The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

The "we" in football is threatening to collapse

29th November, 2015
Advertisement
What has Steven Lowy actually achieved for football in Australia? (AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)
Expert
29th November, 2015
168
3295 Reads

Across the weekend, A-League fans were finally heard. While Football Federation Australia trumpets glitzy mottos and constantly boasts about the strength of the country’s football community, it has frustratingly failed to operate transparently and inclusively.

As the game’s self-employed torchbearers, the FFA has done a fantastic job in rejuvenating football after the collapse of Soccer Australia and the National Soccer League. But it has been far from perfect and the fans are beginning to see through the governing body’s empty words.

What started as an uprising from football fans over an anti-football media report – which printed the names and faces of 198 banned fans – has instead snowballed into a protest about the governing body’s lack of support for its major stakeholders.

Every supporter should want to expose the minority of filth in the football community, but fans argue that many of the banned have been unfairly treated, and have had no right to appeal.

Protests over the weekend, which included walkouts from Melbourne Victory’s North Terrace and Western Sydney Wanderers’ Red and Black Bloc, were clear in their message – the FFA has let football fans down.

Banners displaying “We Stand By The 198”, “No Appeals. No Justice. No Fans. No Football. Terraces. Not Terrorists.”, “30th minute – 30 days. Time is ticking for a change.” and “Sitting in silence. Like the FFA. No fans = no football” displayed a massive turn of opinion.

What should have been the football community – fans, clubs and the FFA – uniting against agenda-driven media reporting, has instead transformed into a rift.

FFA missed a huge chance to keep fans onside and have instead rightly attracted their animosity.

Advertisement

The response to The Daily Telegraph‘s report came way too late. Then when a response did arrive it was more about protecting the FFA’s brand and governance practices than condemning the police and media for branding football fans as “grubby pack animals” and linking them to the Paris terrorist attacks.

Newly elected chairman Steven Lowy had an opportunity to immediately enamour himself with a community still sceptical about his procession to the head job and his ability to move away from his father Frank’s autocratic rule.

Yet Lowy’s silence has been one of the biggest letdowns.

And the grumbling mistrust only grew as fans were fed a series of contradicting comments the FFA.

On Thursday, following The Daily Telegraph’s report, an FFA statement claimed there was an appeals process already in place.

Yet earlier this month, following a recent parliamentary inquiry into policing of Western Sydney games, De Bohun said:

“FFA takes the view that we have a right to decide if a person is welcome among the football community at our matches.

Advertisement

“It’s a general deterrent to those who cause trouble that they face long bans with no right of appeal.”

Then when grilled following the Central Coast Mariners versus Western Sydney match on Sunday, De Bohun admitted that an appeals process would be formalised.

Which is it, De Bohun?

The lies are one of the worst parts about the whole mess, alongside the self-interest, and there is a lack of acknowledgement from the FFA that it stuffed up. It will likely never offer such an admission either.

As Bosnich said, “The time for empty rhetoric has stopped, you have got to do something before you lose the fans…”

While the FFA has stood silent, more concerned protecting its own brand, at least the A-League clubs have stood beside fans in their outrage.

Melbourne Victory named the North Terrace man of the match on the weekend, and chief executive Ian Robson defended supporters in a statement.

Advertisement

Western Sydney chief executive John Tsatsimas said the club would help banned fans with “compelling evidence” of their innocence to appeal.

The clubs’ support suggests that it may be time to finally talk about introducing one of the 2003 Crawford Report’s key recommendations, which was to ensure Australia’s football competition be organised as a separate entity.

A governing body of the league has to be introduced, and one that is independent of the governing body of the game, the FFA.

In England and Germany, the DFB and FA are responsible for the national team, the domestic cup and referees, while the DFL and Premier League take care of the league competition. The structure works well.

It is a shame the separation recommendation was ignored when FFA first rebranded football in Australia, and Frank Lowy himself should have known better.

After all, in 1987 he walked away from Sydney City and the NSL after complaining about the lack of influence clubs had in running the league. The club owners are the ones losing millions, they deserve more say, and they have shown they are united with fans, the ultimate stakeholders.

Thankfully the FFA has reportedly seen sense in loosening strict sponsorship rules surrounding car manufacturers, giving owners a chance to attract much-needed investment. But it has taken years to implement, showing how hard it is for owners to have their voices heard.

Advertisement

The FFA’s move away from controlling the A-League does not have to be a messy split, it can be conducted amicably. A new governing body which gives more control to the clubs sinking millions into football has to happen eventually.

Some see the FFA’s promise of an appeals process as a victory, which is only a half truth.

“We are formalising a process that if a banned spectator can prove to us, through new evidence, that there has been a mistake made, they can bring that evidence to the club, that club can work with us and the fan through that issue,” De Bohun said on Sunday.

“I can tell you categorically that if the fan has not engaged in the alleged behaviour, that ban will be overturned.”

The trouble is that the FFA’s view is still guilty until proven innocent, a ridiculous concept in any other aspect of a democratic society. The FFA has access to CCTV footage, police reports, and should ensure a fan’s guilt before handing down a ban. How does a fan prove their innocence exactly?

The promise also represents a Band-Aid solution, as the police and sections of the media are still going to pigeonhole football supporters into one unwarranted category. Trust has been lost, the FFA has to earn it back.

Transparency. Accountability. Cooperation. Consensus. That is what the FFA must introduce, otherwise the disconnect between fans will crack into a chasm too wide to bridge. At the moment, the governing body is looking after its own brand, and the “we” in the FFA’s favourite slogan is quickly disintegrating.

Advertisement
close