RBB responds to Gallop, vows match boycott

FIUL- I probably have been a football fan for much longer than you for I have lived through 3 phases of management types since I first became interested. The 3 are Association(Amateur) to Federation(move to professionalism), the NSL (semi professional) and the HAL (full time professional) In every one of those phases I have witnessed a type of management that even at the highest levels caused much angst among those who were on the "outer" Let me explain. Up to the "birth" of the HAL there has been a type of management used that in it's purest form was deemed to be truly democratic, based on the British Parliamentary System of Governance. Nothing could be further from the truth for at every level I have experienced there has been a "committee system" that usually saw a strong personality come to the fore and surround himself with "committee men" who usually attended a meeting once a fortnight or month to hear and if necessary,sanction the thoughts and actions that the "president" and his close cohorts had decided was to now be followed.Now that is about as far from a proper "committee system" as one can go. Then along came the HAL and suddenly there was a total change in management structure for at the heart of the "franchises" were men,usually of considerable wealth,who,while perhaps not knowing much about the game,saw some prestige in owning a premier football identity. Immediately the fan was subject to change,change in how everything was being run ,usually with a view to reducing or even turning a loss situation into a profit situation. You see the erstwhile "President" of a club, was now a stakeholder in what was a huge financial outlay and risk factor and was thus probably entitled to have first say in what he wanted to happen in the day to day running of his franchise. In the first 10 years of the HAL this type of management has been in place ,even at the FFA level and the coming and going of personnel over those years in that august body is testament to the fact that the "richest man" was still "calling the shots' So lets look at that man.He had walked away from the semi-professional game disgusted by the way the then "committee system" was running the game.21 years later he is approached by government and asked to revive the game and there is little doubt he would have laid down certain conditions before he accepted the task.Now after 10 years he has stood down after what most would agree has been the best 10 years ever enjoyed by football in this country. Has he made mistakes,of course he has, but probably the most noticeable one he has made was not to include in his closed council a man with deep experience in running a football identity and as a result there are many instances when he has acted in a manner not only detrimental to his perceived aims but to his performance as a "top gun". Examples- World Cup bid,National Coach recommendations, Director of Coaching appointments, CEO's, the list goes on,but these have always to be offset against gains,the Socceroos, TV financial input and coverage ,increased crowds,better facilities for fans, and a perceived improvement in football standard. In the environment he has created we have as you mentioned a franchise ,Melbourne Victory reach an all round standard of management and on field performance that should have every other franchise look and learn, We can but hope. Cheers jb

marron - I may or may not know of how the "groups" are approaching their "clubs" ,or the FFA ,but that does not take away from the fact that a match boycott does not in my opinion do what the game at this point needs. When a management body has to be "corrected" ,and, like many before you and me, I feel the FFA have not handled themselves too well over certain factors of their management,but without knowing their exact reasoning it is to me ,just too easy to pick what is a "perceived reason" and start to "make mischief". Take you for instance, you mention the "hiring" of an "anti-terrorism security force and giving them free rein" and to me that is a "tongue in cheek" opinion.for no way would that make me think of football fans ,even rowdy ones, as terrorists. We don't really know if,due to recent happenings around the world the FFA, and other major sporting bodies, have been advised to look at this course of action to keep an eye on crowds.You note I say I don't know,but am prepared to think that MAY have happened. Finally I think you and I may have hit common ground, There has been plenty of noise in recent days showing displeasure at all levels of the game and if Steven Lowy does not take note then I would say we,the fans, have a problem but that does not change my view that boycotting the game is not the way to go for it is giving the "enemy" all the ammunition they so dearly desire. Cheers jb.

I have been a fan of football for well over fifty years and in that time I have seen and been in huge crowds that sing, chant occasionally swear and seen the odd confrontation in the old days of the skinhead bovver boys in the UK. I have never seen spoilt brats like the active supporters who want to throw their toys out of the bath. You do not realise how good you have it with a growing league that is showing signs of producing some really good Aussie talent. The game will survive and grow stronger even if active fans never return to watch this great game because no one is bigger than the game. That includes the Steven Lowy's and David Gallops in the sport. There are some great games of football on this week why don't we all just go to the game and enjoy it. Whether you be a casual, active or family member/fan. Discussions on improving the relationships between fans and the FAA should be held behind closed doors and if/when agreements can be made with any of the fan groups a joint press release should be issued.

jb, that's what's happening. the clubs are taking it to the FFA as we speak - because they are witnessing the discontent from their own fans. that's a win isn't it? keep in mind that this is not just an issue that has come out of nowhere. these exact issues have been raised directly with the FFA before by various groups. bosnich referred to one of these on sunday evening when talking to de bohun. nothing was done then. it's not something that has just sprung up. it's not about overturning a handful of bans out of the 198 either - it's about changing how this is run altogether. I do understand the view that says this is a bad look for the game. But in my opinion, giving a counter-terrorism security force free reign is also a bad look for the game. And if you look at the commentary - there is more support from all quarters of the football community than on almost any other issue I can think of.

"The FFA do not give a bugger for the fans. This is why we are angry." I've been an ALeague fan from Day 1. I'm a 10 year season ticket holder at MVFC & have been to nearly every match in Melbourne. In the 11 years I've been watching ALeague, I've had absolutely no significant grievance with the FFA. Neither have any of the people with whom I attend matches, or mates who follow the other team in Melbourne. So, please do not presume to suggest all fans are angry.

Ray - A very sensible and reasoned comment on a situation that ,fed by a gleeful anti-football media,is growing daily into a threat that actually is nibbling away at the very foundations of our professional game.What is amazing me is the insignificant numbers of fans that justice is being sought for,for even it is found that some of them are innocent it is almost just as sure that there are some that deserve to be punished,but to "grow" this situation into what it has become is tatamount to self destruction and surely no one wants "victory" to achieve that end. Keep up the good work. jb.

RBB - First of all let me sympathise with you for the perceived position you appear to find yourself in. You cite the season ticket argument as a reason you are not hurting the club and while that may be fiscally correct you seem to ignore what sort of reaction a mass boycott has on the game as a whole,as I said, arming the "opposition" with more "ammunition". Now there is little doubt that things have to change at Head Office, no one disputes that, but to use the broad description that the heirarchy "don't give a bugger for fans" is a far ranging description to describe what is in fact a move to bring people to justice (the FFA) for what is in fact a minor "infringement", the banning of 78 fans or 198 fans depending on where the figures are being sourced. Now I have attempted to put those numbers into some sort of perspective elsewhere (I expect you did not notice my gaffe in the article you are passing comment on when I spelled out 5,000,000 instead of 500,000)and find that as a percentage of attendees to matches the number 198, or in WSW's case 78 ,to be totally insignificant to the whole and yet through the action of a few the game is being put into a position it most definitely doesn't want to be. Now ,if we look at the big picture can I suggest your "anger" while justified,is being used in the wrong way. You mention the "clubs" and to this end I would put to you that that is where your anger should be directed to the FFA, through your club,for if this was done at every "club" the FFA would have to sit up and take note. After all there is a factor not widely appreciated by today's pundits and fans and that is that back in 1980 the then chairman of the national league was pontificating very strongly that in his opinion the then existing clubs should be allowed to run their own competition while remaining affiliated to the "ruling" body,and that is exactly what many of the stakeholders in today's franchises have been saying recently. By the way that chairman who was doing that pontificating was one ----Frank Lowy. Has he changed his views and if so why,that is what I would like the FFA to be asked. Cheers jb.

Several in the RBB are 20,30 & 40 years past being a teenager.

Ray, whatever you decide to do, make sure that if you are unhappy with the situation that you express it in writing to club and FFA.

When you have your clubs understanding and players have expressed their support, the club have your money already anyway, the club are angry with the FFA as well, then it's not so nonsensical. It's about ensuring that a message is heard loud and clear. It's also important that the FFA understands that non-active fans want change as well. Many people I know outside the RBB will be boycotting this week because they feel just as strongly about these issues. Others are choosing to make their message heard by other means - whatever. The club don't want empty stands. And it is the clubs who are actually in the best position to force change and get results. You are right - the FFA won't give in to "suburban terrorists". But they will give in to the clubs, who yesterday were expressing their discontent directly to the FFA.

A fan should not hurt their club to try and get back at the FFA - it's nonsensical.

Ben - It depends on how you look at the number of "incidents" that lead to the banning of an individual 585,723 people have on occasion turned up to watch WSW play home league games and from those appearances there has been an "occasion" to discipline 78 people for perceived indiscretions. Now as you correctly point out the individual acted upon may have been to every game but the "incident percentage" can still be extracted from the whole as I suggested. The percentage figure you calculate would be.0.58% (my calculated % is .01%) but that would be if the 78 banishments all occurred at 1 home game,WSW's average crowd standing at 13,312 per game over the years.so as you do suggest the figure is still grossly insignificant.OK? Thanks for commenting Cheers jb..

The RBB's statement is calling the FFA administration inept and basically demanding that it bend to their will. I simply say that it's difficult for me to imagine any half-competent administration bowing to the demands of what remains a minority group, one which is increasingly at odds with where the FFA sees itself taking the A-League. Over the past 10 days, the message from those protesting has changed to such an extent that it's almost impossible for the FFA to openly support the protesting fans.

Fight like your fans.

What I don’t understand is why haven’t fans of other sports done this in the past? Why didnt Essendon fans boycott the games until people involved in the systematic cheating, rorting and putting players lives in danger were removed from the club? In fact they did the opposite they made excuse after excuse. Why haven’t NRL fans boycotted which ever player has been charged with week for drunk driving/wife bashing/ stalking/ intimindation / beastality. I’m nit a huge fan of the RBB, at times I feel they are self indulgent wankers but that is my opinion, but I do support them and any active group protesting how they see fit on this one.

JB, You don't get it. The FFA do not give a bugger for the fans. This is why we are angry. The only way for the FFA to notice us is not not show up. The clubs themselves will force David Gallop to coming up with a solution. I am not hurting my club at all by not showing up, I have bought a season membership and so have 18,000 others. If you can tell me how this hurts the club I am all ears.

Hi jb, you've counted the 585,723 as individuals. 78 out of an average home crowd is the figure you are after. It is still a rather low percentage.

RBB - Your explanation to Jeff while no doubt given with the best of intentions,fails to explain how a boycott of a WSW game is going to hurt the FFA in any way. You say it is the only way the "fans" ,all 5,000,000 who have watched WSW since its inception can get through to the FFA in what apparently is to try and get justice for 198 people,78 of whom have been reported as WSW fans. Now if we assume that at least some of those 78 were guilty of anti-social behaviour don't you feel this action is perhaps similar to running into a brick wall head first.The wall (the FFA) may well sustain a little damage but for sure it will be the "runner" who will finish much worse off. Now just imagine if the 15,000 regular supporters undertook to bombard head office weekly with protest in all forms of popular media how long would it be before someone at HO said "enough is enough" lets hear what they have to say.??? In that case the biased media we all know exists would be retricted to --------------- bugger all!!. Surely a better way to show displeasure than to hurt the club you love to watch. Cheers jb

I think it already does, just with a lack of talent.

Our family are torn. I am WSW supporter who sit very close to the RBB. I have seen the Police responses which were over reactive on the few times I have seen any rumblings. The fans should never be treated this way. For flares I am totally opposed to the method of use and the people who let them go should suffer the law here. It can be dangerous the way that these people carry this out. Active support which we all love is one of the great reasons why WSW are a great home to be in. The Police did dampen the feeling with their over the top presence. Do we attend on Saturday or not. It means that we show support to the fans who have no real way of finding a just way to their ordeal. Innocent before proven guilty is the law in Australia but not here. The we are not supporting our team, so seeing so many empty seats. What do we do, it is on the 50/50 at present and I am really finding it hard. Ray