- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Just hours before the Socceroos kicked off against Tajikistan in Dushanbe on Tuesday night, the Professional Footballers’ Association announced the Matildas would not be attending a training camp in Sydney.
It was the latest ploy to attract the public’s attention in the football union’s ongoing stoush with Football Federation Australia over a new collective bargaining agreement.
And it was a cheap one.
Less risky than the Socceroos and more emotional, the Matildas represent a team that is vastly underpaid and deserves a wage jump. Unfortunately they are the only losers in this latest battle, which is seeing Australian football descend into chaos.
The he said, she said, back-and-forth between the PFA and FFA has become infuriating. There is no bad guy or good guy in this fight, as there is not enough information to take sides. Both parties have lacked transparency throughout the process.
The PFA are demanding “unaffordable” amounts of money, the FFA are making “unacceptable” counter-offers. It is a farce.
Countless press releases have been issued in the past few months, and the only thing clear from both the FFA’s and PFA’s statements is their inability to recognise the possessive apostrophe.
Knowing that the Socceroos boycotting either of their World Cup qualifying matches against Bangladesh and Tajikistan would be completely ridiculous, the PFA chose to increase the pressure on FFA using the women’s game.
The Matildas, in solidarity, announced that they would cancel a two-game series against the US to be held later this month, thus denying them the opportunity to play against the world champions in front of 60,000 people. (That solidarity has since wavered, however.)
FFA is now in a difficult position to explain the fracas to the United States Soccer Federation, who have sold the tickets and negotiated TV rights. Yet the Matildas are losing out the most, being denied a chance to knock off the world champions, a feat of which they are more than capable.
This argument between the PFA and FFA is not about the Matildas, it never was until this week. The main debate has been over a pay increase for A-League players.
And although it would be folly to take every FFA statement as gospel truth, it is difficult to disagree with CEO David Gallop’s view that the Matildas’ interests have been “taken hostage by the PFA”.
The Matildas deserve a wage rise, and they have reportedly been offered a jump from their current $21,000 annual pay packet to $33,000, gradually over four years. They want a yearly wage of above $40,000, fair enough.
However, the Matildas are not in a position to claim that over the next four years their brand will bring in double the current revenue. FFA are not a bottomless pit, and so the money must come from somewhere.
Women in Australia, and most of the world, are still paid less than men, a ridiculous reality in the 21st century. The Matildas should earn equal amounts to the men, but the football world does not work like that.
In football, wages are based on revenue from ticket sales, merchandise, viewership and sponsorship, and the women’s game cannot match the men’s – an unfortunate truth.
Therefore a pay rise for the Matildas has to come out of the men’s revenue.
The Socceroos are reportedly asking for $1000 extra on top of their current $6500 match fee. Given the team was one of the best paid nations at last year’s FIFA World Cup, based on the group stages, the money would be better off flowing into the Matildas’ budget.
Similarly, A-League players who earn much more than their female counterparts could realistically take a small cut, or keep their wages stable, in order to help FFA give the Matildas the funds they deserve.
Yet the PFA appears to think FFA has more money than it claims, or at least that the governing body is not bringing in as much revenue as it should.
In a press release the PFA claimed the players want a “more effective club licensing system”, and a “genuine revenue sharing model to ensure all parties are incentivised to grow the game”.
Valid points, but that does not translate into higher wages. If the players received their pay rise it would be interesting to see if complaints about club mismanagement continued.
Many people are forced to work in jobs with little pay in order to pursue a career they enjoy – journalism is one of them. Others choose jobs they hate in order to afford luxuries – such as journalists that move into PR. Some people are lucky to find a perfect balance, but it is not common.
Male footballers have a pretty decent balance. But if they don’t like the pay, they can find another employer.
The PFA is correct to question football’s management in Australia, however. The Socceroos still have no major naming sponsor and A-League clubs are shredding money – $17 million in losses last season according to Gallop.
With Western Sydney Wanderers, Adelaide United and Melbourne Victory the only clubs to record a profit, and Sydney FC reportedly close to breaking even, that means the remaining six A-League clubs shared most of the $17 million.
Yes, that comes down to mismanagement, no, that does not mean the clubs should pay higher wages.
A new TV deal is also nowhere near complete, so the PFA cannot assume to know what FFA will pull in, or indeed what they should pull in. If one clause needs to be inserted into the new CBA, it is that the agreement should expire alongside the current TV deal. That way both parties know how much revenue is coming in and can start negotiations from there.
FFA are not innocent either, the PFA have valid concerns and negotiations have dragged on far too long. The players may deserve the pay increase the PFA is asking for, they may not. Fans are in the dark because not enough facts have been released.
But one certainty is that the Matildas are being used. They deserve a pay rise, undoubtedly, but they do not deserve to be used as a pawn for A-League players. Separating the men’s and women’s agreements would surely assist negotiations.
Regardless, complete transparency is what this debate requires from now on. However an outside mediator is probably necessary to fix the mess, because if the A-League does not kick off in a month’s time it is a disaster for everyone.
Are you the ultimate team manager? Pick your own superstar team and go head to head with other football fans for glory and cash prizes on Draftstars. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.