Waz wasn’t saying that moving the Mariners would be a good idea.
He is suggesting that with the APL one-third controlled by a foreign venture capitalist, who also happens to be aligned with the powerful CFG, together they have the wherewithal to do almost anything, and they won’t necessarily have the good of Australian football in mind.

The numbers I saw this year had Fox/Kayo/Binge subscriptions at well over 5 million.
I seriously doubt Paramount is anywhere near that number.
I’d be flabbergasted if they’ve even managed to reach 1 million subscriptions.
When viewed from that perspective, well, choosing Paramount over Foxtel sort of is the problem.

Parra will probably get more in attendance than what melbourne would have got if it had been hosted there.

The article summarises the current situation reasonably well – the A-League is as invisible today, on the eve of a grand final no less, than it has ever been in its 19 year history.

This leads me to muse over a contradiction inherent in the article’s premise. There is a lament about the APL not listening to fans, but in truth, the fans are notorious for not knowing what they are talking about.

Take the Foxtel example. Mike is correct when he refers to A-League fans celebrating the A-League leaving Foxtel. I can remember the various posts and tweets I read on various forums:
– I smiled when she told me that a lot of people were unsubscribing to Foxtel
– Can’t wait to see Foxtel suffer as football fans leave it in droves
– Foxtel is for old people, all the young people will head across to Paramount
etc, etc

The truth? Fox/Kayo subscriptions are currently sitting at record levels and absolutely dwarf Paramount subscribers, and that situation ain’t about to change in a hurry.

And as far as ch 10 goes, they’re numbers have never come even close to some of the peaks SBS experienced back in the day.

In conclusion, why on Earth would the APL head honchos want to listen to fans…they have no idea!

This statement makes me proud to be a sports fan, well done to all the sports bodies involved.
It’s the right move.
It’s an absolutely tiny move. A tiny, tiny bit of recognition for indigenous Australians.
A tiny, tiny step towards reconciliation.
A tiny, tiny amount of respect.

Training facilities was just one aspect of what a “home of football” might be.
In one sense, you have encapsulated the key issue for me perfectly.
Can JJ go to government and say: look, the socceroos get together in Australia twice a year and need top quality facilities, how about spending $700 million on that.
Obviously that ain’t going to fly anywhere.
So a much stronger business case needs to be built round this “home of football” which would include:
– training facilities for all national teams
– a stadium which could accommodate internationals
– a stadium which will host both A-Leagues grand finals every year
– a stadium used for other FA initiatives such as the festival of football
– would be highly desireable that at least one A-League club is playing out of it as well.
The governing body needs to talk about use and content, about how it pays for itself, it ain’t gonna get a massive facility just so the socceroos can train there two times a year.
Also, as we saw in the Hobart example, the FA needs to convince two tiers of government to come to the party, perhaps to help rejuvenate a rundown part of Sydney, or similar (or make use of the almost abandoned AIS facility in Canberra).
It’s all about the business case – wishful thinking will not cut it.

The idea of a festival of football is a good one (to put it mildly, the execution has been somewhat lacking).
I offer you this perspective.
Arnie was asking about a “home” for football given the $700 million two layers of government are about to spend on an oval shaped stadium in Hobart. Big bickies.
The argument goes that football needs a home that can house big socceroos games, while also offering world class training facilities and also be a home for all the junior national teams.
Good vision.
But realistically, such a home, to be used by football alone, can only be built in one city, and the expenditure of, say, $700 million, can only be justified if there is regular content to help pay the bills.
One or two socceroo games per annum ain’t going to do it.
So that means: having a home that also hosts stacks more content, including the two A-Leagues grand finals, including the so-called festival of football – so in conclusion, the grand final must end up in one city, and in all likelihood, that city will end up being Sydney, or it might be Canberra if we end up taking over the AIS facility, and if the new Canberra team ends up using this new “home”.
If we want resources directed at football, the time has come to have just one strong voice, think long term, think smart, think of solutions that actually pay for themselves, think nationally, and to stop thinking about your little backyard.

100,000 on a secondary station is very good.
AFL has been getting poor ratings this year.

The success of the Mariners, especially their hosting of a final the other night, is a reminder to us all that NSW is indeed the home of football in this country.
When we expand to 14 teams in the near future, it’s pretty clear to me now, crystal clear, that the APL will aim for the inclusion of Canberra and Wollongong, and that will strengthen the A-League as a whole because we would then have 7 clubs within easy driving distance of Sydney.
That’s the future for the league, and with half the clubs within a couple of hours of South Sydney, the grand final will be played in Sydney in perpetuity.
The APL were correct in the decision they made.

Looking at the full house in Gosford yesterday, I’m thinking the very first grand final to be played in Sydney, not featuring a Sydney club, will actually be a great success.

A few rounds before the end of the regular season I said it will be a City v Mariners grand final, and nothing has happened since to make me change my mind.

Those AFL TV ratings look rather poor.
Certainly nowhere near enough to justify a $4.5 billion deal.
Some TV execs are going to lose their job over this.

From his earliest games he has shown he is a talent.

socceroos to absolutely cruise through this group

It’s good to hear from a neutral supporter writing about both big Winter codes.
I have to admit, to my eyes at least, I’m not sure a strong case has been made (that the AFL is miles ahead of the NRL).
Having said that, the carry ons of the current NRL Chairman does occasionally border on farce.

If a nation can claim a player if they had at least one grand-parent born overseas, I reckon Italy and Croatia might do all right.

Very good point FF

The positive is that this season put an end to 8 consecutive dips in average attendances.
It’s pretty clear that from hereon in, the A-League Mens will have to survive on average attendances of around 8k long term, with occasional nips at an average 9k season.
Is that enough?
Well, it sort of it is, as long as the owners are happy to fund around $2 million per annum out of their own pocket, the current situation can keep going forever.

It’s certainly true that both Victory and City lobbied for the inclusion of WU ahead of the other bids, and it’s pretty obvious why.
Just for starters, we can already see City staking out the SE for themselves, so little wonder they objected to the Team 11 bid.
As for South Melbourne, how embarrassing would it have been for the global city group to have a little former NSL club match them in attendance numbers in their very first season?
As for Victory, the outer Western suburbs was the one spot in greater Melbourne where they didn’t have massive membership numbers, so were very happy to give that over (and the rest is history).

Quite clearly, I’m not talking about buying a club in the top tier.
A bit like the Wrexham story, in the case of Catania, you’re talking about a club that you can see rise through the tiers, being the 10th largest city in Italy, the Serie B is well within reach, and even the Serie A is achievable.
That’s a very satisfying ride for an owner.
But you can’t do that in Australia (presently).

A club like Catania, having dropped to Serie D (a quasi amateur regional level of competition), would have made a very tempting target. The club has had 2 or 3 stints in the Serie A over a 60 year period, indeed, only 10 years ago it had completed a run of 5 consecutive seasons in the Serie A and there were some decent seasons amongst that.
The thing about buying a club like that, in the doldrums, is that it comes at a relatively cheap price and your ambitions of rising up the tiers of Italian football are achievable (whereas in the Australian context, it’s currently an impossibility, at least to rise to the top tier).
Also, I’m not sure it’s correct to call Catania a small city, it’s actually the 10th largest city in Italy by population.

An amazing effort by Napoli.
33 years since the last title with Maradona, how time flies.
Also worth remembering that around 15 yeaars ago, Napoli was dropped to the Serie C (from yet another scandal the frequents the Serie A).
It’s been a gradual come back to reach this point.
That’s football (but unfortunately, we don’t see enough of it nel calcio moderno).

Rugby League in NSW has survived off pokies for decades now, so in reality, wagering and league are inseparable.

Mid
We’ve already experienced multiple governance and ownership changes across the last 5 or so years, so it seems to me that now that the clubs own and control everything (along with two non-club foreign investors) – what are the chances that they will give that control up?
I know you have a good understanding of the world of commerce.
You must know that there is virtually zero chance of them giving it up (unless the whole thing goes into liquidation).

As the article rightly states, 35.3% of the APL is now owned by non-club foreign corporations, so you’d have to think that the odds of the APL being handed back to the FA to manage are effectively zero.
Because we had at least 2 years of COVID interrupted years, it’s very difficult to conclude wither the APL structure is working or not. We can say that the A-League had already experienced about 5 years of declining attendances by the time the APL took over fully.
The jury is out on whether the current TV deal is working, but then again, no else was bidding and beggars can’t be choosers.
When it’s all said and done, why do these sorts of articles keep appearing as if there is something wrong. What exactly is wrong? What are we judging it against?
Yes, the club owners have lost about $400 million over the course of 18 seasons (approx $2 million per club per annum). If club owners are willing to wear that, is that actually an issue? The majority of professional leagues across the globe run on the smell of an oily rag, so why would anyone think that it should be different in Australia?

Redondo
I count 10 European leagues with average attendances over 10,000, and some of those have about one third the population of Australia (including Belgium by the way). Denmark has a tiny population and manages to get 6000 to games. Croatia’s population is even smaller.
There are also at least 5 leagues whose 2nd tier average over 10,000 in attendances.
Anyway, you are partly correct – it’s not an issue as long as clubs have wealthy benefactors who don’t mind subsidising the A-League clubs by around $2 million per annum.