise he is invisible and always reactive and on the backfoot..
a cosy admin job back at the AFL awaits him..
surely now the time for a ‘football’ man that understand domestic football this country is more than just a one dimensional comp for tv fodder…
September 9th 2010 @ 11:32am
Lmacca said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:32am | Report comment
The irony of all of this is that the on field product is very good this year, arguably at the highest techical level we have seen, with the most players we have had in the competition. So there is depth there, and the product is good. Whilst there have been (many) mistakes, some mention of the standard of football could also be a part of this debate. It would indicate the league is growing and improving, despite all of the accumulated off-field dramas.
September 9th 2010 @ 11:36am
Justin said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:36am | Report comment
I find it laughable that the FFA see the WC in 12 or 14 years time (or whenever it is) is going to be the saviour of soccer in this country.
I’ll give you the tip now – If we win the bid it will be a showcase for 4 weeks. Once the caravan leaves then people WILL go back to life as before the WC.
Rugby has learnt this lesson the hardway and the FFA will too.
September 9th 2010 @ 11:38am
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:38am | Report comment
I could not agree more, Justin. Consolidating the A-League is of far more value to the code than a WC finals.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:24pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
Realfootball
I’d be surprised if any Football fan has that view. When the USA was awarded the hosting rights to WC1994, the USA did not even have a professional national football league.
The first MLS season was in 1996 – 2 years after the USA hosted the WC. The USA would now be considered one of the most lucrative football markets in the World.
If Australia wins the WC2022 hosting rights only the ill-informed sports fan would think the ensuing support will only last for 4-weeks in Jun-Jul 2022!
If Blatter reads out “Australia” on the morning of 4 December 2010 (AEST), the business of sport will dramatically change in Australia.
September 9th 2010 @ 1:23pm
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
Fuss, I am a died in the wool fan who has been attending A-League games since game 1, and not only do I hold that view, but I know others who do too.
The basic problem is that I don’t think we have a hope in Hades of winning the bid, which rather colours my perspective.
In any case, I am skeptical about any sweeping generalisation such as “The USA would now be considered one of the lucrative football markets in the world.” Really? By what measures? It still doesn’t come anywhere near competing with NFL or Baseball.
I think the WC is wildly overrated in terms of a long term legacy for the code in this country, particularly if seeking it means destroying our domestic competition.
September 9th 2010 @ 2:26pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
Realfootball
My comment about the USA was based on the fact that the USA spent the 2nd highest amount to purchase the broadcast rights to televise the 2010 & 2014 FIFA WCs, which one way to assess “the value of a football market”, since the WC is a universal product that is sold in the same format to every country on earth.
According to a document titled: The World Cup and Economics 2010, published by one of the world’s most prestigious investment banks, Goldman Sachs, the “broadcast rights fees paid to FIFA” for the 2010 & 29014 WCs were:
The top 5 broadcast rights – to televise 128 matches in 62 days – are as follows:
1. Italy: $444m
2. USA: $425m
3. France: $318m
4. Germany: $317m (but this does not include 2014 rights, which still have to be purchased!)
5. England: $300m
Interestingly, when you analyse the broadcast rights paid per capita, the USA had one of the highest changes, with a growth of 116%!
Australia (SBS TV) has paid $15m (or $0.70 per capita) for the rights to broadcast the 2010 & 2014 WC.
Source: http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/global-economic-outlook/the-world-cup-2010.html
Page 14
September 9th 2010 @ 3:03pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Realfootball
I based my comment that “The USA would now be considered one of the lucrative football markets in the world” on the fact that the USA paid the 3rd highest amount of money to broadcast the 2010-14 FIFA WCs.
I used the FIFA WCs since this is a universal football product that is broadcast in every country on earth.
In a report titled: The World Cup and Economics 2010, which was published by one of the world’s most prestigious investment banks, Goldman Sachs, on page 14 of the report, there is a Table that contains the Top 5 FIFA TV nations – based on the USD paid to FIFA to televise the 2010-14 FIFA WCs.
The top 5 nations have paid the following to broadcast 128 football matches over 62 days:
1. Italy: 444m
2. USA: 425m
3. France: 318m
4. Germany: 317m (but this is only for the 2010 rights; the 2014 rights have still to be purchased!)
5. England: 300m
On a per capita basis the USA lags behind the others in the “Top 5″ even though its per capita fee grew by the highest rate – a whopping 113%!
If the USA were to pay a similar fee per capita for the FIFA WC tv broadcasts as the other Top 5 nations, the USA would pay $1-2 BILLION for the 2 WC broadcasts!
In my opinion, based on current growth rates, by the 2022 WC, the USA market will be the most lucrative tv market for broadcasting the FIFA WC.
http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/global-economic-outlook/the-world-cup-2010.html
September 9th 2010 @ 3:55pm
Mister Football said | September 9th 2010 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
Sounds like you’re making a good case for why the WC will be hosted in the US in 2022.
September 9th 2010 @ 3:57pm
Bristler said | September 9th 2010 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
I think it is important to put these US figures into perspective; the NFL TV rights are worth more than $3 billion per year for 256 regular season games and 11 playoff games. 425m is not a huge amount in American sport. Furthermore, anyone who follows American sport and the TV contracts will know how ESPN operates; it outbids rivals by a huge amount knowing that its business model is vastly different from the networks and then will offer small increases next contract knowing that commercial rivals will not match the offer (look at the way ESPN won the BCS rights from Fox – it bid $100m more than its rival). As such I would not expect huge increases for some time; there certainly will be small increases but not significant jumps.
The other factor that will limit increases is the relationship between ABC and ESPN (sister networks owned by Disney). ABC can show the high profile games (featuring USA, Mexico, or games from the latter stages) and dump the lesser games on the ESPN family (ESPN1, 2 or 3). CBS and Fox cannot really do this and would not be willing to show the lower rating games meaning they would have to find buyers for the less desirable games. This therefore limits the competition to ABC and NBC (who have a number of sister stations which it relies upon during Olympic coverage to cover less popular events), and anyone who knows about NBC’s current situation knows that they will not be bidding on much for a while. The one game changer is if the US wins the right to host the 2022 WC , but that is not worth discussing unless it happens.
September 9th 2010 @ 4:21pm
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 4:21pm | Report comment
Your statement was still a sweeping generalisation, given that your stats refer specifically to World Cup rights, when in fact what you said in the first instance referred to the USA as a “football market”. A “football market” surely has to include considerably more commercial indicators than the amount paid for WC tv rights.
Unfortunately, I agree with Mr Football. All these figures do is show why FIFA is more likely to go with the United States than Australia.
September 9th 2010 @ 5:01pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
MF and Realfootball – that just doesn’t make sense.
You are saying strong tv broadcast rights figures for the 2010-14 WC means the USA should win the 2022 WC hosting!???
Then, how do you explain that the USA actually DID win the hosting rights for WC 1994?
These rights to host the 1994 WC were announced by FIFA in 1988, when:
a) the USA did NOT have a professional football league; and
b) the USA would have paid a minute amount of money for the tv rights to broadcast FIFA WCs in 1982 & 1986.
September 9th 2010 @ 5:11pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:11pm | Report comment
Bristler
So, we have in the USA tv sports market:
a) NFL TV rights = $11.2m per game (I’m assuming you are a man of honour and your figures are accurate!)
b) FIFA WC rights = $3.3 m per game
The amount paid by the USA for the 2010 & 14 FIFA WCs increased by 113% over the amount paid for the 2002 & 06 FIFA WCs.
Now, for the next deal – for the 2018 & 2022 WCs – if the USA pays just 70% more for the tv rights, the “dollars per game” paid for the FIFA WC will equal that paid for the NFL.
No wonder Goldman Sachs is extremely bullish about the future of football in the USA.
September 9th 2010 @ 1:46pm
Justin said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
Fussball – Not sure which way you are going – on one hand saying no one believes that WC will change the sport uch in AUS and then at the end you say it is ill-informed to have that opinion.
I think quite a few people think a WC it will turn the game in this country on its head.
The after affects of the WC will be much smaller than you are apparently already sprouting…
September 9th 2010 @ 11:02pm
jimbo said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:02pm | Report comment
The WC finals will have an enomous impact on Australia and will give football hundreds of millions in benefits, real and intangible. Plus all the infrastructure and football development and coaching benefits.
The flow on will start in December when the code gets millions of dollars in free publicity right around the world if we win the bid. This will surely flow on to the A-League.
The point is whether the FFA are gambling too heavily on winning the bid at the expense of the A-League.
If we win the bid, there is no doubt Australian football will benefit enormously.
September 9th 2010 @ 11:59am
Mister Football said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Justin
it has to be said that the soccer WC is a much, much bigger event.
And there is another thing that soccer will benefit from: a Government willing to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on the event, including 12 years of non-stop publicity leading up to it.
That’s the big advantage that soccer will get, that rugby didn’t get.
September 9th 2010 @ 1:42pm
Justin said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
No doubt its a bigger event in terms of the all mighty dollar and the influx of tourists but it still goes for a month or 6 weeks and then it is over.
Having a Gov spend money on it wont change the fact that 18 months after the event it will be nothing but a memory. Sydney Olympics anyone?
September 9th 2010 @ 2:01pm
Mister Football said | September 9th 2010 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
There are two points to consider:
1. This represents PR and billions of dollars of taxpayer money directed at one sport, which is a very different proposition to the Olympics (which are full of sports absolutely no one gives a damn about).
2. The unusual situation where FIFA are considering two bids at once means an unusually long lead in period of 12 years, as opposed to the six or seven years for the Sydney Olympics – that’s 12 years of PR all paid for by the taxpayer – this is the real boon that soccer will get from it.
September 9th 2010 @ 11:57am
Art Sapphire said | September 9th 2010 @ 11:57am | Report comment
Frank Lowy spoke to the Daily Telegraph and Foxsports.
Mind you if you live in Melbourne you would not even know this was happening. There is nothing in the local press.
Channel 9 News in Melbourne last night did not even bother to report the Australia’s win over Poland.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,27678228-5000940,00.html
FFA chairman Frank Lowy denies World Cup focus; says accusations ‘malicious’
By Tom Smithies
September 09, 2010
Football Federation Australia chairman Frank Lowy has angrily rejected suggestions that the A-League is withering in the shadow of the 2022 World Cup bid.
Lowy admitted that the slide in crowds was disappointing but said the start of the season would always suffer in competition with the crescendos of other codes’ seasons.
And he described as “malicious” the accusation that he and the FFA had taken their eye off the domestic ball.
Lowy pointed out that six months ago a steering committee was established for the A-League, headed by FFA deputy chair Brian Schwartz, given Lowy’s inevitable need to focus on the World Cup bid.
“I’m still involved at the very top level, but the day to day responsibility lies with the committee,” he said.
“This idea that we are focused on a foreign agenda exclusively . . . it’s malicious. The beginning (of the season) is always a bit tough while the competing codes are at their peak . . . every season starts that way. At least since we expanded to 10 or 11 teams, it’s a fact of life. I don’t think we should be judged by our crowds in that period.”
Lowy denied the FFA had made a strategic mistake by essentially keeping their promotional powder dry until the sporting landscape is clearer later in the year.
“There is a (marketing) push all the time but it achieves more when your competitors aren’t playing,” he said.
“We have to deal with the realities of when stadiums are available.
“Melbourne Heart wanted to postpone some (home) games but we just couldn’t do that. The reason for Sydney FC’s low crowds for instance isn’t hard — they’re not playing well.
“In fact not playing well is a bit of an understatement and Sydney’s not a town to put up with that.
“The financial situation of the clubs is not as strong as it should be. But I was talking to our new coach (Socceroos boss Holger Osieck) and he said he was working in Japan five or six years after the J-League started and they had exactly the same problems.
“We need patience, but it certainly isn’t neglect. Everybody’s working very hard.”
Lowy laid down a stiff challenge to would-be 2011 entrants Sydney Rovers, that D-Day on their still unresolved funding was fast approaching — without which, he said, they would be denied entry to the league.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:06pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Art Sapphire
Thank you for providing this information. Gosh I love Uncle Frank!
PS: There’s only one news service worth watching – 630 p.m. SBS TV. You’ll get real news about real issues – not stories about cats stuck in trees and drunken sportsmen behaving badly – and, the sports report covers all sport.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:08pm
Art Sapphire said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
Interesting to note that Lowy did not mention Buckley, but pointed out that six months ago a steering committee was established for the A-League, headed by FFA deputy chair Brian Schwartz.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:10pm
AndyRoo said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
This is the first time I have heard of Schwartz.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:14pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
I reckon it’s a matter of “horses for courses”.
Buckley is not a football person and, to operate and manage the A-League, you need a person, who knows football. However, from what I’ve observed, Buckley is more a “behind the scenes man” – a negotiator and such a person is not required in the A-League but, by heck, we need a good negotiator for the next broadcast tv rights deal and the WC hosting rights.
Remember Lowy picked Buckley for this job as the head of the FFA. And, if there’s one thing that Frank Lowy is good at – heck, he must be one of the best in the world – it would be identifying the right person to run his businesses!
If Uncle Frank thinks Buckley is ok; far be it for me to question his business assessment.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:24pm
Art Sapphire said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
Can anybody tell me what does Schwartz know about football and running a professional club competition.
Brian Schwartz was appointed as a director of IAG in January 2005. He was appointed Chairman of IAG on 26 August 2010. Brian is a non-executive director of Brambles Limited and Westfield Group and is a consultant to Investec Bank (Australia) Ltd. He is also the deputy chairman of the board of Football Federation Australia Limited.
September 9th 2010 @ 5:11pm
Cpaaa said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:11pm | Report comment
Does anyone know who Schwartz is and what football background has he got? and who are the other FFA board members? again im another asking….where are the football people at FFA that football fans trust? We know 1 and thats Uncle Frank.
Kimon, Foz, Francis, Zdrilla . Any of these guys would be accepted as a media voice
Buckley is a dud speaker and more so an uncertain speaker. His role infront of media has to stop. Also the administration across clubs and FFA that have hired non-football people are living in a dream land.
Imagine Craig Foster was paid handsomely by the AFL to switch loyalty. Would he put is heart and soul into it? Now Way!!
Off topic : for Jesse Fink readers he has a new article today on the Tribal Football site
http://www.tribalfootball.com/jessefink
September 9th 2010 @ 5:17pm
Art Sapphire said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
this is the FFA board Cpaaa
http://www.australiabid.com.au/australias-bid_bid-team_bid-team.aspx
September 9th 2010 @ 5:26pm
dasilva said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
There are two football people in the FFA board
Moya Dodd who was a Matilda and was vice captain of the team
Jack Reilly who was the goalkeeper who played in all of the matches of the 1974 World Cup and is in FFA Hall Of Fame.
September 9th 2010 @ 5:29pm
Mister Football said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:29pm | Report comment
It’s a pretty strong board, with the range of skills I would expect to see in any competent board.
That anyone would expect the board to comprise purely ex-soccer players is a bit misguided.
September 9th 2010 @ 7:16pm
Cpaaa said | September 9th 2010 @ 7:16pm | Report comment
thanks Art.
On paper nothing looks wrong with their qualifications but simply representing your country dosnt qualify you to be on the board of directors.
It seems the less they say and do at FFA the more their jobs are secure.
September 10th 2010 @ 7:02am
hp said | September 10th 2010 @ 7:02am | Report comment
I think people overly criticise Ben Buckley too much. As you said he’s not a football person, but a negotiator. The guy plays diplomat for the FFA. I agree, if Lowy thinks he’s the manfor the job, it was purely for business reasons.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:14pm
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
In six months they sure haven’t done much ‘steering’. The FFA looks for all the world like a ship where the Captain has either nodded off or is drunk below decks.
September 9th 2010 @ 1:02pm
Stefan said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
“The reason for Sydney FC’s low crowds for instance isn’t hard — they’re not playing well.”
And here I was thinking it was because of the weather, SFS being to far and hard to get to, no big name marquee, costs too much to go, don’t like the colour blue, and every other excuse sfc seem to conjur up.
September 9th 2010 @ 4:16pm
FKCZ said | September 9th 2010 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
Doesn’t help when you market the club as Bling FC. We all know aussies go for the underdog.
September 9th 2010 @ 12:20pm
Midfielder said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
I support Uncle Frank most of the time and fully accept what he told the Terror…
However there is a much broader issue here … BB appears to be camera shy… unlike the other sports heads he does not get out and beat the drum…
IMO a major part of any CEO of a sporting code would be media skills… BB appears to have none… and it is a broad cross section of the football community asking the questions… SBS, SMH, Terrorgraph (Ray Gatts article)..
IMO BB or Lyall Gorman need to come out and at least talk up the A-League if nothing else… SBS writers may be laeding the charge but most of the Australian Football community are seeking answers… all Frank said wasthey were working very hard… we all accept this … but but but but and a big but is we never hear from BB … we want in times of trouble a leader to help us through and talk to the media .
September 9th 2010 @ 12:26pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
Midfielder
Whilst I’ve never met Lowy, I’ve met guys like him and, believe me, they don’t sit idly if they think someone is ruining their business or costing them money.
As long as Uncle Frank is not concerned about the “business of Football in Australia” I, too, will remain unconcerned.
September 9th 2010 @ 1:31pm
Midfielder said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Fuss
An old saying of mine is …. If Frank I trust…. a kinda go at the US as this appears on a lot of what they do but also to show my respect for Frank…. having said all this and I am not saying football is about to collaspe nor in any major long term trouble… it’s just that I want a leader to lead … to me it all appears office deals and committees … as I said earlier the security group appointed, the lack of player rights pertaining to the diving send offs, that the Fold said they would follow a Mariners blueprint and become the community club and then become the new bling with almost no community connections and fact actually have local football people having a go at them…
The Gong bid was a huge loss… because Bruce Gordon is a football fan from way back and was a long way into negotiations with Fox to broadcast some A-League games across WIN … which is Australia’s biggest regional FTA broadcaster in Australia ….
That the gong bid may have hurt the SFC fan base from southern Sydney is the reason why many say it did not get up as they had Timmy Cahil almost ready to jump on board and they also said they would follow a community model similar to the Mariners… given the history of Football in the gong I think they would have been hughly successful…
September 9th 2010 @ 1:19pm
Chris said | September 9th 2010 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
The Sydney FC not playing well excuse doesn’t really fly when they got a bad crowd to their very first game of the season. Given their last A-League game at that point was a grand final victory it is hard to say they were playing badly.
September 9th 2010 @ 2:12pm
Mister Football said | September 9th 2010 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
Agree on that point – it’s a stupid thing to have said – there is clearly a deeper malaise with SFC.
September 9th 2010 @ 2:37pm
The Special One said | September 9th 2010 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
The writing was on the wall when no one turned up to the pre season Sydney football festival or whatever it was called.
September 9th 2010 @ 4:11pm
Tom said | September 9th 2010 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
Owning a a-league side has no attraction as a business investment. You would have to have more money then sense. How could you possibly post a profit? The original article has some substance and as a football lover and a-league tragic I hope someone in the FFA is reading this.
Don’t let frank lowy fool you with a “well every one behind the scenes is working very hard to make the a-league a success”. I think we can all agree that this year the a-league has missed the mark in connecting with the people.
We have a great product, now we need to sell it.
September 9th 2010 @ 4:24pm
Realfootball said | September 9th 2010 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
Owning an A-League club is philanthropy, not business.
That is what the FFA have to change.
September 9th 2010 @ 6:05pm
Gob Bluth said | September 9th 2010 @ 6:05pm | Report comment
I wish the media would make up their minds on this. I’m with you Real football, but Mike Cockerill from the SMH is a shocker for one minute saying we need these blokes to just hand over cash to the next saying owning football teams is the key to doing business in Asia and without it Tom sage could never have done business in South America nor would Clive Palmer even think about doing anything in China.
September 9th 2010 @ 10:50pm
jimbo said | September 9th 2010 @ 10:50pm | Report comment
Exactly,
that’s why Palmer is playing politics with the Qld state govt and they will never allow a crowd of more than 5K to a GCU home game – how is that good for the A-League?
There should be documented rules and guidelines set down by the FFA for all A-League franchise owners, that must be obeyed – without exception.
September 9th 2010 @ 5:36pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 5:36pm | Report comment
Tom
It’s not just the A-League clubs that struggle to make money.
1. NRL Club Melbourne Storm runs at a loss and only remains solvent b/c it gets annual capital injections from its major shareholder, News Corp.
2. Even the biggest & most successful AFL clubs in Victoria – e.g. Collingwood, Essendon & Geelong – make losses each year on their football operations alone – i.e. revenue from football operations (including membership, sponsorship, etc) is less than expenses relation to football operations. These AFL Clubs survive purely on the profits from Poker/Gaming machines.
I’d hazard a guess that the NRL clubs, too, make losses from football operations and rely on their Gambling outlets to remain solvent?
Source:
Collingwood annual report 2009: http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/portals/0/magpies_docs/2009_annual_report_cfc.pdf
Essendon annual report: http://www.essendonfc.com.au/club/2009AnnualReport.pdf
September 9th 2010 @ 6:03pm
Mister Football said | September 9th 2010 @ 6:03pm | Report comment
Just checked the pies annual report for 2009.
They had football expenses of $17 mill, but made the following net revenue from their football operations:
Sponsorship: $15.1 mill – $8.6 mill = $6.5 mill
Membership: $9.6 mill – $3.7 mill = $5.9 mill
AFL distributions and match returns: $10.3 mill
meaning their football operations made a profit of $5.7 mill.
So how do you figure that Collingwood make a loss on their football operations?
September 9th 2010 @ 10:05pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 9th 2010 @ 10:05pm | Report comment
MF – my calculations below
On first glance you have failed to include wages and salary for staff – i.e. the footballers & football department – rent & admin expenses, which are all essential to the football operations.
Total Revenue = $62.8m
Football = $35
- AFL dividends= 10.3
- Membership & gate receipts= 9.6
- Marketing & Sponsorship= 15.1
Non-football = $27.8
- Social Club & Gaming, etc=22.7
- Travel agency & bank interest= 5.0
Total Expenses = 61.2
Football = 37.8
- Football, Admin, Rental= 25.4
- Membership = 3.7
- Marketing & Sponsorship = 8.7
Non Football = 23.4
- Social club & gaming = $19
- Travel agency = 4.4
Football operations: Profit/(loss) = 35 – 37.83 = (2.83)
Non-football operations: Profit/(loss) = 27.8 – 23.4 = 4.4
EBITDA = $1.6m
Source:
Revenue: Page 21
Expenses breakdown: page 8