Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nnnnnathan12

The Matilda's, Australian Woman's national football team

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, btron3000 said:

Though this part:

"It is understood the board and its new chairman, Chris Nikou, remained sure their decision to terminate the contract of Stajcic was the correct one for the Matildas but were dismayed they were forced to act in such a manner and so abruptly. Sources suggest the board believes many of the issues around the team's culture should have been flagged much earlier and rectified well before ending in the catastrophic events that tarnished the FFA's brand and damaged the image of Stajcic.

suggests the Board - who it seems ultimately made the call - are innocent of any wrongdoing. LOL 

Also suggests that the Board is passing the buck. Gallop will be the fall guy here, but surely, there were others at play. We actually know that there was. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Join WestSydneyFootball.Com and participate by registering an account.

9 minutes ago, Wanderboy said:

Also suggests that the Board is passing the buck. Gallop will be the fall guy here, but surely, there were others at play. We actually know that there was. 

For sure.

For one, Gallop never acts quickly on anything unless he has been told to e.g. the sacking of Osiek. It's just not his style to go rushing into things.

Second, no Board is "forced" to do anything. They got the results in December, and he was sacked a month later. That is plenty of time to get an understanding as to what happened, who knew, etc. etc., which is what they say the review is for. They are just covering their arses because it's blown up.

If Gallop withheld info from them until January, they should have taken their time and asked the right questions then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Taurus said:

I always hate to admit it when it happens, but now and again, Alan Jones does nail it.

I hope he pursues this....in his usual terrier-like style...and makes a difference.

There seems to be a real turning in momentum towards AS at the moment....which I hope does see him achieve justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, btron3000 said:

For sure.

For one, Gallop never acts quickly on anything unless he has been told to e.g. the sacking of Osiek. It's just not his style to go rushing into things.

Second, no Board is "forced" to do anything. They got the results in December, and he was sacked a month later. That is plenty of time to get an understanding as to what happened, who knew, etc. etc., which is what they say the review is for. They are just covering their arses because it's blown up.

If Gallop withheld info from them until January, they should have taken their time and asked the right questions then.

The biggest problem for me is that Gallop has overseen disaster after disaster. It started in the NRL when he was reactionary to every single problem the game suffered during his regime.

He brought the same reactionary culture to football. The best example was the active support protests and walk outs after the inflammatory Rebecca Wilson articles in News Limited, of whom he was once a legal employee. The banned fans that he promised to right the wrongs. lol. He knew it was brewing, yet did nothing about it until fans started leaving stadiums. Then, he promised the world, and still did nothing.

The guy is a complete fraud. He has no understanding of football culture, and in fact, throughout his regime, he has unwittingly done everything to destroy it. Not for one second, ever, has he actually grown some nuts and stood up for football in this country.

I seriously cannot wait to see him turfed out on his arse, WITHOUT A PAYOUT!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Wanderboy said:

The biggest problem for me is that Gallop has overseen disaster after disaster. It started in the NRL when he was reactionary to every single problem the game suffered during his regime.

He brought the same reactionary culture to football. The best example was the active support protests and walk outs after the inflammatory Rebecca Wilson articles in News Limited, of whom he was once a legal employee. The banned fans that he promised to right the wrongs. lol. He knew it was brewing, yet did nothing about it until fans started leaving stadiums. Then, he promised the world, and still did nothing.

The guy is a complete fraud. He has no understanding of football culture, and in fact, throughout his regime, he has unwittingly done everything to destroy it. Not for one second, ever, has he actually grown some nuts and stood up for football in this country.

I seriously cannot wait to see him turfed out on his arse, WITHOUT A PAYOUT!

 

100%.  And he was only appointed CEO of the NRL because he was a Newscorp stooge and the ARL and Superleague were compromising. The ARL thought they were getting their game back, but they had to accept Gallop as CEO in the deal.

5 minutes ago, Cynth said:

Absolutely. David Gallop is no good for our game. He never has been. And this debacle with Stajic is just the straw that breaks the camels back. 

The banned fans saga should have been the last straw. I mean, it took Bozza to tell him that he should talk to the fans! hahahaha "Mate, you better go talk to your main stakeholders, without them you haven't got a game".

This is what you get when you employ puppets. Uncy Fwank didn't like it when big bad John O'Neill didn't agree with him, so first he got Ben Buckley, and now Gallop. Both absolute flatliners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wanderboy said:

Also suggests that the Board is passing the buck. Gallop will be the fall guy here, but surely, there were others at play. We actually know that there was. 

This is where I'm not sure how much of the Board was involved and is passing the buck. It wouldn't surprise me if the Stajcic drama was led by a few key individuals and the others just went along with it or believed what they said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how Gallop would go in a wide ranging survey of people involved in football, with limited responses from the people he actually works with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Taurus said:

Yeah, in the current climate I don't know whether getting Alan Jones in your corner is a positive thing !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cynth said:

Absolutely. David Gallop is no good for our game. He never has been. And this debacle with Stajic is just the straw that breaks the camels back. 

There's already a herd of camels with broken backs! Hopefully now a major cause will be removed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's weird agreeing with Alan Jones...

Also I can tell I'm not in his target demographic when I have to listen to an ad about dentures before the interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Davo said:

It's weird agreeing with Alan Jones...

Also I can tell I'm not in his target demographic when I have to listen to an ad about dentures before the interview.

Or West End Mazda. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Davo said:

It's weird agreeing with Alan Jones...

 Also I can tell I'm not in his target demographic when I have to listen to an ad about dentures before the interview.

Can’t help but feel a little dirty clicking on the link. I got one about arthritis, do they know something I don’t :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Paul01 said:

Or West End Mazda. 

Hey! No mocking Mazda’s, my old one is falling apart, maybe that was meant for me :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Prydzopolis said:

Hey! No mocking Mazda’s, my old one is falling apart, maybe that was meant for me :lol:

Changed from Mazda to Honda but not because of the Parrot😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I can fill in some gaps, I have been following this pretty intensely over the past few weeks.

It is just incredible the fallout, I’m really glad that we just didn’t sweep this under the carpet. A few factors make this worse: The new FFA board promised transparency, this saga & handling is the complete opposite of what was promised; The #sokkahtwitter community has been holding them to account; the back room politics that plauged the previous board, one we thought was put to bed has now reared its ugly head. Frank & Steven would be having a good laugh right now; there are some things within the dressing room that would be very damaging if they got out; In regards to the handling, how they thought if they put out a vague explanation that it would all disappear. In fact, I’d argue that this is what they were hoping would happen till they had to stop the rot.

In regards to legal action & the FFA. Stajicic had a clause in his contract that allowed him to be sacked without cause. The FFA have every right to exercise the clause. They have also tried to hide releasing reasons under the guise of confidentiality but I don’t buy it, can’t understand why they can’t de-indentify events or give examples where identities would be hidden. I guess they hoped that this would disappear but have completely misread the football community. The issue of defamation I think is from certain people behind the scenes who have said some damaging things “if you knew what I knew”, “he’ll never coach in women’s football again”

One of the main reasons behind his sacking was the two surveys undertaken by the PFA & Our Watch. In regards to PFA, the PFA highlighted areas that could be improved but nothing that could be considered a sackable offense. The next interesting factor is The Who, what, where, when, how, why around the Our Watch survey. The fact they’ve used an organization that focuses on abuse & violence to women is a baffling, it implies something much worse at play. There is much to come out about this & is much about the politiking behind the scenes. Another interesting fact around these surveys was Our Watch was aimed towards the whole of the FFA organization not just the Matilda’s. These surveys were not password protected and passed to people outside its target (partners, friends & family), who filled out what & who said what is difficult to determine.

The way that the language changed from the FFA. First it was the surveys, then it was the surveys that led to the FFA doing interviews & other factors. Just Monday, the FFA referred to on field performances. Just interesting how the narrative is changing.

On the reasons behind the sacking & the complete silence on its explanation has been baffling. Much of the reasons around toxic culture have come from leaks to the media but have related to the support staff in the regards to casual homophobic remarks, fat shaming & work loads. None of these allegations were aimed at Stajicic but it seemed like the board felt that cutting off the head of the snake was the best course of action. Funnily enough, most of these allegations have been refuted by Stajcic.

The baffling aspect to all this was that this toxic culture & “a deteriorating situation” that was happening whilst being completely oblivious to the FFA management. The head of women’s football who attends the camps & games didn’t flag anything. Luke Casserly, Head of all the Australian national teams didn’t notice anything. David Gallop who Stajcic reports to didn’t flag anything. In fact he mentioned in passing to Stajcic, the new board is good for me but bad for you. Interestingly enough, the board still feels the decision was right & doesn’t intend to reinstate him. This tells me that certain people were blindsided (the board) who felt they had no option but to act & others who were used as a puppet but blindsided nonetheless (Gallop).

In regards to those in the know, it goes for both sides. Bonita approached the situation with no fear & wasn’t afraid of exposing this sham. In fact she was threatened via lawyers by a board of director to stop, it’s good to know that she has been at this a long time & knows good lawyers :lol:. She mentioned that certain individuals in the media were briefed on the situation by a director. In the following paragraph she mentioned 4 journalists who came out in support of the sacking **** (if only you knew). They all mentioned that they had covered the women’s game for a long time & they had heard concerning whispers. Since these first few days, they have either gone very quiet or tried to be very neutral on the subject, careful not to fall on any side.

On the dressing room, from the outside it looks like they are United. On the inside it’s a different picture (I’m lead to believe). There are some damaging things (that have been said online) that has yet to leak into the mainstream media. From some of the comments I’ve seen in regards to the “lesbian mafia” it would be really bad if it all comes out.

The Stajcic press conference & interviews have been all the more damaging. Incredibly sad, raw emotions & presented it in a way that was by far done in a classy manner unlike the the rolling PR disaster in the way that the FFA have handled things.

Last night reports emerged that the board had decided to act. They are undertaking an inquiry to find out how this happened & to make sure it doesn’t happen again. All the key management personnel will have there positions reviewed & will come under close review. Gallop might be moved along in the guise of a restructure once the A-League is made independent. Another positive, they will be looking at the factors around the Our Watch survey which raises some very interesting questions yet to be answered. Not independent, but better than what they’ve offered up thus far.

PS One further point I’ve missed out is that the FFA have been furiously calling all manner of people on twitter, media, Matilda players & parents. The calls to the players are those most of concern, especially threatening the future participation in the national team’s. Just imagine that you’ve resorted to calling twitter users to stop the truth from coming out. Incredible.

**** A point for the masters of English & teachers in this class room. I felt the separation of the two sentences by a paragraph meant that they should be two separate sentences viewed in isolation. Many interpreted that the 4 journalists were the ones that were briefed, I interpreted that as certain journalists were briefed (not the 4 mentioned in the next paragraph). Funnily enough 3/4 journalists refuted the statement, Bonita said she never said they were the ones that were briefed. I am being a bit picky here but I can understand the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Prydzopolis said:

Perhaps I can fill in some gaps, I have been following this pretty intensely over the past few weeks.

It is just incredible the fallout, I’m really glad that we just didn’t sweep this under the carpet. A few factors make this worse: The new FFA board promised transparency, this saga & handling is the complete opposite of what was promised; The #sokkahtwitter community has been holding them to account; the back room politics that plauged the previous board, one we thought was put to bed has now reared its ugly head. Frank & Steven would be having a good laugh right now; there are some things within the dressing room that would be very damaging if they got out; In regards to the handling, how they thought if they put out a vague explanation that it would all disappear. In fact, I’d argue that this is what they were hoping would happen till they had to stop the rot.

In regards to legal action & the FFA. Stajicic had a clause in his contract that allowed him to be sacked without cause. The FFA have every right to exercise the clause. They have also tried to hide releasing reasons under the guise of confidentiality but I don’t buy it, can’t understand why they can’t de-indentify events or give examples where identities would be hidden. I guess they hoped that this would disappear but have completely misread the football community. The issue of defamation I think is from certain people behind the scenes who have said some damaging things “if you knew what I knew”, “he’ll never coach in women’s football again”

One of the main reasons behind his sacking was the two surveys undertaken by the PFA & Our Watch. In regards to PFA, the PFA highlighted areas that could be improved but nothing that could be considered a sackable offense. The next interesting factor is The Who, what, where, when, how, why around the Our Watch survey. The fact they’ve used an organization that focuses on abuse & violence to women is a baffling, it implies something much worse at play. There is much to come out about this & is much about the politiking behind the scenes. Another interesting fact around these surveys was Our Watch was aimed towards the whole of the FFA organization not just the Matilda’s. These surveys were not password protected and passed to people outside its target (partners, friends & family), who filled out what & who said what is difficult to determine.

The way that the language changed from the FFA. First it was the surveys, then it was the surveys that led to the FFA doing interviews & other factors. Just Monday, the FFA referred to on field performances. Just interesting how the narrative is changing.

On the reasons behind the sacking & the complete silence on its explanation has been baffling. Much of the reasons around toxic culture have come from leaks to the media but have related to the support staff in the regards to casual homophobic remarks, fat shaming & work loads. None of these allegations were aimed at Stajicic but it seemed like the board felt that cutting off the head of the snake was the best course of action. Funnily enough, most of these allegations have been refuted by Stajcic.

The baffling aspect to all this was that this toxic culture & “a deteriorating situation” that was happening whilst being completely oblivious to the FFA management. The head of women’s football who attends the camps & games didn’t flag anything. Luke Casserly, Head of all the Australian national teams didn’t notice anything. David Gallop who Stajcic reports to didn’t flag anything. In fact he mentioned in passing to Stajcic, the new board is good for me but bad for you. Interestingly enough, the board still feels the decision was right & doesn’t intend to reinstate him. This tells me that certain people were blindsided (the board) who felt they had no option but to act & others who were used as a puppet but blindsided nonetheless (Gallop).

In regards to those in the know, it goes for both sides. Bonita approached the situation with no fear & wasn’t afraid of exposing this sham. In fact she was threatened via lawyers by a board of director to stop, it’s good to know that she has been at this a long time & knows good lawyers :lol:. She mentioned that certain individuals in the media were briefed on the situation by a director. In the following paragraph she mentioned 4 journalists who came out in support of the sacking **** (if only you knew). They all mentioned that they had covered the women’s game for a long time & they had heard concerning whispers. Since these first few days, they have either gone very quiet or tried to be very neutral on the subject, careful not to fall on any side.

On the dressing room, from the outside it looks like they are United. On the inside it’s a different picture (I’m lead to believe). There are some damaging things (that have been said online) that has yet to leak into the mainstream media. From some of the comments I’ve seen in regards to the “lesbian mafia” it would be really bad if it all comes out.

The Stajcic press conference & interviews have been all the more damaging. Incredibly sad, raw emotions & presented it in a way that was by far done in a classy manner unlike the the rolling PR disaster in the way that the FFA have handled things.

Last night reports emerged that the board had decided to act. They are undertaking an inquiry to find out how this happened & to make sure it doesn’t happen again. All the key management personnel will have there positions reviewed & will come under close review. Gallop might be moved along in the guise of a restructure once the A-League is made independent. Another positive, they will be looking at the factors around the Our Watch survey which raises some very interesting questions yet to be answered. Not independent, but better than what they’ve offered up thus far.

**** A point for the masters of English & teachers in this class room. I felt the separation of the two sentences by a paragraph meant that they should be two separate sentences viewed in isolation. Many interpreted that the 4 journalists were the ones that were briefed, I interpreted that as certain journalists were briefed (not the 4 mentioned in the next paragraph). Funnily enough 3/4 journalists refuted the statement, Bonita said she never said they were the ones that were briefed. I am being a bit picky here but I can understand the confusion.

While I agree with most of what you say a mate of mine is a Matilda's physio and attends all Matilda camps home and away.  The term 'fat shaming' was brought up once in a light hearted manner by a player when getting skin folds done (the player who was being tested), the reason it was definitely brought up in a light hearted manner is because the player in question had good skin fold results at the time.  There are cliques in the group no doubt, like there is in any team but they were not based on sexuality, that is absurd, there was a younger group, there was an older group, there was a Sydney group, a Melbourne group, an many filtered in between all of those groups and still do.  This is no different to most National sporting teams on the planet.   The ill famed Our Watch survey was organised by Heather Reid (and Nikou who coincidentally got on the Board only due to Reid in the first place so they vote together).  Reid detests Stajic and always has done due to some non selection of Canberra players as well as wanting a different (female) Coach, like she has done at Football Canberra when she was there as well.  Now Natasha Stott Despoja is the Chair of Our Watch and recently was appointed on the FFA Womens World Cup 2023 Bid committee as well, you think still it is a coincidence that Our watch were chosen? Now go look at what Our Watch do? Look at what Staj did to get the best from his players? He trained them into the ground, he got them for 11 weeks every year and turned them from part timers into full timers, you think he didn't crack some eggs along the way? you think he didnt upset some parents? players?  FFA went gung ho and fired him and expected no repercussions, especially during an Asian Cup campaign, Nikou and Reid instigated it, Rosmarin, Murray and Carozzi all come from Business backgrounds where HR play major roles so they don't understand pushing girls to their absolute limits and Nogarotto well he is Nogarotto - while Gallop is copping the fallout here, he is not even to blame which is ironic as he is normally to blame for so much. 

Edited by scarcev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, scarcev said:

Now go look at what Our Watch do?

For starters thats very damning what you have just posted I am not going to further expand on that but I have mentioned our watch who I did think using them was very sus.

49 minutes ago, scarcev said:

while Gallop is copping the fallout here, he is not even to blame which is ironic as he is normally to blame for so much

Hate to say but I agree, Gallop is the scapegoat in all of this and was given the task by the board members to sack Stajcic, front the media about this but cannot explain why he had to be sacked. But Gallop to his detriment handled this very poorly after this and he has a poor history of handling 'scandals', but in this case, Gallop and FFA bought this onto themselves and they keep digging themselves deeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow this is all very interesting. Puts a very different spin on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been blaming Gallop as much as anyone else. But I posted this when it first blew up:

On 21/01/2019 at 10:15 PM, Edinburgh said:

The way it has been reported/announced it sounds more like a board decision rather than a Gallop decision 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, SBW said:

For starters thats very damning what you have just posted I am not going to further expand on that but I have mentioned our watch who I did think using them was very sus.

What is damning? I havent defamed anyone nor spread any lies, it is all truth and also readily accessible information if you want to seek it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Prydzopolis said:

Perhaps I can fill in some gaps, I have been following this pretty intensely over the past few weeks.

It is just incredible the fallout, I’m really glad that we just didn’t sweep this under the carpet. A few factors make this worse: The new FFA board promised transparency, this saga & handling is the complete opposite of what was promised; The #sokkahtwitter community has been holding them to account; the back room politics that plauged the previous board, one we thought was put to bed has now reared its ugly head. Frank & Steven would be having a good laugh right now; there are some things within the dressing room that would be very damaging if they got out; In regards to the handling, how they thought if they put out a vague explanation that it would all disappear. In fact, I’d argue that this is what they were hoping would happen till they had to stop the rot.

 In regards to legal action & the FFA. Stajicic had a clause in his contract that allowed him to be sacked without cause. The FFA have every right to exercise the clause. They have also tried to hide releasing reasons under the guise of confidentiality but I don’t buy it, can’t understand why they can’t de-indentify events or give examples where identities would be hidden. I guess they hoped that this would disappear but have completely misread the football community. The issue of defamation I think is from certain people behind the scenes who have said some damaging things “if you knew what I knew”, “he’ll never coach in women’s football again”

 One of the main reasons behind his sacking was the two surveys undertaken by the PFA & Our Watch. In regards to PFA, the PFA highlighted areas that could be improved but nothing that could be considered a sackable offense. The next interesting factor is The Who, what, where, when, how, why around the Our Watch survey. The fact they’ve used an organization that focuses on abuse & violence to women is a baffling, it implies something much worse at play. There is much to come out about this & is much about the politiking behind the scenes. Another interesting fact around these surveys was Our Watch was aimed towards the whole of the FFA organization not just the Matilda’s. These surveys were not password protected and passed to people outside its target (partners, friends & family), who filled out what & who said what is difficult to determine.

 The way that the language changed from the FFA. First it was the surveys, then it was the surveys that led to the FFA doing interviews & other factors. Just Monday, the FFA referred to on field performances. Just interesting how the narrative is changing.

 On the reasons behind the sacking & the complete silence on its explanation has been baffling. Much of the reasons around toxic culture have come from leaks to the media but have related to the support staff in the regards to casual homophobic remarks, fat shaming & work loads. None of these allegations were aimed at Stajicic but it seemed like the board felt that cutting off the head of the snake was the best course of action. Funnily enough, most of these allegations have been refuted by Stajcic.

 The baffling aspect to all this was that this toxic culture & “a deteriorating situation” that was happening whilst being completely oblivious to the FFA management. The head of women’s football who attends the camps & games didn’t flag anything. Luke Casserly, Head of all the Australian national teams didn’t notice anything. David Gallop who Stajcic reports to didn’t flag anything. In fact he mentioned in passing to Stajcic, the new board is good for me but bad for you. Interestingly enough, the board still feels the decision was right & doesn’t intend to reinstate him. This tells me that certain people were blindsided (the board) who felt they had no option but to act & others who were used as a puppet but blindsided nonetheless (Gallop).

 In regards to those in the know, it goes for both sides. Bonita approached the situation with no fear & wasn’t afraid of exposing this sham. In fact she was threatened via lawyers by a board of director to stop, it’s good to know that she has been at this a long time & knows good lawyers :lol:. She mentioned that certain individuals in the media were briefed on the situation by a director. In the following paragraph she mentioned 4 journalists who came out in support of the sacking **** (if only you knew). They all mentioned that they had covered the women’s game for a long time & they had heard concerning whispers. Since these first few days, they have either gone very quiet or tried to be very neutral on the subject, careful not to fall on any side.

 On the dressing room, from the outside it looks like they are United. On the inside it’s a different picture (I’m lead to believe). There are some damaging things (that have been said online) that has yet to leak into the mainstream media. From some of the comments I’ve seen in regards to the “lesbian mafia” it would be really bad if it all comes out.

 The Stajcic press conference & interviews have been all the more damaging. Incredibly sad, raw emotions & presented it in a way that was by far done in a classy manner unlike the the rolling PR disaster in the way that the FFA have handled things.

 Last night reports emerged that the board had decided to act. They are undertaking an inquiry to find out how this happened & to make sure it doesn’t happen again. All the key management personnel will have there positions reviewed & will come under close review. Gallop might be moved along in the guise of a restructure once the A-League is made independent. Another positive, they will be looking at the factors around the Our Watch survey which raises some very interesting questions yet to be answered. Not independent, but better than what they’ve offered up thus far.

 **** A point for the masters of English & teachers in this class room. I felt the separation of the two sentences by a paragraph meant that they should be two separate sentences viewed in isolation. Many interpreted that the 4 journalists were the ones that were briefed, I interpreted that as certain journalists were briefed (not the 4 mentioned in the next paragraph). Funnily enough 3/4 journalists refuted the statement, Bonita said she never said they were the ones that were briefed. I am being a bit picky here but I can understand the confusion.

Quality post.

I can't get away from it. I want this case to be properly investigated and hope we clear out most of the skeletons in the closet. We think it's a **** up post-Lowy, but these are teething problems if we want the system to be fixed in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scarcev said:

Long post

Re fat shaming. I only mentioned that it was an example given to his sacking, when in fact it had nothing to do with him. It was reported by Bossi as being different to the situation you highlighted, almost as if someone who wasn’t in on the joke took it the wrong way.

Re cliques: reported by Gatt that it isn’t as simple as the young old Sydney etc clique & a bit more persuasive too. I’m not in the know, just picking up on things I’ve read (that email I’ve read on social media).

Re cultural problems: The biggest issue you’ve mentioned is that a lot of these girls have gone from semi pro to professional within a year or so. You think that some of these girls play for two teams (W-League, America) plus national team. They get hardly no rest between seasons & play up to 70 games a season. That’s huge.

On top of that you still have got a lot of girls who are still semi pro (only 20+ Matilda’s on contract). I think the conditions in the national team are difficult for these girls, having a professional national environment would be difficult for these girls who have to hold a 9-5 job, juggling school, university, family, relationships & kids. I only suspect but I believe that it these group of girls that would have struggled and may be the ones who might have had the problems. You’d think that many of the older girls would thrive in an environment like this because of what they’ve gone & fought through up to this point. It is entirely different for the younger girls, different generation, different time & different pressures.

Re Politics: Gallop is the puppet but fell hook line and sinker for the politiking that lead to sacking. You would feel sorry for him if there weren’t so many high profile blunders attributed to his tenure. Nogarotto is nogarotto :lol: Reid, hey, some of the “alleged” stuff she has orchestrated behind the scenes & leaks made out to media are incredible. Don’t need cowboys or cowgirls on the board trying to implement there own agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Burztur said:

Quality post.

I can't get away from it. I want this case to be properly investigated and hope we clear out most of the skeletons in the closet. We think it's a **** up post-Lowy, but these are teething problems if we want the system to be fixed in the long run.

Just so you know, as sacrev has said it’s all out there on the internet in some form or the other. Seems like lots of people know information but are keeping things close to there chest. There seems like a lot more to come out of this saga. Just tried to fill some gaps in information that I have picked up on putting all the pieces together.

31 minutes ago, scarcev said:

What is damning? I havent defamed anyone nor spread any lies, it is all truth and also readily accessible information if you want to seek it out.

I think you just need to throw in some “alleged” or “I believe it to be the case” or “I have heard” to cover your arse :lol: I doubt anyone would bother tracking down you & threatening you to be quiet. Plenty of others on #sokkahtwitter, players/parents & in the media who have some explosive stuff have had threatening phone calls from the FFA demanding they stop talking. Incredible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scarev and Pryds, thanks for the insights! Couple of things:

8 hours ago, Prydzopolis said:

In regards to legal action & the FFA. Stajicic had a clause in his contract that allowed him to be sacked without cause. The FFA have every right to exercise the clause.

...

The way that the language changed from the FFA. First it was the surveys, then it was the surveys that led to the FFA doing interviews & other factors. Just Monday, the FFA referred to on field performances. Just interesting how the narrative is changing.

It's irrelevant what a clause in a contract says if the clause is illegal. For example, I can't give you a contract saying that you have to work 70 hours a week. Even if you agree to it and want the money, it's an illegal clause.

Many employment contracts have a clause that says something like "the company may terminate you for any reason by giving 3 months notice..." To you and me that means that they can sack someone with no cause - "any reason".  But to a lawyer, that means that they have to give you 3 months notice, and the "any reason" part means "regardless of the reason".  It's weird lawyer talk, but that's what it means. The reason still has to be justified and legal.

I would hazard a guess that is why the narrative has changed.  One of the Board members came out and said "many coaches have clauses that allow termination for on-field performance" or something like that. They are trying to wedge the "any reason" clause into a "performance clause". If he had a proper performance clause, it would say "team must be number x in the world by x date" or something. Again, it's what they don't say. If they had a clause like that and he didn't hit it, they'd say so. But c'mon, is anyone in world football going to suggest the Matildas haven't hit their targets??

 

8 hours ago, Prydzopolis said:

Bonita approached the situation with no fear & wasn’t afraid of exposing this sham. ..

She mentioned that certain individuals in the media were briefed on the situation by a director. In the following paragraph she mentioned 4 journalists who came out in support of the sacking **** 

 

**** A point for the masters of English & teachers in this class room. I felt the separation of the two sentences by a paragraph meant that they should be two separate sentences viewed in isolation. Many interpreted that the 4 journalists were the ones that were briefed, I interpreted that as certain journalists were briefed (not the 4 mentioned in the next paragraph). Funnily enough 3/4 journalists refuted the statement, Bonita said she never said they were the ones that were briefed. I am being a bit picky here but I can understand the confusion.

While I like that Mersiades is after them, she's not above being a rat.  I read her book about the World Cup. Not once did she take any responsibiity for what happened. She had numerous chances to speak up and she barely did a thing. Then she took a payout. Then in her book she kept suggesting that the consultants that Lowy used were rats themselves but never actually came out and said it directly. It was so passive agressive. I could see why people working with her wouldn't like her.

We need someone calling out the sham artists in FFA and FIFA, but she ain't above a little nasty game herself. Like implying certain people were briefed without actually saying who they were.

 

7 hours ago, scarcev said:

while Gallop is copping the fallout here, he is not even to blame which is ironic as he is normally to blame for so much. 

He's hardly innocent. There are plenty of things that he could have done. He could have stood firm against any Board member that wanted the sacking. He could have lobbied other Board members. He could have explained that they'd have a media shitfight on their hands. And if he couldn't convince them, he could have refused to be the one that fronted the media and left it up to the person who wanted the sacking. He could have refused to pull the trigger himself. He even could have resigned. But once again he shows what a Yes Man he is. Spineless and weak. It's all self-interest for him, he doesn't care about what is right, or for the game.

Before saying Gallop is not to blame, everyone on this board should ask themselves -  regardless of who it was, if you didn't believe that someone should be sacked, would you do it?  Now, add another part - would you front the media and deliver weasly words about why it happened? Now, add a further part - what if this was a coach who had given the team a genuine shot at winning the World Cup??

Gallop either believed Stajcic should be sacked, or he didn't have the balls to say NO to someone. He's no victim here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, btron3000 said:

It's irrelevant what a clause in a contract says if the clause is illegal. For example, I can't give you a contract saying that you have to work 70 hours a week. Even if you agree to it and want the money, it's an illegal cla

I would hazard a guess that is why the narrative has changed.  One of the Board members came out and said "many coaches have clauses that allow termination for on-field performance" or something like that. They are trying to wedge the "any reason" clause into a "performance clause". If he had a proper performance clause, it would say "team must be number x in the world by x date" or something. Again, it's what they don't say. If they had a clause like that and he didn't hit it, they'd say so. But c'mon, is anyone in world football going to suggest the Matildas haven't hit their targets??

Well the clause stated that if the clause is executed then he gets the remaining part of his contract paid out (9 months). It has also emerged that at his latest performance review that FFA were very happy & negotiated performance related bonuses for the WC despite a poor showing at the Asian Cup. Very hard to justify performance related clause when it hadn't been raised previously & perhaps the reason they "had" to use "toxic culture & deteriorating situation".

I guess that is why he is considering legal action, gallop being a lawyer himself & obviously the FFA lawyer would have made sure it is airtight. They wouldn't have put the clause in, let alone offer the contract without it been legal. I believe this is why the FFA are persisting moving Stajcic on & looking for a new coach. They 100% believe it will stand up.

7 minutes ago, btron3000 said:

While I like that Mersiades is after them, she's not above being a rat.

 We need someone calling out the sham artists in FFA and FIFA, but she ain't above a little nasty game herself. Like implying certain people were briefed without actually saying who they were.

Ahhh Bonita, she is certainly a divisive personality on #sokkahtwitter with many believing she has a motive & agenda herself. They took her attack on the 4 women journalists like an attack on themselves.

You have to feel sorry for the position she was in & the balls it took to be a whistleblower. On one hand she would be taking orders, following on instructions, knowing that these actions were needed to win the world cup bid & wanted to keep being apart of football administration in this country. Were she to become a whistleblower, she would burn all the bridges in the football administration community within Australia & would carry the burden of her actions around for the rest of her life. Big risk.

On why she didn't go further in her book, I can't be sure. Could she have acted earlier? Should she? If she knows more, why didn't she say? Certainly wasn't afraid to go after some people. Is she limited by what she could say because of her lawyers? One thing is for certain, it appears she isn't afraid to get her hands dirty when the time comes to mudslinging, not afraid to play that game or ruffle the wrong feathers. Does the bad things she has done outweigh the selfless things she has done to expose some of the more shady underhanded dealings in Australian football? I don't know, so many questions & unknowns. In my book, in the weighted scales of good v bad, she definitely comes out in the good. 

Ps. Sorry I deleted some post, otherwise too long quote/post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×