The biggest surprise for me, since Federal Sports Minister Senator Mark Arbib announced the Smith review on Sunday, has been how split opinion is on the matter.
While chief executive of the PFA, Brendan Schwab, welcomed the move saying “Football cannot afford to stand still”, Michael Cockerill was lamenting “another bloody review” in Tuesday’s Sydney Morning Herald.
Essentially, the Smith review will take four to five months to complete and in the government’s own words “will assess the structure, governance and administration of football in Australia, examine the development of its positioning for the (2015) Asian Cup, and identify key opportunities to ensure the financial viability and sustainability of football in Australia.”
Before I get to what I believe is the crux of the matter, I think it’s worth acknowledging that not only did Arbib prematurely announce the review, which was originally slated for Budget night, the government has yet to adequately explain why there is the need for such an investigation.
Yet, despite the fact that there is little question the announcement was bungled, it doesn’t mean the content is equally ill-advised.
Let’s be clear: the Australian government has put in significant money into the game and has been asked to continue to do so.
Therefore, regardless of any political motives behind this announcement, it is well within its rights to make sure that money is being spent effectively.
Furthermore, another review of operations, which will come at little direct cost to the game, should be seen as a good thing, especially in the context of Australian sport where they are hardly unusual – the AFL went through two reviews in a similar time-frame during the early 1990s.
Heading into another crucial period for football, including a new television rights deal and the 2015 Asian Cup (which looks set to be subsidised by the federal government), now is the right moment to steady the ship.
Here’s the real issue: four years on after FFA was awarded a $32 million grant that is about to expire, football not only still needs this money but the game’s administrators are hoping for more.
All sports enjoy some sort of government funding but football’s share is significantly large. Even considering the unique demands of playing in Asia, this money continues to raise the ire of Australia’s other major codes.
So here’s an idea – instead of moaning about less talk and more action, how about we focus questioning on why the game’s administration still requires significant government funding to get by and how, or even if, this can be rectified.
sydneyMan
Guest
The majority of the funding is actually for the W-league and various national womens team, and there is a paralympic team as well. How someone can write an article about this issue and not know this is cringeworthy. Can someone show me where black South Africans requested funding for AFL. Why was government funding being used to pay for second rate journalism at SBS in you and the Fink.
Griffo
Roar Guru
Agree also - it is the business opportunities that follows exposure by football that can be beneficial. And Asia is one of our biggest markets. The government would want to make sure this is working, and get a return on investment.
Roarchild
Guest
Fez. I think it's wrong to just dismiss actually playing the game as unimportant. From a government perspective subsidizing professional teams and their stadiums makes a lot less sense to me than cutting football loose. Making sure the most popular participation code (in a nation of fatties) is adequately funded to oversee the game is important. This enabled the SSG and curriculum improvements as well as supports our junior national teams. It's not a HAL subsidy. If it was I would understand your reasoning but you seem to be in favor of more subsidies for professional sports. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
asanchez
Roar Guru
The Australian government puts money into every sport. Just google it, and you will see that. AFL and other codes also get millions in grants, infrastructure and stadium upgrades etc. Not a real issue that the government puts money into sport. They're also right into having another review, as they, like any other organisation, want to see some sort of return on investment. They want to make sure they aren't throwing money down the drain. In 2003, the Crawford Report, was supposed to save the game, but it didn't deliver. It had a detailed list of recommendations, which if all followed correctly, would have our code in a better position than it finds itself today! However it did kick things off, and pushed things in the right direction. But it would have done more if it was implemented in full. Hopefully with this report, the FFA can right those wrongs! Senator Crawford also did a report on the AFL about 15-20 years ago. The reason the government also invests in the round ball game, is because it realizes the potential our game has to help develop our business relationships with our Asian neighbours. Take the Asian Cup for example, all the corporate and political big knobs from Asia will be in town in 2015. What a perfect time to wine and dine potential investors or business partners for future dealings! This can also happen often as the Socceroos are now in Asia, and play against our Asian neighbours on a regular basis. So the government also has other factors in getting involved, not just for the good of the code, or tackling obesity, but for the good of the economy and their wallets. Why do people think Clive Palmer and Tony Sage got involved in the A-League? Because they can see the potential in Asia through football.
Chris
Guest
Don't expect much. Everything else this government has done in the last four years has been a monumental cock-up. Let's just hope they don't try and give FFA headquarters free insulation.
Hoof
Roar Rookie
Didn't the government put money into a few reviews of the AFL back in the day? It's not just football getting the money.
Futbanous
Guest
Agree . IMO the main reason for the government stepping in again ,the Asian Cup & our image within the region.
Ben of Phnom Penh
Guest
Correct. To me this has been the biggest issue as the FFA has too many responsibilities to maintain the required managerial focus on the A-League. In short they run the risk of taking their eye off the ball, particuarly in times like now when the A-League managerial demands are ebbing and the national team managerial demands rising.
Paul J
Guest
I believe the last review strongly urged an independent commission to run the A -League and a separate independent commission to run the FFA. This never happened to the sports detriment.
Ben of Phnom Penh
Guest
There is a much larger issue here for the government and corporate Australia which has to do around the perceptions of Australia in Asia. The government will be keeping a close eye on the FFA on the run-up to the Asian Cup to ensure that an image of vibrancy, efficiency and openess is projected across the region. They desperately need people to leave with the idea that Australians know how to run things, and run them well. A hell of a lot of people will be watching and a horde of fans, businessmen and journalists will be attending. Time to bring out the good shirt and brush up on your Mandarin boys & girls.
Fez's are cool
Guest
Well, I agree with you, especially with AFL. I think it is rediculous that the Government uses Ausaid money on AFL balls in South Africa. WTF?
nordster
Guest
the "average" Australian ? Well i'm pretty average even if only a 'soccer' fan ... pay taxes, have mortgage, feed dog etc etc ... If you're saying the only sports worth funding are the most popular ones (spectator-wise), then we may as well eliminate much of the AIS.
Fez's are cool
Guest
So? Why is the average Australian paying for it, when the average Australian doesn't follow soccer? I am yet to see a logical answer to this one. Soccer should be able to fund its own ventures. The Government is there to provide infrastructure for the people, not to prop up a sport with little domestic interest.
Con
Guest
because we have nine national teams which travel intercontinentally on a regular basis (rl and afl dont have this), were trying to compete globally (rl and afl dont have this), we have a fledging comp (not an established one), we have double the participation base of afl and triple that of nrl and we have clubs that need to travel across asia. more costs are involved with a popular global sport
whiskeymac
Guest
does the HAL also have charity status? Its a significant advantage for some organisations not to pay tax despite massive TV rights. I wld think that govt investment in sport is a good thing but shld be made accountable - i have no probs with the review in that respect. Where i wld like to see the investment going though is in the grassroots (yes that wonderful catchall that seems to mean amateur) - that is, for me, kids under 16 and ensuring the playing grounds and club facilities they use are upto scratch etc for me this is something the government (fed state and local) shld be doing and is more important to the health of the nation, and justifiable.
nordster
Guest
does the government pump so much into football compared to other sports like aussie rules or cricket ? Thats not been my reading of the situation over the last few decades ... especially given the amount the national body has to deal with as a base expense from running so many national teams and representing Australia around the globe.
Australian Football
Roar Guru
If anyone has seen Arbib's video interview on the TWG site he said they will be reviewing Australian Football---seems like he has the terminology right at least.
Patrick Angel
Roar Guru
I think it is in part the push to get into the heart of Asia, as we are already in the minds. NRL and Super Rugby are watched throughout the Pacific, ensuring we have some kind of 'soft power' in the area, as well as cricket in India, and Aussie Rules shows off an Australian game to visitors. It's about building a national profile.
Fez's are cool
Guest
Also, why does the government pump so much public funds into soccer over far more popular spectator sports? Sure, soccer is huge amoung juniors, particularily in NSW, but it seems rediculous the amount of funding they get, where teams like Manly and Port Adelaide are playing in stadiums that need condemning... The Governments role in sport is to provide infrastructure for sports of all types to flourish, and a set of rules for financing sport that are pro-competition between sports and against anti-social issues like gambling, alcohol and smoking. That means a mix of excellent cricket grounds, football stadiums (of a Suncorp Stadium/AAMI Park standard or better), athletics facilities and swimming centres around Australia.
Fez's are cool
Guest
Why is it the federal governments job to be constantly giving bandaid fixes and reviews to Soccer in Australia? They don't do it for any other sport. Just seems rediculous and strange. Soccer should sink or swim on its own merits, just like every other sport - we don't need socialism in sport. I say this as a primarily Cricket, Soccer and RL fan.