Creating a new order for football in Australia

Nemesis Roar Guru

By Nemesis, Nemesis is a Roar Guru

Tagged:
 , ,

81 Have your say

    It’s been reported FIFA has instructed the FFA to reform its governance structure by 31 March 2017. In particular, FIFA wants membership of the FFA to embrace a wider section of stakeholders.

    Currently, the FFA has just ten ‘members’, which means there are only ten votes at general meetings, and only ten votes for electing the FFA board.

    There are nine votes for state members, with the federations of Queensland, Northern New South Wales, New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia, and Northern Territory each getting one vote. Then there’s one vote for the ten A-League clubs.

    FIFA is not happy with this.

    The governance structure required of FIFA Members is detailed in FIFA’s statutes, with Article 15 stating: “legislative bodies (in this case, FFA) must be constituted in accordance with the principles of representative democracy and taking into account the importance of gender equality in football.”

    FIFA boss Gianni Infantino (Photo: AP)

    This issue is not new.

    In September 2002, the Australian Minister for Sport, Senator Rod Kemp, called for a review into the governance and management structures of football in Australia.

    In April 2003, the “Report of the Independent Soccer Review Committee: into the Structure, Governance and Management of Soccer in Australia” was delivered to Federal Parliament.

    This report is commonly referred to as The Crawford Report, and it proposed a voting structure for the FFA with broad stakeholder representation. Sadly, the recommendation was ignored and, as a result, we now are faced with the urgent demand from FIFA to reform, or face sanctions.

    In particular, the Crawford Report recommended a voting electorate that would have a minimum of one vote for each of the nine state and territory member federations of the FFA.

    The Crawford Report also suggested:

    • additional one vote for State Members with more than 50,000 registered players
    • additional one vote for State Members with 200,000 registered players
    • additional one vote for State Members with 400,000 registered players
    • one vote for the national men’s football league
    • one vote each for: coaches, futsal, referees, women and players.

    It’s a shame the Crawford recommendations were not implemented from Day 1, since it suggested a reasonable voting structure.

    Nevertheless, we now have the opportunity to start again. So, this discussion is focused on two key points:

    Firstly, which stakeholder groups do you want to vote on issues impacting football in Australia?

    Secondly, how would you weight the votes for the stakeholders?

    Here is my new FFA structure.

    ffa structure

    Guiding principles

    1. Include all major stakeholder groups in football
    I’m aware I’ve omitted giving fans a vote, since the interests of fans are too diverse to be represented by any two individuals.

    However, I can be convinced to include fans as a voting constituent if someone can create a viable way to have all fans vote for two representatives and a method to ensure all interests are represented – not just active fans.

    2. Equal male and female representatives for every voting constituency, other than A-League and W-League

    3. The two biggest voting constituents will be A-League clubs and PFA

    4. No single group of constituents must have a majority vote, so single constituency agendas cannot be forced

    Here’s your chance to paint your vision for football in Australia. Start with a blank sheet and create your utopian model for the new FFA.

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (81)

    • March 15th 2017 @ 7:06am
      Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 7:06am | ! Report

      In everyone’s proposal (FIFA, the FFAs) there needs to be some representation for fans. Maybe allocate 2 votes for fans? How that gets organised is another problem but one that can be resolved by building something similar to the uk Supporters Federation. This would take some time to achieve but in the same way people said it was impossible for U.K. Fans to get organised it was done there and can be done here too.

    • March 15th 2017 @ 7:21am
      Locomotiv said | March 15th 2017 @ 7:21am | ! Report

      If you are a club member then you should be able to vote.
      Your vote would represent the federation from which you are a member.
      This would also make fans feel part of a community instead of a franchise.
      IMO also not a bad way to increase memberships.

      • March 15th 2017 @ 8:01am
        Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 8:01am | ! Report

        That’s not fair on non-member fans though, their opinion is just as important; and this should be about representation and a voice for fans not selling more memberships. And their voice should not be filleted by being reoresented through a Federation which may have a different set of priorities. Fans need a direct voice and they should be given one.

        • March 15th 2017 @ 9:36am
          Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 9:36am | ! Report

          And, already we have dispute about who gets a vote for the “Fan” representatives. 🙂

          I’m an ALeague fan and I don’t need a voice on the FFA right now.

          Right now the ONLY thing I want to improve is the governance structure of football in Australia for those involved with the actual playing of the sport.

          Maybe in 10 years we can include people who watch the sport with representatives for:
          – Active fans
          – Prawn Sandwich fans
          – Fans aged u10, u20, u30, ,u40, 50+
          – Fans who are members
          – Fans who are members but never go to games
          – Fans who are not members but go to games
          – Fans who watch on TV
          – Fans who watch via illegal streaming

          Who knows, we may even need a grouping for people whose only exposure to football is FIFA PlayStation & Fantasy Leagues?

        • March 15th 2017 @ 10:00am
          Caltex & SBS support Australian Football said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:00am | ! Report

          Waz, you can’t be serious? Would you really want the likes of an Anon, to have a vote on FFA football issues?

          • March 15th 2017 @ 10:07am
            Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:07am | ! Report

            Bingo!

            Imagine the crazy football illiterates & football haters who would join a Supporters Group just to cause disruptions.

            We have enough crazies from outside our Community who make it their daily routine to disrupt football discussions. These pathetic lonely people will jump at the chance to have their ignorant voices represented.

            • March 15th 2017 @ 10:17am
              Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:17am | ! Report

              I think you need to look st the success of the uk Supporters Federation before ruling things like this out.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 10:29am
                Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:29am | ! Report

                Ok. I’ve just browsed their website.

                Seems anyone can join – there is no joining fee & no identity check. So, just like The Roar, anyone can join as many times as they want provided they give a new surname and new email address?

                Does this Group actually have any voting power on the English FA?

                Or is their power Sweet FA – just a forum for aggrieved fans to show their outrage?

              • March 15th 2017 @ 1:47pm
                Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 1:47pm | ! Report

                It’s worth doing some more research before dismissing it. If you’ve an interest in fans gaining a voice in football this model and the German model are great examples.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 1:55pm
                Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 1:55pm | ! Report

                @Waz

                This discussion is purely about a New Model for the FFA Congress – who will get a vote for FFA Board & at AGMs.

                Does any Football Association have “Fans” as a voting constituency?

                I’m all for fans having a vote at club level. So far, no one has said anything to convince me fans need a vote at FFA level.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 4:08pm
                Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 4:08pm | ! Report

                Nemesis,

                I don’t think they do. I’ve had several discussions in the last 6 months with the UK Federation (for the stuff Roar supporters are doing) and they work from the outside in. They do however influence parliament and are consulted on football related matters so things have improved. So there is no model to follow as far as I am aware and, while I like your thinking here, I see no reason why Australia shouldn’t be the first to do this.

                And to be fair to the ffa, FIFA do not recognise fans as stakeholders in the game which imo is a mistake.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 4:18pm
                Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 4:18pm | ! Report

                @Waz

                I definitely like the idea of fans forming a Union or Association.

                And I definitely like the idea of this Association being used to lobby politicians.

                Just don’t think it’s required at the FFA Congress level.

                If the ALeague were to become independent, then maybe fans could have input at that level.

                It’s obvious to me that fans within a club have very different expectations and value things differently.

                Then, when we look across clubs – fans of Melbourne Victory will have different expectations to fans of CCM who will have different expectations to fans of NIX, etc. etc.

                Further, fans of NPL or grassroots have different expectations to fans of ALeague.
                Fans who attend every away matches different expectation to fans who only attend home matches & different expectations to fans who only watch on TV.

        • March 15th 2017 @ 10:15am
          Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:15am | ! Report

          I couldn’t disagree more strongly.

          The most engaged fans should have the loudest voice, and the least engaged fans the weakest. The most engaged fans of football in Australia are the club members.

          The opinion of members who make a contribution for the good of the A-League (or the NPL, I assume NPL teams sell season tickets) and their club, particularly those who do it year in, year out, should be much more important than the opinion of ‘fans’ whose engagement is not strong enough to make that most basic contribution.

          For the Eurosnob football ‘fans’ in this country who only talk about Australian football when they’re bagging it, as far as I’m concerned, the less they are heard the better.

          • March 15th 2017 @ 10:20am
            Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:20am | ! Report

            Not all engaged fans are members – some work shifts so can’t get to games, dine just can’t afford it, some live hours away from their nearest NPL/HAL clubs so can’t get to games. Members are no more important than non-members, it’s whether they’re engaged with football that matters.

            • March 15th 2017 @ 10:27am
              mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:27am | ! Report

              exactly Waz. I was a Adl Utd foundation member (NSL) and a member in the initial A-League years. Then I moved away. I have been to many United games since, including 2/3 GFs however I have not been a member for a number of years. I watch them every weekend on TV and whenever they’re in the ACL. I am also an ardent A-League supporter in general. Just because I am not a club member does not mean I don’t have a vested interest or an opinion on the game in Australia.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 11:22am
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 11:22am | ! Report

                I can’t speak for other clubs, but Melbourne Victory offer country/interstate and supporter memberships for people who live away from Melbourne and can’t attend many, or any, matches. I assume other clubs offer similar memberships.

                I buy my interstate Victory membership every year. I just think it’s the right thing to do. It doesn’t worry me at all that I don’t get to anywhere near the number of matches it entitles me to (not even half).

                The most tangible sign of being an engaged fan is being a club member. Otherwise, how do you tell? I’m sure someone who plays FIFA on the Xbox for 20 hours a week would argue that they are an engaged fan as well. A lot of the current problems with football in Australia could be solved if more of the people who claim they are engaged fans actually made some tangible contribution to it.

                I don’t expect the North Melbourne AFL club to listen to me today because I used to be a member from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s. I wouldn’t dare suggest that my voice should be heard equally to someone who is a current club member. Similarly, I think it’s silly to suggest that people who don’t attend any matches or attend one or two derbies a season should be heard the same as people who buy memberships and attend almost all home matches.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 6:20pm
                Swanny said | March 15th 2017 @ 6:20pm | ! Report

                Don’t give up north Melb buddy our time is coming soon

              • March 15th 2017 @ 12:00pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 12:00pm | ! Report

                sorry mark I don’t agree. A membership is a relatively new phenomenon in Aus football and really seems to have been derived from other professional sports. I have purchased an interstate membership before and I really don’t see it as value for money. Some crappy merchandise and an invitation to the AGM (which I can’t attend). No real voting rights that I’m aware of. I am an engaged fan and there are many other ways of measuring this either through online surveys, social media etc.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 12:20pm
                Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 12:20pm | ! Report

                . A membership is a relatively new phenomenon in Aus football

                I don’t think this is accurate at all. Grassroots clubs all over Australia have been built – quite literally – by Members.

                In fact, I’d say ALeague clubs have the lowest Member engagement of any football clubs in Australia.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 12:48pm
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 12:48pm | ! Report

                mattq, I respect that you obviously have a lot of interest in Australian football, but it’s clear we have polar opposite positions on this with no chance of agreeing.

                I think people who make a financial contribution to the game should be heard well before people whose ‘engagement’ with the game is having a lot to say on Facebook and Twitter.

                If I were to judge my membership strictly on a value for money basis, I wouldn’t buy one either. I buy one because I derive significant non-financial value from being a member.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:09pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:09pm | ! Report

                mark, is my monthly Foxtel subscription not a financial contribution to the game? It certainly costs me more than an away membership and I dare say more than a season ticket!

                @Nemesis, I was referring to top tier football, not the lower tiers. All the clubs I played at, being a member was compulsory.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:30pm
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:30pm | ! Report

                mattq, Foxtel’s revenue each year is roughly $2 billion. Under the new TV agreement, Foxtel will pay the A-League $60 million per year. On that basis, around 3% of Foxtel’s revenue goes to paying for A-League TV rights.

                Let’s assume your Foxtel is the basic package plus sport and HD. That’s $65 per month, or $780 per year. 3% of that is $23.40. That is, effectively, your contribution to Australian football each year through your Foxtel subscription.

                As I said, I respect that you obviously have a keen interest in football, and any contribution is better than no contribution. However, I 100% maintain that if the FFA is going to provide a voice for Australian football fans, it should listen to the people who are the most heavily invested and engaged, that is, the club members, before anyone else.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:36pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:36pm | ! Report

                Mark, those numbers may paint that picture but it is subjective. The A-League rights are worth what the market will pay, not what percentage of my subscription Foxtel decides to allocate towards funding the A-League. From my perspective as a contributing football fan, my $65p/m Foxtel subscription is 95% for the A-League (5% for Nick Jnr). In fact you could argue it is 100% because if Foxtel lost the A-League, they’d also lose my $65p/m.

                If you want to play your numbers game, what percentage of your interstate membership goes directly to the club as opposed to a chinese sweatshop middle man responsible for the keyrings, flags and bumber stickers you get in your pack?

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:40pm
                Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:40pm | ! Report

                @mattq

                I was also referring to top tier football in Australia.

                Before the ALeague, the top tier football in Australia was NSL. I wasn’t involved but I guarantee the NSL clubs were filled with members who literally built & managed every aspect of the clubs – from mopping floors to pouring the concrete to build grandstands.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:48pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:48pm | ! Report

                @ Nem – sorry I don’t see a direct correlation in mono-ethnic member based clubs and broadbased professional sporting franchises. There’s no two ways about it, club memberships is a relatively new phenomenon for the broadbased Australian football public. AFL (and to a lesser extent NRL) memberships have been part of a family’s annual budget for years.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:51pm
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:51pm | ! Report

                mattq, regardless of what your actual motivations for having a subscription are. Foxtel doesn’t take your money and give it all to the FFA just because your primary motivation for getting a subscription is the A-League.

                If we consider that the FFA dilutes the money it gets from Foxtel further by giving a only proportion of it to the A-League, of which only a proportion of that goes to your favourite club, your financial contribution to your favourite club becomes minuscule.

                On the other hand, 100% of the money I pay for my membership goes directly to my favourite club. What they choose to do with it, even if it is paying a Chinese sweatshop to make keyrings, is their business, other than to say that as a Victory fan, I’m very happy with the way the club is run and how my money is being spent.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:56pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:56pm | ! Report

                but Mark we’re not talking about financial contributions to individual clubs, we’re talking about whether all fans (members/non-members) should be represented by a body with voting rights at FFA. I think you’ve strayed off topic a bit.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:57pm
                Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:57pm | ! Report

                @mattq

                We obviously won’t agree on this.

                But, suffice to say…

                Apart from the exception I’ve mentioned below, EVERY single football club in Australia – at all levels since football was 1st played in this country – would have been built & administered by Club Members.

                The only exceptions to this are the 9 A-League clubs.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:58pm
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:58pm | ! Report

                “AFL (and to a lesser extent NRL) memberships have been part of a family’s annual budget for years”

                There is a reason why the AFL is in very good financial health, while football and, to a lesser extent, NRL are struggling.

                AFL fans, particularly those in Melbourne, put their money where their mouth is to support their clubs. I strongly suspect Victory benefits from that culture and growing up in that culture has certainly influenced my views on this matter. Football fans, and similarly NRL fans, on the other hand, have an attitude of entitlement, giving little or nothing to their clubs but expecting them to bend over backwards to appease them in return.

                I just saw your most recent comment, and I do agree we have got off topic.

          • March 15th 2017 @ 2:46pm
            steve said | March 15th 2017 @ 2:46pm | ! Report

            Sorry but why does a member of a club deserve more say than a non member who supports a club in exactly the same way except handing over money for a membership?

            • March 15th 2017 @ 3:03pm
              Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:03pm | ! Report

              Aren’t you part of the AFL fanboys who constantly tell us how AFL club members actually own their club?

              Yet, you ask this question about why should Members be treated differently?

              Wow. Whatever is said on a Football discussion, your immediate reaction is to poke your nose in to be argumentative.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:22pm
                steve said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:22pm | ! Report

                No, I don’t constantly tell you anything about how AFL members own their club. Never mentioned AFL except to tell you that I have supported Carlton since I was about 5 years old. I’m not a member of any club in any sport. You are mixing me up with the AFL fanboys. I’m one of your casual sports fans remember?

            • March 15th 2017 @ 3:13pm
              Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:13pm | ! Report

              The answer to your question is self-evident.

              A non-member does not ‘support’ their club in the same way as a member because they don’t pay for a membership. Non-members cannot claim their support for their club is equivalent to that of members.

              Members contribute positively to the health of their club. Non-members don’t.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:25pm
                steve said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:25pm | ! Report

                Members contribute positively to the health of their clubs? How so? I attend games just like members do. I buy a jersey just like members do. I engage on social media just like members do. But I don’t buy membership packs and miss out on all the goodies like bumper stickers, key rings and posters of the team so I’m not contributing positively? How ridiculous.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:32pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:32pm | ! Report

                exactly Steve, as I pointed out above. My annual Foxtel subscription costs more than a season membership! Sorry Mark, I appreciate your point of view but you’re way off on this one.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:38pm
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:38pm | ! Report

                One swallow doesn’t make a summer, just like buying a jersey and attending a derby or two doesn’t make someone an engaged fan.

                I bought a Real Madrid jersey this year and attended their games in Melbourne a couple of years ago. Should I rock up to their next elections and demand a vote along with their paid up ‘socios’?

                Ridiculous.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 3:51pm
                mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 3:51pm | ! Report

                @Mark, we’re not talking about club voting rights. We’re debating which Australian football fan’s contribution is worth more, a paid up club member or a non-club member who financially contributes via other means (i.e. season ticket, match day ticket, fox subscription etc.).

              • March 15th 2017 @ 6:15pm
                Mark said | March 15th 2017 @ 6:15pm | ! Report

                mattq, my example is relevant. I’m making the point that people who buy a jersey and attend a couple of games don’t make the same contribution as paid up members.

                A paid up club member will always make a greater financial contribution to football than a non-member. As I’ve outlined above, while a Foxtel subscriber may pay more than a club member, only a very small proportion of that subscription ends up as money in the coffers of the FFA or the A-League clubs. Money spent on jerseys goes mostly to the apparel company and the retailer. In relation to Steve’s point about attending games, if you are going to attend a majority of matches it is cheaper to buy a membership, so I don’t believe for a second that there are all these non-member fans out there attending nearly every one of their club’s home matches.

              • March 15th 2017 @ 6:35pm
                Mattq said | March 15th 2017 @ 6:35pm | ! Report

                It’s cheaper to buy a season ticket, membership is different. That’s my understanding anyway

      • Roar Guru

        March 15th 2017 @ 8:14am
        Griffo said | March 15th 2017 @ 8:14am | ! Report

        Fan representation was something that struck me as well.

        Ideally fans could have some representation via various constituents (ie: A-League clubs if members elected their CEO or ‘president’, federations which are representing clubs who often are volunteer, etc.) but filtering of view is a problem as Waz points out, as is just fans of the game being represented; fans of the women’s game, futsal, etc.

        I’d agree also with Ben below that there appears a lot of cross-over between A-League and W-League, which for the most part are part of the one club, so what would be represented here – club or competition?

        Back to this thread: fans need some representation – if Waz’s idea of the supporters federation is possible then there should be room there – perhaps one each of fan, member, active, female game, volunteer, futsal, etc. – how many is too many? 5? 10?

    • Roar Guru

      March 15th 2017 @ 7:51am
      Ben of Phnom Penh said | March 15th 2017 @ 7:51am | ! Report

      It is an interesting discussion and certainly one worth having. One issue is ensuring W-League representatives are independent of A-League representatives which may take some work. A member representing indigenous footballers may also be needed. As Waz mentioned, fan representation is another aspect that may need consideration and I am sure there are others.

      A key aspect is the congress needs to be broadly representative, which means prospective board members need to be able to articulate their position on a wide range of topics in order to be elected and it limits the ability of prospective board members to pander to a narrow interest group. It also improves the flow of information to stakeholders so that the positions and nature of prospective Board members are known. Reporting also improves as the different interest groups in the congress require feedback on their specific areas of interest.

      The next question arising from this is Board composition; a topic for another day/

      • March 15th 2017 @ 8:04am
        Waz said | March 15th 2017 @ 8:04am | ! Report

        Great point on the lack of indigenous representation Ben, still one of our codes great failings.

      • March 15th 2017 @ 9:40am
        Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 9:40am | ! Report

        One issue is ensuring W-League representatives are independent of A-League representatives

        If WLeague clubs are owned by the ALeague clubs I cannot see how they can expect to be truly independent of the ALeague.

        One option would be for the WLeague representatives to be appointed by votes only from WLeague players & coaches.

    • March 15th 2017 @ 8:32am
      j binnie said | March 15th 2017 @ 8:32am | ! Report

      Nemesis – A worthwhile article that will cause discussion, but being the experienced cynic I am (from experience), I always treat with suspicion a system that calls for huge representation numerically ,for if there is one way to slow progress it is to appoint a “committee” of people,with people’s foibles to “rule” over the game.
      The game’s history all around the world show instances,just like the public service, of an ever growing number of people required to run their particular “part “of the game so that instead of a “forum” of 10 or so “learned people” making decisions you finish up with a couple of hundred all with their own agendas.
      I always smile when I think of a friend of mine ,on being appointed national team manager, and fronting his first board meeting, listening to the “members ” making their “reports to the manager “, (they had every weekend away all expense paid) to “run an eye” over potential international players”) and it was these opinions he was to listen to.!!!!!
      You can imagine the reaction when he told them he could make phone calls to team managers around the country and get any information he wanted. This “helping hand” went down like the proverbial lead balloon and my friend lasted for three games before he was dumped.
      That’s football at board or committee level .Keep up the good work Cheers jb.

      • March 15th 2017 @ 10:22am
        Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 10:22am | ! Report

        jb

        Very wise insight about having too many ‘members’.

        However, these Members will not be involved with day-to-day operations. Rather, they will vote on big issue items that are raised at Annual General Meetings, or EGMs.

        So items on the Agenda at AGMs would typically include:

        * FFA Annual Finance reports
        * Election of FFA Board
        * New items such as:
        – Junior Development/National Curriculum
        – hosting major tournaments in the future (youth WC, Women’s WC, men’s WC)
        – on-field issues:
        > Goal Line Technology/VAR
        > use of artificial pitches
        > heat policies for playing football
        > etc.

        • March 15th 2017 @ 1:49pm
          Ken Spacey said | March 15th 2017 @ 1:49pm | ! Report

          Good sample list but I’d put keeping hold of existing grounds and getting a heap more (i.e larger primary school ovals) at top of the list. I for one don’t buy the AFL’s sudden and overdue female equity awareness as altruistic but the idea of pinching real estate of “football” via driving up demand for space is cynically brilliant strategy. On another matter-huge congrats to Brisbane Roar (women”s group) for forming an a alliance with a top Brissy private girls school. We need more of this type of thing as a way of countering the cashed up colonists. As Professor Snape said to Harry ‘the Dark Lord isn’t resting”

      • Roar Guru

        March 15th 2017 @ 11:11am
        Ben of Phnom Penh said | March 15th 2017 @ 11:11am | ! Report

        To be fair, jb, this is the Congress not the Board. The Congresses’ main job is to vote for the Board and to hold the Board to account.

    • Roar Guru

      March 15th 2017 @ 8:39am
      Griffo said | March 15th 2017 @ 8:39am | ! Report

      Great effort. Something has to be better than what is existing at this point, which has served it’s purpose also.

      As above fans need to be represented, as does Ben’s point on indigenous footballers.

      Women’s football needs an independent voice outside of comps (W-League) and federations, and dare I say it, the PFA.

      I’d also suggest there needs another ‘comps’ representative in the NPL, which are mobilising for putting forward a national level NPL with or without the FFA engagement at this point.

      Which leads to what each group represents: naturally A-League and W-League could/should have their own independent body (even under the oversight of the FFA). Which leaves whether the comps are representing the clubs or the competitions – so potentially the APFCA (pro clubs) and the like might feel the need for representation – although to me that is more owner led than club so the self-interest dynamic could cloud things there in addition to the A-League ‘comps’ representative.

      Good to see coaches, refs, and futsal. Not sure what ‘special interest’ represents (footvolley? Blind football? Street footbal?, etc.) but ideally any group with two or more representative needs to be noted by name rather than an umbrella title.

      Only other question is the number for say coaches and refs: coaches could be both pro and NPL, state level – what about assistant coaches; ‘2’ seems small. As does ‘2’ for refs, who are collectively a large group, particularly at state and amateur level.

      A good discussion to have.

      • March 15th 2017 @ 9:26am
        Nemesis said | March 15th 2017 @ 9:26am | ! Report

        @Griffo

        Women’s football
        I’ve specifically mentioned 50% of each group – other than ALeague & WLeague – needs 50% female votes. Can we ensure the WLeague representatives are independent of the ALeague? Yes, we can for Canberra United. But no we cannot for all the WLeague clubs owned by ALeague clubs. If WLeague clubs want to have voting independent of the ALeague clubs, they need to create their own independent structure with their own funding.

        NPL
        I thought about this. If the NPL does get organized I’d be willing to give them a voice. How many votes? I don’t know. Less than ALeague. Maybe equal to WLeague?

        Special Needs
        Yes, it refers to football issues relating to people with special needs

        Additional Groups

        My model already has 16 constituent groups with 57 votes. That’s a big increase on 10 votes we currently have.

        The more groups we include, the logistics & cost (assuming FFA covers the cost of travel & accommodation for General Meetings of Congress) will be significant.

        And, remember the more voting groups you want to include will dilute the voting power.

    • March 15th 2017 @ 8:45am
      Paul said | March 15th 2017 @ 8:45am | ! Report

      We just need some change. Football is in a downward spiral at the moment. I like the approach here

      • March 15th 2017 @ 2:17pm
        Midfielder said | March 15th 2017 @ 2:17pm | ! Report

        Football is in a downward spiral at the moment

        Crowds, TV ratings, Membership are all up…

        Sponsorship are up..

        16 bids to join the the A-League with 8 having some form of government support.

        Along with Basketball the only two codes growing players numbers.

        Alone with Basketball the only code to have a formal male and female season long national domestic competition.

        It appears we are headed for the first time to a commercial free to air broadcaster …

        OK were is the downward parts…. ?????

        As a matter of interest as our rating, crowds have increase… from the wookies site…

        Super rugby crowds down 17% rating down 24%

        Rugby League crowds down 2% rating down 7%

    Explore:
    , ,