Oceania was comfortable. Australia was the head of the family, often the host for when the rest of the clan dropped round for a get together. But then you left.
You joined a new family and left the old one behind. Everyone understood. It helped you get ahead – a more beautiful spouse, a bigger house, more career opportunities and more children for your kids to play with.
There are sure to be wistful looks back at the old haunts from time to time. It is pretty obvious that there are closer cultural, geographical, historical and other links between Australia and New Zealand than between Australia and anywhere else in Asia.
You all seem to talk the same, are really good at sports and are certainly in the same league when it comes to putting beetroot on burgers.
In football terms however, there is nothing any more. The recent issue between the A-League and Wellington Phoenix is obviously a painful one for the fans, players and plenty of others involved in the club and New Zealand football. Whether it is the right decision for the A-League and its future is another issue and one that those closer to the ground are better placed to answer.
Whether the end of the club in the league, if that is indeed what comes to pass, sounds the death knell for professional football in New Zealand, as has been claimed, is another matter for debate and again, only time will tell.
This subject though is not something that is the responsibility of the A-League or Football Federation Australia or anyone else. Australia left New Zealand behind when it left Oceania. It’s nice to maintain ties whenever and wherever possible but there is no obligation to do so. You’ve got a new family now.
It’s for New Zealand to sort out New Zealand’s problems.
In football terms, Bahrain, Yemen and Mongolia are more the concern of Australia than New Zealand. Some may not agree or like it but this is the way it is – few things in life are free of downsides. Australia should be more involved in helping in Indonesia, a country currently suspended from FIFA and going through serious issues, than a country in a completely different confederation.
The Asian Football Confederation is not a fan of having an Oceania team in an Asian league and why should it be?
In 2009, New Zealand took the last spot at the 2010 World Cup ahead of Bahrain, thereby depriving Asia of a fifth representative in South Africa, helped by a number of players who played for a New Zealand club in one of the top Asian leagues. Care should be taken not to overstate this, but among some members it did not go down well.
It is no secret that there are still parts of the AFC that are lukewarm to the idea and the practice of Australia in Asia. Having a New Zealand team in the league offers easy ammunition, for those who seek it, that the Aussies still think of themselves as separate from Asia and feel happier when looking east across the Tasman.
Sooner or later then, it was always going to come to a head. That is not to say that the AFC top brass have been wearing out carpets in Kuala Lumpur – or in the west of the continent where the decisions are made these days – pacing up and down trying to find a way to get rid of the outsiders.
Of the priorities in the AFC, Wellington was not exactly top of the list but there was the assumption that the problem would have to be dealt with at some point. The general feeling when you talk to people is that there is no reason to drag the situation on for years. Best to deal with it quickly and move on.
The only way it can change is for the Kiwis to join the AFC, but that is unlikely. There is virtually zero support in Asia for this. Adding New Zealand means adding Oceania and that makes too big a confederation in more ways than one.
Splitting the AFC in two is not something that is going to happen anytime soon – by design at least as the possibility that it could happen by accident or argument can never be completely ruled out. One high-ranking AFC official predicted recently that Asia will split at some point in the next decade.
All that, however, is another debate. If Australia really wants to help it could start lobbying within the AFC for a new member. What would be easier however is to just accept that when it comes to football, there is no special relationship between Australia and New Zealand any more.
Ollie Michie
Roar Rookie
The Nix are already in the ASB Premiership, but its not a professional league, and not much attention is paid to it.
John Hamilton
Roar Pro
Games in Canberra would get a boost when WSW and Sydney FC play there. Sydney is only 3 hours drive away. Melbourne is only an 8 hour drive or 1 hour flight away as well.
Bovs
Guest
Oceania is a pointless and anachronistic leftover of FIFA's regional organisation and needs to go. The simple solution is of course to just absorb them into Asia. But that really does make Asia just too big. The better solution would be to break Asia in two. Everything east of India joins in with Oceania to become the East Asian Confederation. Everything west is West Asia. If the numbers aren't quite right, some North African nations can join with West Asia which is good anyway because Africa has too many members at present. Australia has plenty in common with NZ, Fiji, Japan, India, Indonesia and Thailand. It makes sense we should all be one confederation. None of us have much in common with Syria, Jordan, Pakistan, Kazakhstan and Qatar. Let them be their own confederation... they have much more in common with each other than us. Plus the travelling distances between Australia/NZ/Japan and Palestine/Yemen/Turkmenistan are way too far and impractical.
Mato-Bateman
Guest
I think they'd average around 8,000 which isn't bad, the third Sydney team won't draw much better. Depends who their drawcard is, would be a well known marquee player help their cause? Maybe initially they should get a name marquee to boost attendances in the first year. You just hope the FFA would've learnt their lesson from 3 QLD teams in 2009 and how that didn't work, which is why I've always thought Canberra could be a viable option.
Cozza
Guest
Here here, NZ TV channels are not going to pay "overs" for a TV product they can't sell. if there's no TV viewers for soccer in NZ, then cut them off and move on. The Nix have added little to the League and should have been jettisoned several years back. This issue was always going to come to a head at some point.
Lionheart
Guest
Hurricanes? You've lost me there, do they play in the NZ league? If they have a big following maybe they could replace the 'nix. Aren't A League and Phoenix games telecast outside Wellington? That's the crowd they want, the TV viewers, not the few thousand Wellingtonians who turn up at the ground. You see, lots of viewers tune in to watch smaller city teams play, every round. But that's not happening in NZ, and the Phoenix attract fewer viewership Australia too, apparently.
Lionheart
Guest
No mate, you're way off here. Nothing to do with who negotiated the NZ deal (naturally it was FFA though, it's their league after all), but everything to do with how much NZ TV stations are willing to pay, which is driven by how many NZ viewers watch and so how much advertisers will pay. As to the money, no it's not divided up like that at all. The FFA pay players wages inside the salary cap, which is up to $2.6mil at present, plus I believe FFA pay travel costs to NZ. Member numbers and crowd attendance money are not part of the FFA takings, so why you are focused on those I'm not sure. They're Phoenix earnings, nothing to do with FFA. This is the point you miss, and why your points about per capita attendance and memberships and small Wellington miss the point completely. The games are broadcast outside Wellington, and that's the market that drives FFA, not the small Wellington market. In any case, as I've said earlier, I wish you well. You've got a lot of catching up to do.
Davybhoy
Roar Rookie
I dont think anyone would argue that Canberra SHOULD have an A League presence. But it comes down to money. 19000 there tonight but would anywhere near that turn up every 2nd week? We certainly dont need a third Sydney team. Canberra couldnt do worse than city....
Davybhoy
Roar Rookie
I think that is true with regards the tv rights, but from everything i have read in the media it was the FFA who negotited such a bad deal with sky tv, not Phoenix. I think...and please correct me if i am wrong ....that the tv money is divided between the 10 clubs. The skytv money included but it is nowhere near 10% of the total. The result then is that by default phoenix take out from fox more than they put in with sky. Elsewhere they are paying their way. FFA accepted a poor deal and are now using that deal to pour blame n Phoenix and get rid of them.
Davybhoy
Roar Rookie
The difference between Phoenix and your outback town is that your outback town wouldnt be given a team in the first place. FFA consciously made a decision at admit a brand new team from Wellington, a relatively small city. You can't honestly believe that when they did so they thought Phoenix would attract crowds and membership bigger than the Hurricanes? Or are they as stupid as they are starting to seem and thought that Wellington would attract membership from a pool of 4 000 000? Wellington probably isnt big enough for professional football. But thenneither is gosford. Newcastle and adelaide dont really get big enough crowds for professional football either. And as for city....
Mato-Bateman
Guest
Why not have both? 11 teams is nothing new for the A-League. Byes can definitely help out during FFA Cup and ACL matches. Phoenix should accept the 4 year term and do their best during the 4 years to convince FFA that they deserve a team beyond that. Canberra is the big test tonight, if they get a great crowd that should tell FFA where another team can come from. I'd rather have a Canberra team over a 3rd Sydney team.
Lionheart
Guest
I don't like to interrupt here, but the Phoenix are not paying their way. Isn't that the FFA's point? The money they bring to the FFA via TV rights goes nowhere near to paying their way.
Lionheart
Guest
Well thanks for the reply, but you miss the point, the point that the FFA make. It's irrelevant to the FFA, completely irrelevant, that the Phoenix per capita attract more people than MV or anyone. Otherwise, we'd have a league full of outback clubs who'd attract 100% membership of the town (of three people and a dog). It's irrelevant that Wellington is too far to tavel, or that the FFA negotiated the TV deal or even that they're a stable club (although that is a bonus for sure). The FFA presence (through the A League) in NZ has to be profitable or at least close to break-even, for the FFA. If not, there is no reason to be there, and as the article above points out, given the Oceania link, all the reason to leave. I wish NZ football well, but not if it costs us money.
Davybhoy
Roar Rookie
I accept your point that there are domestic Australian areas overlooked in favour of NZ and I agree but I can't see that there is an issue with expanding the league and still including Phoenix. As I repeatedly state, why would any business model get rid of a solid and stable performer? I don't know about the other codes but I would hazard a guess and say that the NZ teams in those codes are viable and paying their way. Just as the Phoenix are.
RyanM suxsAsav.
Guest
New Zealand had 11 years of professional football of the back of the FFA to get it to work - They failed and now there blaming us?. The FFA got you to the 2010 World Cup!!!. No more squatters!!. Its disgusting the way Wellington or more so New Zealand football as a whole leeches off us. Australia get nothing from Oceanina except for pity.
Davybhoy
Roar Rookie
Part of the problem that you aren't getting is that you (& the FFA) see Wellington as New Zealand. It isn't. Its a relatively small city. Population around 400k. That hasn't changed significantly in the last 8 years so it should come as no surprise that its performance off field isnt at the level of most of the Australian clubs. If we judge off field performance per capita Phoenix blasts everyone else away. Members approx 400. Thats 1% Only Victory come close with a comparatively miserable 25000 out of 4.5 million. Frankly Sydney & Melbourne City should be ashamed of their membership numbers. City are a disgrace in that respect. What sort of crowds do the FFA want Phoenix to get? Rugby is a religion in NZ yet the hurricanes only get 13-15000. More than most of the clubs in the A league I admit, but you cant really expect the Phoenix to be at that level unless you expect say Victory to get similar crowds to Essendon or Collingwood. There's a lot of support for Phoenix in NZ but they dont go to games because the 8 hour drive (north or south) is way too much. They dont buy memberships because they cant go to games - the same as every other club.Spreading games around doesnt help because (a) it dilutes the home ground advantage and (b) Fans from Christchurch or Wellington arent going to go to Auckland or Hamilton in huge numbers either so the attendance will stay the same but with different attendees. TV is the same. Of course the Fox figures for Phoenix are lower. Fox is Australian based it doesnt broadcast in NZ so the viewers will be halved. And it was the FFA that negotiated the deal with Sky TV not Phoenix. Why are they being blamed for the pittance it is? Games between 2 Australian teams will attract supporters from 2 teams in the ratings games with Phoenix won't include viewers in NZ. In actual fact from a business viewpoint Phoenix contribute in huge amounts - they are solid financially, they are competitive on the park and they add to the stability of the league. Having a league with 10 or 12 teams stable must be the aim. By getting rid of Phoenix the league is reduced to 10 teams 4 of which are unstable (if you include the NRL club mooted to replace it) Judge everyone by the same criteria. In absolutely no way does Melbourne City contribute as much as Phoenix. anywhere.
Lionheart
Guest
I'm neutral on this, or was but trending away from Nix a little now. The 'Nix business success is irrelevant and has not been mentioned by FFA. They are stable, great, and aren't losing money as a club. But the FFA point is that they don't bring any money in for the FFA. They cost the FFA the salary bill each year, plus some apparently. There's a lot of emotion spent in the comments above, but the fact is that the FFA is pouring hard earned money from their TV deal into NZ football. They have asked the 'Nix and NZ Football to lift their game and earnings for the A League, else they'd prefer to be pouring that hard earned into Australian football. NZ has to take the emotion out of their response and work on raising the profile of the A League at home. Heck, there's enough decent kiwi players across the A League to attract support for a few clubs, and increase ratings for TV rights. This bit about you invited us in, you've got to keep us in, is nonsense. You were invited in, now contribute or we'll get someone else.
Republican
Guest
Davybhoy I thought both flags were inspired by GB., while I have been hearing for many years now, how we appropriate all and sundry, in respect of NZ but thankfully sanctimony is not one of them. My demographic once boasted a domestic Soccer team, mens Basketball team, Womens Netball team to name a few, all of which were compromised by respective governing bodies while NZ has since expediently usurped us in all of the aforementioned codes. While local markets i.e. mine continue to fight for meritorious recognition in respect of the saturated Australian sporting market, NZ, a sovereign nation continues to assume special treatment from Australian sporting bodies. Our domestic market offers plenty of opportunity to expand respective codes, while its time NZ got on with the job of invigorating their own potential domestic leagues, rather than crying injustice and neglect on our part.
Horto Magiko
Roar Rookie
You know what they say about guests and fish :)
Davybhoy
Roar Rookie
I'm not sure what the NZ flag debate has to do with this but the Australian flag was modelled on the NZ flag - you are aware of that, right? I can't see a double standard in anything I have written. Phoenix DO have a sense of entitlement to be in the A League. Not 8 years ago but certainly now. To turn around and say "We dont want you for no reason other than we dont want you" really isn't good enough and is pure arrogance. As an aside, getting rid of Phoenix whilst three other clubs are struggling is an astonishingly bad business move - especially for an organisation that says "we are trying to expand".