FFA get reprieve as FIFA intervention delayed until next month

By Emma Kemp, Emma Kemp is a Roar Guru

 , ,

59 Have your say

    FIFA’s planned intervention into the governance of Australian football has been delayed, with FFA’s November 30 deadline to sort out its affairs creeping closer.

    A joint delegation of FIFA and Asian Football Confederation representatives was set to arrive in Australia in late July to mend the rift between divided stakeholders and end their impasse on a new, more democratic congress demanded by FIFA.

    If the congress is not in place by the November deadline, FIFA will disband the FFA board and remove chairman Steven Lowy.

    “We’re working to get a resolution that means we don’t get to that stage,” FFA chief executive David Gallop told AAP on Monday, adding the delegation was now only likely to arrive in early August.

    “We’re still looking to finalise the date but it’s likely to be in early August.

    “We support FIFA coming and hearing the views of the various stakeholders first hand.

    “We’ve seen some changes in the FIFA administration and the people managing the issue in recent times, so it will be good for the people who are actually dealing with the matter to come to Australia and hear the debate.”

    If the delegation does arrive in early August, it will leave little more than three months before FIFA acts on its threat to implement a normalisation committee to temporarily take over FFA’s affairs.

    The governing body’s decision earlier this month to intercede is an embarrassing blow to Lowy and his beleaguered board, and followed FIFA’s outright rejection of its proposed new congress model as unrepresentative.

    After a protracted stalemate lasting months, FFA informed FIFA it had reached consensus from more than 75 per cent of members for the first stage of an expanded congress.

    That 9-3-1 model is made up of the nine state member federations, two seats for the A-league clubs and one for the W-League, and one for the players’ union, the Professional Footballer’s Australia (PFA).

    FFA still sits poles apart from the A-League clubs, PFA and the largest state member federation, Football NSW, who are standing firm on a 9-5-1 model.

    Trust has all but dissolved in the increasingly bitter stand-off, especially as the 10 A-League clubs continue to seek what they believe is their share of revenue entitlements and a greater say in the game’s future.

    “It would certainly be good to get things resolved,” Gallop said.

    “There’s a level of frustration from most stakeholders.”

    © AAP 2018

    Have Your Say

    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (59)

    • July 18th 2017 @ 12:37am
      BeastieBoy said | July 18th 2017 @ 12:37am | ! Report

      Here we go Here we go. Shades of 1975 or was it 1978 when they destroyed the national Comp. Sure get rid of the Lowey family. You will be doing them a favour. But thats the end of soccer again for another 20 years. They have bought sense, money and structure into the game and saved the clubs from themselves. The other codes will love it.

      • July 18th 2017 @ 8:45am
        Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 8:45am | ! Report

        What happened in 1975? I know the NSL started in 1977 & I don’t think it was destroyed in 1978. Apart from the Westfield sponsorship of all women’s football from club to the national level, what money are the Lowy Family putting into the game? I’ve got the FFA Annual Report in front of me, so I’m keen to know what you’ve seen that I’m not seeing.

      • Roar Rookie

        July 18th 2017 @ 10:04am
        Grobbelaar said | July 18th 2017 @ 10:04am | ! Report

        football does not belong to one family, the handing over of power to the former chairman’s son was wrong on so many levels, if it takes FIFA and the setting up of the normalisation committee with its eminent members to fix things up in Australian football, then so be it, short term pain for long term gain

    • July 18th 2017 @ 9:59am
      mattq said | July 18th 2017 @ 9:59am | ! Report

      gosh you kinda just want this thing to move forward. I think Nem said it the other day, it’s hard to even look that forward to 17/18 season when 18/19 is where expansion is at. I’m definitely not an FFA apologist but I also do not trust any one particular stakeholder (particularly my club’s Griffin). But what I do want is to move forward, in unison with a bright outlook and stakeholders representing the game with the game’s best intentions in mind, not regional priorities. half the problem (I think) with our political system is that federal politicians still have to consider their ‘constituency’ when deciding on federal policy (another debate).

      • Roar Rookie

        July 18th 2017 @ 10:06am
        Grobbelaar said | July 18th 2017 @ 10:06am | ! Report

        matt, interesting you liken sports administration to politics, the analogy is apt, there are always competing interests, always, these will never go away, so just like politics, there have to be compromises and second best solutions to keep as many stakeholders as possible happy, but you cannot keep 100% of stakeholders happy all of the time

    • July 18th 2017 @ 12:20pm
      Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 12:20pm | ! Report

      Makes me think the deal is all but done.

      tis obvious both the A-League clubs and the PFA want expansion…. they both like the current system … see SBS article http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2017/07/17/semi-pro-second-division-wont-work-warns-pfaBS article re PFA and semi-professional league won’t work … It seems the PFA and clubs have an alliance from the SBS article.

      Their argument with FFA is over the control of the revenue flow…

      BTW this is not my choice just the old cynical bugger in me looking at what could play out.

      State Feds represent all clubs aside from A-League clubs in Australia and each State Fed and its board or committee is voted on by what 900 odd clubs representing grassroots Football in Australia and all clubs in the National Premier League.

      The PFA leadership is voted on by the professional players say 300.

      The A-League Clubs represent the capital investment so their 8 votes have power.

      The referee bodies are also voted on at various levels and arguably 10’s of thousands votes.
      Coaches there is a new coaching body elected in some form by professional coaches

      FIFA come over…

      9 State Fed votes representing all clubs in Australian and maybe 1, 000 votes
      1 PFA vote for professional and say 300 votes to elect the board member
      1 vote for the officials from many and various forums arguably thousands of votes to appoint a head.
      4 votes A-League & W League votes … by existing clubs.
      1 vote for the coaches, by a number of forums.

      This is 17 votes, with those on the board representing numerous votes arguably well over 2, 000 votes from all levels of Football.

      My guess is neither the existing clubs, nor the PFA, nor FFA, nor Coaches want anything other than a franchise / licence system where they control the process. {BTW ground work already being prepared see Southern Bid, 300 million investment support of local associations]

      FIFA will be presented with a model similar to the above saying this model represent every level of Football… FIFA will agree … then again I am a old cynical bugger at times…

      Then the divide and conquer thingy will happen South Melbourne will be offered a place and they will stop their media campaign.

      • Roar Guru

        July 18th 2017 @ 1:17pm
        Griffo said | July 18th 2017 @ 1:17pm | ! Report

        I think you’ve outlined the complexity of the game well Mid.

        Ultimately this is control of money, and how to make more revenue. It’s a reflection of what occurs in general: the few wanting control most of the wealth. Even more the complexity of foreign owners.

        It would be good if it was just about the good of the local game.

        The various owners of A-League clubs have ‘invested’ a lot, but the early stages of that goodwill at kick starting a professional competition has evaporated as the red mist of money evaporating has no answers or seemingly much of a plan from FFA, plus the backtracking and wanting to ‘consolidate’ until the storm of lack of significant growth blew over.

        The FFA have to then consider how they are going to grow a largely volunteer base of 900-odd clubs and help them, all the while hoping the A-League can grow and generate more revenue.

        Revenue isn’t growing fast enough for some, and isn’t being distributed enough according to others.

        The Congress should have a much wider and relative representation of all the games stakeholders.

        The APFCA body needs to realise it is part of a wider family, and they can’t have it all. The FFA though should have planned for growth well before now, that involved a different setup to what the A-League started with, and that released some of the control that would allow the professional game as an entity to be unshackled and grow.

        Good luck to the FIFA mediators for the remaining time, but more importantly I hope those playing the hard, immovable line don’t stuff the whole game up for controlling $millions for their own ends.

        • July 18th 2017 @ 4:24pm
          Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 4:24pm | ! Report


          I hope so too…. but as I have posted I feel the last thing the existing key stakeholders want is for a smaller clubs in the NPL to get in.

        • July 18th 2017 @ 6:22pm
          pete4 said | July 18th 2017 @ 6:22pm | ! Report

          No question A-League owners want the competition to become independent that’s the biggest issue for the FFA going forward.

          Hopefully some middle ground can be reached so the FFA can continue to support $ other parts of the game and maybe give the A-League some semi-autonomy.

          I think it’s too early for an independent A-League because if that happens kiss goodbye any notion of A-League clubs voting to bring a 2nd tier in ever

          • Roar Guru

            July 18th 2017 @ 9:59pm
            Griffo said | July 18th 2017 @ 9:59pm | ! Report

            I don’t know about not bringing in a second tier – if APFCA get full autonomy then they would likely want to grow the A-League to grow revenue – but whether they grow big enough to split into an A1 and A2 is not as important as if they keep the professional tier separate from NPL or not, or not pay a dividend to FFA.

            That is where APFCA will likely repeat a franchise model, or cherry pick the better NPL.

            Either way I don’t think a separate A-League/FFA of that nature will be good for the game given the heated opinons that would carry over from the birth.

      • Roar Rookie

        July 18th 2017 @ 1:58pm
        Grobbelaar said | July 18th 2017 @ 1:58pm | ! Report

        its looking like a 17 seat congress has a better chance of getting FIFA approval than a 15 seat congress, so you’re probably on the right track there, but what I wonder about is this, is there a reason to believe that the PFA and the clubs would be on the same page in relation to a possible 2nd division?

        • July 18th 2017 @ 4:19pm
          Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 4:19pm | ! Report

          Is there reason to believe PFA and the existing clubs are on the same page…

          Thats how I read this SBS article published yesterday…


          But Professional Footballers Australia CEO John Didulica has warned any efforts to “reverse engineer” a cut-price, semi-professional blueprint to suit state-league clubs would be doomed to fail.

          The Association of Australian Football Clubs (AAFC), a lobby group of more than 100 NPL clubs, held their first board meeting in Brisbane on Saturday as they seek to further their plans to establish a second division with eventual promotion and relegation to the top tier.

          The AAFC board discussed three potential models – including a dual conference structure to negate travel costs – and intends to publish a report in October detailing their preferred option.

          However, AAFC chairman Rabieh Krayem – the former boss of defunct A-League club North Queensland Fury – has suggested it would most likely be a semi-professional competition involving former National Soccer League clubs like Sydney Olympic, Melbourne Knights and South Melbourne.

          The AAFC has also dismissed PFA modelling that suggested it would cost $5.5 million per year to run a professional second division club, in addition to more than $10 million in centralised league operating costs, arguing it could be done for around half that amount.

          Didulica is adamant that doing it on the cheap would not create the sort of playing opportunities Australian football desperately needs.

          “To take the step carelessly and just hope things fall into place is hugely risky and people who have formed this group have been part of A-League clubs that have failed,” Didulica told AAP.

          “They should know the pitfalls of acting with haste.

          “It’s fine to dismiss that figure, saying ‘we can’t afford it’ – but then you’re not ready to have a fully professional second-tier competition.

          “What you’re proposing is a re-heated semi-professional competition. My question is, what’s the point?

          “We can’t just reverse engineer a league to suit existing interests. We need to take a step back and ask what is in the interests of Australian football.”

          It’s understood FFA see the AAFC’s call for a second division as implausible given the game’s current financial state.

          Any national second division would need to be sanctioned by FFA, or else it would operate outside of FIFA rules.

          AAFC is also seeking a position on FFA’s congress, the body that elects members to FFA’s board.

          “There’ll be various views about that that will come forward when the FIFA/AFC delegation arrive,” FFA chief David Gallop told AAP.

          “That’s as much as we can say about that at this point.”

      • July 18th 2017 @ 2:07pm
        Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 2:07pm | ! Report


        Did you see the FFV’s Zone map I linked? I knew FFV divided Victoria into zones, but had never seen the map.

        Now that I have and after reading how the English & Germans organise their National Football Federations, it got me thinking.

        What if the FFA actually wants FIFA to tear up the current structure because it might lead to the end of State Federations? I know the FFA is keen to abolish the State Feds and centralise everything. But, under the current FFA structure this can never occur. The States control 90% of the votes.

        But, imagine if FIFA steps in & we start again. Imagine if, instead of 9 State representative votes, the whole of Australia is divided into Zones. I’m sure this already occurs in each State Federation, as it does in Victoria.

        That way each Zone will get a vote on FFA Congress.
        The FFA will get rid of the State Feds.
        And, the FFA will consolidate all the State Federation Balance Sheets. There must be close to $100 million Net Assets across the 9 Member Federations.

        Could this be the FFA’s ultimate goal?
        Or, conspiracy theory?

        • Roar Rookie

          July 18th 2017 @ 2:30pm
          Grobbelaar said | July 18th 2017 @ 2:30pm | ! Report

          its the clubs who have invited FIFA in, not the FFA

          • July 18th 2017 @ 2:37pm
            Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 2:37pm | ! Report

            From the letter I read from FIFA, FIFA hasn’t been “invited”. FIFA are inviting themselves. The clubs have merely been communicating directly with FIFA.

            • Roar Rookie

              July 18th 2017 @ 6:09pm
              Grobbelaar said | July 18th 2017 @ 6:09pm | ! Report

              FIFA have invited themselves because one of the stakeholders (the A-League clubs) complained to FIFA, so yes, it’s the clubs inviting FIFA in, i.e. this is not the FFA’s doing (as your previous post appeared to suggest)

              • July 18th 2017 @ 6:44pm
                Waz said | July 18th 2017 @ 6:44pm | ! Report

                This has been going on for over 7 years now. Way before that letter.

              • July 18th 2017 @ 7:00pm
                Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 7:00pm | ! Report

                “this is not the FFA’s doing (as your previous post appeared to suggest)”

                I’ve never suggested anything of the sort.

                What I suggested was: the FFA may be quite happy to have FIFA come in & re-organise everything IF this means the State Feds are abolished & FFA gets all the assets.

              • Roar Rookie

                July 19th 2017 @ 7:58pm
                Grobbelaar said | July 19th 2017 @ 7:58pm | ! Report

                Yes, and FIFA only acted because there was a complaint from one of the stakeholders, i.e. the A-League clubs.

                Lowy is about to go from being able to control everything, including being able to hand the chair to his son, if he so chooses, to being able to control nothing.

                On what basis could you possible believe that he welcomes this?

              • July 19th 2017 @ 9:35pm
                Nemesis said | July 19th 2017 @ 9:35pm | ! Report

                “On what basis could you possible believe that he welcomes this?”

                My hypothesis is base on one – and only one – potential motivation: MONEY.

                The 9 State Federations are sitting on around $100 MILLION of Net Assets. If the FFA could gain control of that, it would be real financial power for the FFA & football.

                At the end of the last Reporting Year, the FFA on its own had Net Assets of only $7 million.

                Can you imagine what the FFA could achieve with $100m in Net Assets?

                Finally, everyone goes on about the Lowy Family controlling things. Let’s be perfectly clear.

                The bottom line is, the FFA Board is a creation of the State Feds. Blame them for the FFA Board. They had the opportunity to put anyone they choose onto the FFA Board.

                And, they chose Steven Lowy.

        • July 18th 2017 @ 2:51pm
          Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 2:51pm | ! Report


          FIFA are coming because a number of a key stakeholder complained and FIFA want it fixed.

          FIFA want, P & R and at least two divisions.

          What I am saying is … My reading of the Tea Leafs [which could be totally wrong] is we have 3 maybe 4 powerful stakeholder groups in the PFA representing the professional players with reps voted for, the State Feds again votes to be appointed by essentially every club in Australia aside from A-League clubs,… FFA themselves … and maybe professional coaches … all these groups represent large segments of the Football community …

          So it goes something like this …. remember its the old cynic in me saying when powerful groups get together and want a similar outcome … that’s normally what happens.

          The Tea Leafs tell me this group will offer to grow the existing base to around 24 teams, all hand picked by new governance procedures.

          The 24 teams spilt between 16 Div 1 and 8 Div 2.

          Div 1 will play 30 rounds and the bottom 4 teams will join the top 4 from Div 2…thus 8 teams in a 14 round end of season tournament with the top four promoted to Div 1.

          This method draws on two existing FIFA accepted models, The P & R model is similar to Belgium, having only and A & B league is how Japan was at a similar time of their development.

          Message to FIFA … we have the support of over 90% of the Football community…. we are expanding the League by 140% and introducing already excepted FIFA P & R systems…

          But sometimes old cynic’s get it wrong… and as I said in the 24 teams places will be found 6 or so former NSL teams… South Melbourne, West ADL & ADL City, Bris Strikers, Brisbane FC, a WS team most likely Olympic maybe Sydney United…. this will IMO take the paid for media campaign away.

          • July 18th 2017 @ 3:15pm
            Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 3:15pm | ! Report

            All good points, Mid.

            But, what’s your take on FIFA abolishing the State Feds & the FFA then consolidating all the Balance Sheets.

            The FFA’s Balance Sheet is meagre – $7m Net Assets.
            If the FFA gets control of 9 Member Federations & merges the Balance Sheets, suddenly the FFA sits on Net Assets of close to $100 million.

            $100m Net Assets starts to give FFA good financial clout.

            • July 18th 2017 @ 3:54pm
              Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 3:54pm | ! Report


              FIFA cannot force the State Feds to hand their assets to FFA…

              They can curtail their power …

              Also in fairness the State Feds are representative of the various district associations… i.e. the voice of the 900 local park teams … plus the higher state NPL teams as well…

              You could argue that the State Feds votes are changed for the number of players … i.e. NSW visa V Tassie and NT …

              From a centralised controlled cost saving aspect I can see reason for FFA to absorb the State Feds … but can’t see it happening..

              • July 18th 2017 @ 4:33pm
                Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 4:33pm | ! Report

                Just reviewing the FFV Constitution.

                Clause 21.2 states that if the FFV is wound up, all property that remains after paying debts & liabilities

                must be transferred to another body

                a) that has similar objects at those of the FFV
                b) whose constitution prohibits the distribution of income & property to the same effect as the FFV constitution prohibits such distribution

                So, if FFV is wound up & all Federations are centralised, I think the FFV’s assets would be transferred to the FFA.

              • Roar Rookie

                July 18th 2017 @ 6:11pm
                Grobbelaar said | July 18th 2017 @ 6:11pm | ! Report

                they are pretty normal clauses for a not-for-profit body

              • July 18th 2017 @ 6:59pm
                Nemesis said | July 18th 2017 @ 6:59pm | ! Report

                “they are pretty normal clauses for a not-for-profit body”

                Which suggests the State Feds assets can be passed to the FFA if the State Feds are wound up.

              • July 18th 2017 @ 7:10pm
                pete4 said | July 18th 2017 @ 7:10pm | ! Report

                Hopefully Gallop is behind the scenes planning something like this. Having separate state federation’s is just another layer of red tape

              • Roar Guru

                July 18th 2017 @ 10:25pm
                Griffo said | July 18th 2017 @ 10:25pm | ! Report

                I thought Crawford mentioned consolidating the state feds – at least amalgamating the separate associations in a state under the state fed – but easier said than done.

                Possibly the new congress could be huge, with representation of zones based on player registrations, plus all the other stakeholders you can fathom…but tricky to get representation right so the bigger state regions don’t dominate smaller…

                And the old state fed CEO positions, etc. become the new FFA board…

                How the regions then manage would be interesting in it’s own right – some big, sparse areas with little revenue compared to metro regions – but if it means less bureaucratic wastage, then long overdue.

                Never going to happen with the current FFA setup…

              • July 19th 2017 @ 7:53am
                Nemesis said | July 19th 2017 @ 7:53am | ! Report


                You’ve raised some excellent points.

                IT’s good to discuss football issues with people who have real interest in football & are not here to just disrupt & annoy and pretend they’re football aware.

                A few observations, based on what I’ve read in the FFV Constitution (presuming all other Member Feds are similar)

                1) Yes, the new congress could be huge, with representation of zones based on player registrations. E.g. England has over 100 people voting for its Congress

                2) If Zones are being represented, then, in the absences of collusion and voting in State blocks, all votes are equal (just as it is for Federal Govt elections in Australia)

                3) State fed CEO positions will not become the new FFA board automatically. The Congress votes on the FFA Board. Currently, there are 10 votes for the FFA Board. I’m pretty sure right now, there is a Clause in the FFA Statutes that prevents anyone from serving on the FFA Board if they’ve held a position at State Level for a certain number of years. I’m sure that clause will prevent what you’re suggesting.

                4) The regions won’t be asked to raise their own funds. The funds are pooled federally, rather than by State.

                5) Agree, it’ll never happen with the current FFA setup, which is why FIFA intervention may be exactly what the FFA wants. Only FIFA can step in & get rid of the States.

              • Roar Guru

                July 19th 2017 @ 5:33pm
                Griffo said | July 19th 2017 @ 5:33pm | ! Report

                For 3) just thinking along the lines of something palatable to the state Feds that they would self terminate their own existence as an entity. My thinking was more likely a nomination…initially state bonds would be tight, but then some powerful, neighboring regions might collude. A large, game representative congress might have other ideas…again representation is key – there are many forms of football and stakeholders.
                For 4) I expect current state fee dividend would go to FFA along with $12.60-ish FFA fee, or the regional fee will take on the state fee (which might serve the regions better and less processing. Again larger regions would need more funds but perhaps a greater pool from grassroots fees could help with infrastructure, amongst others needs. Something FFA are struggling with (and seemingly the states and regions, too).
                5) Politically FFA’s chance on realigning state Feds was early, which is to say ‘none and Buckley’s chance (no, not that one) so the only hope is an external body. Interesting theory (Mid) but it seems like some of the stakeholders demanding reform are the more powerful states.

                Interesting three months ahead if those political maneuverings (to remove states Feds) have to play out.

                I’m still expecting A-League owners will be trying to come out on top, and have the connections.

              • July 19th 2017 @ 6:03pm
                Nemesis said | July 19th 2017 @ 6:03pm | ! Report

                Done a bit more reading on who can be an FFA Director.

                Article 10.16 of the FFA Constitution says

                A person is disqualified from being nominated for a position on the FFA Board if, within the previous 2 years:

                – he/she has been an employee of the FFA or a State Member Federation; or
                – he/she has been a member of a Standing Commitee
                – he/she has held any “Official Position”

                “Official Position” includes: all directorships, or exec positions on a State Body, or Club, etc.

                So, basically, anyone who has been involved in decision-making in AUS football at any level cannot be appointed to the FFA Board for 2 years after leaving that position.

            • July 18th 2017 @ 3:55pm
              Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 3:55pm | ! Report



              Please tell me the


              That sent this post off to the mods…

              • July 18th 2017 @ 7:45pm
                northerner said | July 18th 2017 @ 7:45pm | ! Report

                Midfielder – if the comment that got moderated is the one below, I suspect the word
                “g-ts” tipped off their algorithm. Go figure. I’ve also found putting in links to such dangerous websites as the BBC can cause a meltdown.

                Writing comments here can sometimes require the skills of a tap dancer to avoid putting a foot (or key) wrong. Don’t take it personally – just improve your footwork 😉

              • July 18th 2017 @ 8:23pm
                Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 8:23pm | ! Report


                It was the post above … and you maybe right but its very frustrating …

              • July 18th 2017 @ 8:50pm
                northerner said | July 18th 2017 @ 8:50pm | ! Report

                Just think of the moderation system as a bunch of very proper Victorian ladies. No language that might cause them to swoon and require smelling salts for revival. Insults, racism, misogyny, fine – but no swear words.

              • Roar Guru

                July 18th 2017 @ 10:04pm
                Griffo said | July 18th 2017 @ 10:04pm | ! Report

                It use to be that two or more links in a post tripped moderation…the secret was to post one link, then re-edit the post and add the rest, avoiding moderation…

                It’s a tricky game but sometimes fun 😉

        • July 18th 2017 @ 3:48pm
          Midfielder said | July 18th 2017 @ 3:48pm | ! Report


          My gut tells me, … The existing 10 A-League clubs do not want aside from a handful I mentioned above any of the NPL sides making the A-League… they are seen as to small and do not have the fan base to continue existing revenues from broadcasters.

          The same for the PFA they want controls on player wages, and see smaller clubs causing trouble and or salaries falling because of the size of the clubs…

          The State Feds don’t want to loose any more control than they have too.

          The Lowy family don’t want small clubs in the league.

          My guess to is Fox and other sponsors and 10, have also had a word privately to the existing clubs and PFA.

          My model in the post a few up, actually covers every single team and player in the country and has thousands of votes to elect the key members of the board.

          Also take South Melbourne and their paid media campaign out, and add another key NSL teams in the 24 teams and IMO FIFA will tick the box for another 10 to 15 years… the re visit will be when the other NPL teams can join the second division.

          But I could be totally wrong…. however as I said when the A-League clubs, the PFA, Refs, Coaches, & State Feds say it’s Ok… and their are lots of votes to elect each member of the board… it’s hard to argue against ..

          • July 19th 2017 @ 10:15am
            FIFA-supporter said | July 19th 2017 @ 10:15am | ! Report

            No A-League club has the right to say we don’t want smaller clubs in the A-League. That attitude is anti Football and the reason why many of us immigrants don’t care about the A-League (yet). And because our local NPL clubs cannot get promoted, kills our motivation to support them as well. What’s the point of supporting an NPL club if we can never get promoted? Only the players and coaches can get promoted by moving to better clubs around the world. But the fans are being ignored. So it’s a self-serving venture for players and coaches.

            If the current A-League clubs want to remain in the A-League, they have to prove themselves by competing against clubs from lower divisions. All the time. That’s what Football is all about. Anyone who doesn’t follow this policy, has no right to be in a position of authority in Football.

            • July 19th 2017 @ 4:26pm
              Midfielder said | July 19th 2017 @ 4:26pm | ! Report

              I have no argument with you on the introduction of a full FIFA model…

              Its just my reading of the tea leafs is many existing powerful stakeholders want to expand and have P & R but within the confines of the existing system for between 10 to 15 years…

              I could be totally wrong … it just the way I am reading the signs…

        • July 19th 2017 @ 2:07pm
          Newie said | July 19th 2017 @ 2:07pm | ! Report

          I think you might be onto something.

          The impasse that punters are blaming on the FFA might be the state federations refusing to negotiate to allow other stakeholders into the tent.

          • July 19th 2017 @ 6:23pm
            pete4 said | July 19th 2017 @ 6:23pm | ! Report

            Because the state federation’s know once the lose the numbers in the Congress one of the 1st votes that will come up will be to abolish the state federation’s

            Until that comes about they are safe hence them only wanting 13-15 seats

            • Roar Rookie

              July 19th 2017 @ 8:01pm
              Grobbelaar said | July 19th 2017 @ 8:01pm | ! Report

              It’s a case of scratching each others’ backs. The Lowy dynasty depended on the votes of the majority of state federations, presumably he has been able to count on most of them because of such assurances and other promises made (straight out of the FIFA game book in fact).

    , ,