Dean, I have written lengthy responses to some of your previous flippant comments in the hope of educating you, but it seems like a lost cause. So this may well be my last attempt at a lengthy educational reply.

It may be hard for a simple minded man to understand, but not only did the active supporters support their team last week, they were also supporting other active supporter groups (the nominal enemy), they were supporting the entire A-league, and they were supporting the name of football in general, by defending all of us and demanding action by the FFA against the rubbish of some media.

In addition, unlike fair weather supporters who can only see past last week’s win or loss in terms of whether they turn up the following week, the active supporters took a very long term view of what would be best for their club and for football long-term. Why? Because they want to be there every week actively supporting their clubs and if that meant one week sitting in a pub watching then so be it.

In addition, the majority of them are club members and have already paid their attendance money so the clubs in question were not financially disadvantaged by their move. The only people disadvantaged were he FFA who were made to look out of touch with the fans.

Finally, this type of coordinated action by the active groups across all clubs in the league is not the action of a “dummy spit”. It indicates a very coordinated and considered approach by these groups who are not affiliated to each other and have no official affiliation to the clubs. These non-affiliated groups who are extremely passionate about their clubs, have also held up banners this year (Save the Nix) and in prior years showing strong support for each other and for the football community.

This type of wide based, coordinated and forward thinking support for our game is not something ever seen in other codes in Australia and is just another example of the great passion that active supporters have for their clubs and our code.

As for Mark B’s comment about “the active crowd” using the same boring insults, I would ask him to name the active supporters on this thread or regular commentator to the Roar. I’ll give him a clue though – it will be a small list, especially if compared to names of non-active supporters.

I doubt he understands the difference between active and non-active.

Most of us football going public here dwell in the non-active areas, the active supporters are predominantly found in other forums.

Dean, your argument is both poorly founded and illogical.

To compare the trouble at A-League games with the NSL troubles is ludicrous. I spent over 10 years going to the NSL and was in the changing rooms every weekend. I saw way too many pitch invasions, I saw fans fighting all over the ground and in the main grandstand area, I saw players and officials being attacked on the park as they tried to leave the field. No, not every week, not even ‘lots of times’, but too many times it happened. It’s never happened at the A-League. At its worst I have sat with players in the dressing room for hours as they waited to go home but dare not leave because there were crowds waiting for them in the car park. I don’t think that has ever happened at an A-League game. The NSL had much bigger problems than a small group of mostly young idiots.

Then to suggest that the NSL had troublemakers, the A-League groups have trouble makers but if they continue to boycott ‘new fan groups would emerge … without the hardline anarchists’, well that is simply illogical. The ‘anarchists’ would surely just join the new groups and we are in the same place.

With that off my chest, let me just return to the current picture and recent events.

I’m not an apologist for the RBB, NT or any other group. There are some things that happen that should not happen. I just wish for some reality in the conversation and balance and accuracy in the reporting. For all Bec’s beatings about ‘endemic’ violence and ‘cultural problems’ in the sport, she has never once offered a slither of a constructive suggestion about how these issues (that she sees) might best be address. She just throws mud at what she doesn’t understand or doesn’t like because it is easy to do.

In addition, if only weeks before the start of the season the police table a document to all the regular members of A-League clubs that they would be vigorously enforcing a long list of tough restrictions for all supporters in the grandstands, including:
* a zero tolerance for swearing; and
* supporters will be ordered to remain in their seats and to not stand, jump and clap with their hands above their heads,
Breaking these restrictions would result in evictions and possibly bans. (there is a ref link below)

The average Joe would say, ‘ What !!! F*&% off ! ‘ but that is the sort of rubbish the active supporter groups have to put up with. It’s no wonder they thumb their noses at police/security and the two groups are at loggerheads. And where is the FFA when this happens? Who’s back have they got? So some of the ‘idiots’ fight back and rip a flare -that’ll teach em !! – and the negative cycle is perpetuated.

But who is building bridges and seeking a balance? Not the police/security. Not the FFA.

Would the AFL put up with police issuing these restrictions to AFL fans? It, quite rightly, just wouldn’t happen in AFL so why do football fans have to put up with it?

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/western-sydney-wanderers/western-sydney-wanderers-and-nsw-police-working-through-red-and-black-bloc-restrictions-20150924-gjufbj.html#ixzz3tdNLrF7M

c, llet me give you three quotes from a recent Bec article of Nov 22. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/rebecca-wilson-its-time-to-stop-the-football-thugs/story-fni0cwl5-1227617318241

I can’t access the weekend piece as I refuse to pay money to subscribe to the rubbish but this article gives you a flavour.
The positioning of the story is in relation to ‘football louts’ and soccer in Australia being in danger of becoming worse than England or Europe…

Bec then goes on to say,
1. ‘the problem has become endemic’. (Now, endemic means rife or prevalent throughout an entire population.)
2. ‘FFA is loath to make a genuine and concerted stand against the Wanderers’.
3. There is ‘a cultural problem within the sport’.

So, to re-phrase her, ‘the problem of louts and violent behaviour has become prevalent throughout the entire soccer population.’

She didn’t say a ‘concerted stand against this rogue element’, [which FFA had done by banning the said troublemakers] but she was demanding a concerted stand against ‘the Wanderers’ as a whole.

And finally it’s a racial issue ‘within the sport.’ It’s not a cultural problem within a problematic group, it’s not a cultural problem within a section of the crowd, but it’s a cultural problem ‘within the sport’.

If those three comments in one article don’t paint the everyone at Hal’s parties with the same brush then I don’t know what does.

Dean, did you watch the game or just dream up the above comments. The ”atmosphere was big” only when the crowd mimicked the chants and calls that were created by the RBB. That won’t last in the long term.

Alf can have his reactive crowds who are as dull as dishwater before a match and especially so when you are loosing by six goals. I’ll take proactive crowds every time to build the suspense and atmosphere.

Hi jb, I haven’t yet watched the expose but I’ll find it in the next day or two and do so. I’ll get back to you with my thoughts. Philip

Thanks for pointing that out nordster, the lingo here is important to make sure you don’t stand out too much.

Mister Football, I know you are an AFL person who really hardly deserves a reply for your comments but I’ll patiently do so anyway.

Re your first point, the FFA did not defend the 99% of fans at all and that is the issue. They only defended their abhorrent, third-world banning process.

Re your second point, the MV supporter who would be delighted at the NT disappearing is not particular ‘astute’ at all. He is just proof that there are extremist in every group of people which include the NT and obviously the non NT supporters.

I love the colour and atmosphere created by the Nth End and the South End and the RBB and The Cove. I don’t support the flares or the occasional violent nature of some people – but bear in mind that an AFL spectator was given a jail sentence just 2 days ago for hitting a woman spectator at a West Coats game. And are all AFL spectators thugs and terrorists? Of course not. And no journalist would write a front page article accusing banned AFL supporters of being ‘suburban terrorists’.

I have taken rugby supporters to MV games and they are in awe of the chanting of the Nth End and Sth End and the chant off which sometimes includes East End / West End.

The reality is that most MV supporters don’t understand the issues faced, in particular, by the active supporters because they are not confronted with them as they sit in the grandstands. And MOST MV supporters do support the NT for taking a stand on the issue of lack of leadership of the FFA. The NT are not all kids with nothing better to do on a game night.

But perhaps what I think and what the ‘astute MV supporter’ thinks is irrelevant. So I’ll leave you with this comment – where do the players run to when they score a goal? Yes, the Nth End or Sth End. Where do the players go after every match to talk to and salute the crowd? The Nth End.

An extreme MV supporter (and maybe even a few of his mates) might rejoice at the loss of the NT but I would not, the supporters as a whole would not, the club management would not, and most importantly, the players definitely would not.

At this moment I think the active groups have made their point and should come back and give the FFA till Feb to address the issues which the FFA have said they would in a rather apologetic manner. After Feb, we can all reassess the situation.

Now, go back to the AFL pages and check the latest news on drug scandals, the draft, or whatever else might be happening there.

I have watched and listened to the entire Lowe/Gallop Press Conference and Q time (that just occurred a few hours ago) three times now.

Clearly Lowe’s remarks were a lot of ‘political-speak’ and he was trying to say we made some mistakes while at the same time not wishing to drop Gallop in the poop. It wasn’t Lowe’s best performance or very passionate in any respects but if you strip the political-speak away it was a move in the right direction and admittance that they got it wrong.

Gallop in Q time was clearly quite chastened by what has occurred. He admitted he got it wrong several times and I thought he was about as honest as he could be and without any waffling. Based on my business experience and reading his reaction I recon he’s been given a rocket behind the scenes and told to do better or else.

Of course, action speaks loader than words and the next few weeks will be very interesting to see what actually occurs out of FFA HQ … esp as Lowe said the results of the review should presented to the Board next Feb which isn’t far away.

You maths is a bit incorrect … actual A-league games to date over 11 years plus finals is 1215 (so you mean 198 bans in 1215 ganes = 0.16 per game)

Great piece Tony.

Although I am a MVFC person I would encourage everyone to watch the entire 9 min speech by de Pietro and imagine if that was the norm across 12-14-16 teams. BUT especially watch between 7:40 and 8:28 …just 48 seconds which is all Gallop should have said last week. Full Stop.

You Mister Football are just the sort of person that we have to keep educating.

The fans and de Pietro are 100% on the same page on this issue. And de Pietro doesnt have to choose between one option and the other … he has 26000 paid up members, passionate crowd support and 1200 business men all paying money to be part of a successful club … that is exactly what Wilson et al and that AFL and i suspect you are worried about.

The Wanderers have the chance to do just as well and Sydney FC are even moving in the right direction if the can get stability in management who knows what they might achieve. The Mariners have their centre of excellence. That is what the anti-football brigade is worried about. We have the seeds of success … they just need some tending to.

This week might seem disruptive (and there are different voices and opinion as to the best course to take) but it is actually galvanizing in many respects and Victory management and active fans and general supporters predominantly all have the same goal … success … because WE are Football.

That isn’t selectively quoting me at all. I never said any of the words you wrote.

Let’s just leave it with this thought, for years and years McDonlads has been extremely popular, a leading brand and highly profitable and people go there in huge numbers – despite the food being proven to be unhealthy when consumed at the levels we as a society eat, despite being linked to obesity, despite the huge cost burden on the health care system, despite you-tube videos of fights and stabbings among it’s customer base, despite murders in it’s carparks…..

The FFA and Football in general is incredibly unpopular among the wider community, poorly supported, and loss making – despite having great product, a great core of current supporters and a huge sports participant base, despite it being a healthy and social activity, despite the fact that it can put Australia on the world stage, and despite the fact that the SCG Trust has been named on the violent venues register by the NSW Government with 12 violent incidents last year of which 4 were NRL, 3 Cricket, 2 rugby union, 2 AFL and only 1 ‘soccer’

Somebody is selling their story well and it isnt the FFA.

Cheers, Philip

I can’t believe your comments Dean or others that say the media would just misrepresent you. It’s rubbish but I’m not hear to teach you Marketing 101.

Gallup and de Bohun actually said Wilson was right when they said we defend our stance in banning people …they may as well have added ‘from our violent game’.

Wilson framed the agenda and FFA walked right into it.

FFA should have repositioned the whole story. But that is Marketing 201.

I think you are wrong Waz. It is possible to take on a hostile media and frame the agenda and a good marketing/PR person could have avoided all this mess and got a positive message out.

Saying nothing let’s the masses believe that the negative press is true. The numbers of people who say to me that I must be mad going to the football with all the violence every week is depressing. They think the chanting of the supporters is baying for blood and they are about to invade the pitch!!! That is what Wilson et al do to the game and its not hard to address that if FFA got their act together.

John, a nice article and your last line is quite correct although comparisons with Asia don’t really tell us much as we should be held to account by our own standards and not the standards of others.

In all this recent fracas the overwhelming issue is this – Football fans are tired of being treated as second class citizens by the mainstream media and then suffering the double indignity of a federation that doesn’t stand up for them.

I have been in communication with the FFA and received a reply to my concerns that read in part, ”(our) ability to shape public commentary is constrained.” This comment is blatant nonsense. The FFA should get on the front foot instead of responding to media reports … it is the back-foot/reactive nature of the FFA that makes it believe it’s ‘’ability to shape public commentary is constrained’’.

It should be setting the agenda! It should wack anybody who denigrates the game and all it’s stakeholders. Any decent marketing person could tell the FFA how to do it – the FFA is a brand with an image problem. Every brand leader sets the agenda for the category and doesn’t get bullied by the ‘opposition’ – that is marketing 101.

This is why fans are disgruntled. We want LEADERSHIP and SUPPORT (even if they make an odd mistake here and there). And the FFA need to address it.

Cheers,

Good piece Emma.

I fully support the RBB, NT, Cove and other for taking a stand. Some in the media have said this is about trying to get the bans against the 198 rescinded and it has nothing to do with that at all. It’s about the principle of the core body supporting it’s entire supporter base, condemning those who denigrate our game, having robust privacy policies and investing breaches of policy, and having fair and transparent dealings with all it’s stakeholders.

The FFA again have played into the media hands and missed the point entirely by defending their ‘robust’ banning policy against the 198. It was never the supporters concern about the 198 people per se – no doubt most of the 198 are guilty. Great. The point was simple – the FFA were the ones who set themselves up as judge and jury (they should have left it to Stadium Management to issue banning oredrs) and if FFA want to be judge and jury on these matters then invite the accused to the review, show them the evidence and give them a chance to refute it. Most wont be able to and they will be banned. Fair enough. Some will say it wasn’t me and the evidence will be challenged and and weighed up and they will not be banned. Nice and easy process. The supporters are absolutely with their rights to demand this. I would demand this if I received a banning notice.

Imagine suspending a player for 1 year, with no hearing for the player to attend and saying that the player cant see the evidence that was used to find them guilty and they have to prove their innocence?! It’s ridiculous. The evidence against a fan could be as weak as a grumpy security person making a statement. We’ll never know. When the FFA say that you cant see what evidence they have it might as well say we have no evidence at all – because maybe it has none? Who knows!

The other big points are the failure of the FFA to respect the rights and privacy of those who attend matches. Banned or not. The info held by the FFA is confidential. They should have immediately condemned the press for (a) the leak – and demanded answers as to how a leak happened, and (b) for another totally bias and inaccurate portrayal of Football Supporters in general.

I’m 56 and my dear old parents and many non-football going friends think I am incredibly brave and they wonder how I can go to football matches that are so dangerous with riots every week and spectator trouble! They now misinterpret the FANTASTIC supporter groups chanting for the team as a bunch of thugs baying for blood and about to storm the pitch at any moment !! They cant believe me when I say there was no trouble and plenty of families with kids go and sit in the stands.

That warped perception is the problem we have (it’s not helped by the FFA’s comments about banning as many people as they can) and that is why I completely disagree with those who say we should ignore the bad press. We must fight it.

The main concern I have is, what is the end game for FFA and for the generally uncoordinated supporter groups. This week the FFA have proved useless in their press releases and commentary. There is no reason to hope that will change – BUT IT MUST. The supporters have legitimate demands but they cant keep boycotting without hurting the game we love.

My solution would be for the FFA to issue full page press releases in all the noisy newspapers saying that they 100% back the supporter groups of the clubs (don’t mention the banned ones or talk small percentages, just stop buying into that argument). The FFA to say the have some policy issues that they will address and will correct. For the FFA to say that some press have an agenda but the FFA and Supporter groups are united in making football the best spectacle possible (and mean it!). If FFA really did their job properly the support groups would be party to the release, they would thank the FFA for promising progress and they would call on all sports supporters to come out and see the best of all football codes when the RBB, the Cove, the NT, South End and other groups get behind our teams on the weekend, because WE ARE FOOTBALL.

All it takes is someone to negotiate a ‘peace’ between the parties and get back to what we love … Bozza where are you?

TK, it is the FFA who decide on the banning orders and they are the only ones who initially know who all the people are. The information is confidential to them. If they pass it on it it their responsibility to ensure that it is provided only to others on a need-to-know basis and the other people they give it to should also treat it with the same confidentiality. If it leaked from FFA HQ or from somewhere else it is FFA’s responsibility to find out how and why this occurred and to take action against those responsible.

Kaks and AZ-RBB,

I think you are 100% right. As i wrote in my piece today, this has nothing to do really with Wilson, Jones or those ‘supporters’ guilty of offences and correctly banned. The argument is with the FFA failing to stand up for football and ALL football fans.

I hope the others here and at the games get that message. No-one supports law breaking but even football fans have civil rights – one of which is to be able to appeal against a sanction against you – another of which is to protect confidential information. The FFA have let down all football fans with their silence on the matter.

Philip

Thanks Uncle for your comments.

Beg to differ on one point though. The FFA (de Bohun) did respond with a short sentence “FFA … have strong banning processes …. showing we take the safety of our true fans seriously,” ie, yes Rebecca you are right!

At the very least it should have said yes we ban people if we think they are unruly, but the piece is highly provocative, does not state the facts as to the reasons why these people were banned, and it appears that we at FFA have an integrity issue with the release of this sensitive information which will be address immediately to ensure that all fans can have trust in our processes.

It was a gutless and weak response by de Biohun who did not stand up for the A-League or the FFA.

Cheers, P

What Rebecca Wilson drugs are you taking….. ”the typical brawl in the stands” …. I’ve been to over 130 Melbourne Victory A-League matches, the largest attended matches by far, the team with the most ‘rivalries’, the team with historically the noisiest supporters and I have NEVER seen a ‘brawl in the stands’

Sure there are problems with some supporters, most A-league fans will admit that. I for one don’t like flares. And I’ve seen some aggression in and around grounds but not much worse that the AFL.

The problem is not that the A-league or fans wont acknowledge the troublemakers, the problem is the constant bias reporting. Lets name and shame on the front page the several hundreds of racegoer evicted and arrested at the Melbourne Cup Carnivals over the past 11 years. Lets call them all alcoholics and violent drunks. Let’s shame Racing Victoria for doing nothing about this constant threat to society, year-in and year-out, and for cultivating a drunken anti-social atmosphere at its venues. It’s ridiculous and yet football supporters have to put up with this same sh%£ trotted out time and again by the mainstream press.

I take your point Bondy and I agree the Kantarovski incident ‘looked’ far worse than Smeltz’s and would have looked absolutely horrible if he had connected – talk about world wide exposure for the A-League, we would have got it!

But Smeltz caused real injury by his actions and he knew full well that leaving a foot in would contact the goal keeper – I’m not saying he meant the damage he caused – but he would have been expecting contact and expecting to cause the goal keeper some discomfort. AND he has prior form having done it before causing injury to a goal keeper. So I rate them as equal.

And for anyone who says Smetz’s contact was accidental and occurred in a split moment – you are either conning yourselves or you have never played the game. When you are going for any ball you have choices;
* just take the ball as cleanly as you can, or,
* try and clip the opposition player in the process, or jump into his back, just make sure they know you are there, even at the expense of a free kick, but never to injure, [defenders do it all the time to forwards and sometimes vice versa], or,
* completely pull out of a potential collision, or,
* pursue the ball, or pretend to pursue the ball, in a dangerous manner expecting contact and without real regard for the outcome.

All players make decisions consciously in tiny fractions of a second. It’s part of being a professional player. Smeltz chose the last option which is the most unforgivable.

NUFCMVFC, you have no need to worry about your comment ‘if the financial gain (at AAMI) being lower than a lower ticket price sellout at the rent neutral ABD system it will naturally raise questions.’

Hume holds only 5000 people. Assume and average ticket at $35 = $175,000. It may be nominally rent neutral but there is cost of security and associated event costs.

AAMI should attract at least 10,000-12,000. Using the lower crowd figure at $35 that’s $350,000. I doubt if the rental cost would chew up the additional $175,000 that they can expect from ticket sales.

Hume would have crunched their numbers. Either game will be a major financially windfall but AAMI is bound to be better.

I’d also like to comment on the opening line of Mike Cockerill’s piece, ‘Everyone knows what the “magic” of the Cup really means.’ Clearly we don’t all know at all Mike because I for one disagree with the sentiments in his article.

Is there more ‘magic’ in watching say Luton Town play Liverpool at Kenilworth Road in front of 10,356 in an FA Cup fixture or watching the same two teams in front of 80,000-90,000 at Wembley Stadium in the final. I’d choose the latter for my “magic” of what the cup really means. It’s slaying the giants that counts and if you can do it in a bigger venue, on a bigger stage, then all the better.

So, let’s bring it closer to home and the Hume FC vs MVFC match.

Hume FC home ground has a maximum capacity is 5,000 and I’d guess their average home game attendance is at very best 2,000-2,500 (they don’t publish stats). The players usually play in front of a small crowd, with very basic facilities for the players, the ground surface may be ok but it wouldn’t be AAMI standard.

On Wed 28th the players get to take on the current A-League Premiers and Champions in an FFA cup semi-final. This will be the biggest game in their lives! For a rusted on Hume FC supporter it may be the biggest game they’ll ever get to watch. Their choices are:
• Play at home in front of a maximum 5,000 – the regular fans probably outnumbered by MVFC fans – on an ok pitch in familiar surroundings – is there some magic in that? Maybe.
• Play at Heidelburg FC’s ground on an ok pitch in front of 10,000-12,000 – there is no home game advantage – it’s the same familiar facilities for players – I’ve played here before – there will be a bigger crowd but Hume fans will definitely be outnumbered by MVFC fans – is there some magic in that? None at all for me.
• Play on a perfect AAMI park – bright lights – great facilities for players – it’s all new and exciting – in front of say 10,000-13,000 people – a once in a lifetime opportunity for me as a player – is there some magic in that? Yes please!

I don’t know about you, but if I was a player, or a spectator who closely follows Hume FC, I would choose the magic of a trip to AAMI over the other options without any hesitation at all.

I wrote on the Roar in an an article last week that the MRP system was broken and the members should be the ones adjudicating on critical decisions in the game. My hypothesis was that we know what we want to see on the football field.

Despite some extreme polarization on the replies here, the weight of opinion from supporters of various clubs is that Smeltz should have been sanctioned – and for the record I agree – he left a foot dangling in an area where he knew full well that the ball was beyond him and dangerous contact with the goalkeeper was likely – he failed in a duty of care to another player (and not for the first time).

Kantarovsky should also have been banned for several weeks for that attempt to break another players leg but a yellow card meant he couldn’t be sanctioned further – it’s plain ridiculous and the members know it!

So there you have it. In round 2, just one week after I commented, we have the FFA/MRP dishing up an outcome totally at odds with what the majority of the public think and want. More than half the A-League members would be feeling that the game has been let down once again by the administrators in two significant incidents – a major injury to a goalkeeper and a tackle that would have broken a players leg had the flying, double footed, studs up challenge, been only centimeters from where the players actually landed.

It isn’t good enough and the FFA need to fix it.

I’m not big on the PFA and have written articles condemning their recent behavior. But I’d like to ask Mr Vivian where are you on all this? Why haven’t you come out and spoken in defence of your Mission to’ support the players and build the game’? Birighittti and the lucky Sydney player whom Kantarovski missed are the ones you should be supporting – they were playing football, while condemning Shmeltz and Kantarovski who by their actions tarnished the game on the weekend and certainly didnt ‘build it’. You’d have a case this time for saying that the FFA through their inadequate rules, should charge themselves with bringing the game into disrepute. For once I’d agree with you.

See comment to Kaks below

Up until 2005 scientists would tell you that there was no logical explanation as to how bees could manage to fly … but they did!

I know that to become a ‘guru’ on the Roar only requires you to submit lots of articles and comments – it says nothing of your education or social status or anything else… if you are a football guru though, it does tell me that you have a real interest in the game, you read, you watch, you comment, no doubt you argue with your mates about it. I also know that the people who post here are probably at the extreme of football enthusiasts and very bias toward their team so ‘we’ are a skewed sample of all members. Not every football fan is a Horto Magiko or a Fussball ist unser leben (and I say that with the greatest of respect to both 🙂 ).

However, I put it to you that if you put 100 randomly chosen roar football gurus in a room and showed them footage of any A-League incident that went to the MRP (or didn’t go) in the last 10 years and asked them to vote on whether it was a dive, a penalty, a red, whatever … i’ll bet my house that you would get a better, more balanced and more consistent answer than what has been delivered by the current MRP system.

The current system gave us Danny Vukovic getting 15 month for ‘striking’ Mark Shields on the hand (more like a high five than a strike) while Joel Griffiths got nothing for smacking a linesman in the nuts. Go figure! And we’ve had no end of divers punished and un-punished.

In a big enough sample, the gross biases that answered only on emotion one way or the other would cancel out and the considered opinion of the rest of the group would win the argument more often than not.