- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Perth Glory's Todd Howarth wins the ball against Melbourne Heart's Michael Marrone, during the round 4 match of the A-League season, played at AAMI stadium in Melbourne, Sunday Aug. 29, 2010. Perth Glory drew with Melbourne Heart 2-2. (AAP Image/Joe Castro).
Kudos to Football Federation Australia! For all the criticism leveled at the governing body – justified or not – they showed great courage in acting on diving and imposing two-game bans on Patricio Perez and Michael Baird, via the Match Review Panel. But they need to be aggressive in enforcing this precedent and in other areas off the field.
The bans are an important statement to players that Section 9.23 of the FFA’s A-League Disciplinary Regulations – “Obvious Error – Simulation Citations” – will be enforced with a suspension of two matches for a player guilty of simulation which has been missed by the referee and where a penalty kick was awarded.
In the strictest application of that regulation, the FFA Match Review Panel was justified in handing out the two-game suspensions, particularly considering the dives deprived Sydney FC and Melbourne Heart of full points and the public backlash that followed.
As Mike Tuckerman wrote yesterday, diving/simulation hurts the code’s mainstream appeal in this country and needs to be stamped out of the game if the A-League is to reach a wider audience and be embraced.
In that sense the regulation is essential, and there is no doubt that two-match bans will act as a deterrent. It’s the only way to get the message across to players.
But the problem now is applying that regulation consistently.
For example, there are those who maintain Perez’s ban is unjust because there appeared to be (according to them) slight contact with Liam Reddy, as opposed to Michael Baird’s dive.
And herein lies the problem. There are many shades of grey when it comes to diving and winning a penalty, and the FFA must strike the right balance between giving the players the benefit of the doubt and strictly apply the regulation.
Perhaps there needs to be two tiers to the rule: one that enforces a one-match ban in cases where there was slight (or the possibility of) contact and the player has exaggerated that contact (Perez), and the current two-match ban for players who clearly dive with no contact (Baird).
This clarification could at least give the regulation some leeway.
But the FFA should be applauded in this case for responding to the outrage of fans and acting so convincingly.
If only they were as forthright in other matters.
The other major talking point to emerge from the weekend was Gold Coast United’s paltry 3,624-crowd under the unpopular crowd cap.
In an interview with The World Game, A-League boss Lyall Gorman backed Gold Coast United’s policy, expressing faith that the club will turn around its dismal crowds.
But the FFA needs to appreciate that the situation on the Gold Coast has reached (if not exceeded) a state of emergency.
The crowds won’t be coming back to Skilled until the cap is lifted. While some of us appreciate it as a financial decision that makes sense, saving approximately $60,000 per home match, the Gold Coast fans seemingly can’t resonate with this considering their owner is one of the richest men in Australia.
Unfair or not, the question marks around United and the ability to sustain a franchise on the Gold Coast mask the real issue, which is the damage the club has done to its own profile that may never be repaired.
Continuing as is with a new burst of marketing and community based activities won’t cause much a ripple in the region for a club which has seemingly lost the faith and support of its community.
The FFA needs to be aggressive in working with the club on winning the locals back, with the Melbourne Storm’s example of offering $1 tickets to its final home game of the season as a way of repaying fans’ loyalties a possible template for what should be down (taking the short-term financial hit for long-term benefits).
Only initiatives of such magnitude can save the club now.
(Regarding initiatives to bring in new fans, kudos to the Melbourne Heart for this intelligent offer.)
As we enjoy what has been without question the most open A-League season with a clear rise in the technical level of football being played, let’s not lose sight of the off-field issues.
Adelaide United and North Queensland Fury remain on the FFA’s books; there have been reports that the Newcastle Jets are behind on player payments; Gold Coast United is reaching the point of no return; and crowds (dare I say it without a backlash) remain low (10,000 in Sydney isn’t good enough).
The forthrightness with which the FFA has handled simulation, in the regulation and its application, needs to be coupled with a forthrightness in other areas.
As the World Cup bid effort winds down it’s time there was a genuine attempt to address issues around the A-League’s growth.