Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mack

FFA Failure: Meet The New Boss, Same As The Old Boss

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Carns said:

Providing it was available to be viewed in some format I'd have no problem with it. I don't have Fox, never have. Throughout the years I've used a combination of the Telstra A-league streaming, illegal streaming, watching it at a mates place or the pub. But I always manage to see it. I'd be open to a streaming only option, but not every fan would be happy with that.

My answer to that would be - "tough ****". You wanna see every game, go to the ground!

In any case, you'd hope this is a short-term thing.  The goal should be 14 teams, with home and away, for a 26 round season. That's the other area the FFA have failed - inspiring people about the future. AGAIN. If they stated when teams 13 and 14 could come in, and people knew the ultimate goal was an even, fair competition, they'd be more likely to put up with whatever the interim arrangement is. Instead we just get "Fox is more important than integrity". 

Share this post


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

Very well said btron. A bit of, dare I say, vi$ion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/05/2019 at 6:30 PM, Edinburgh said:

After 29 rounds there will be 3 rounds of finals. Total 32.

For fairness there should be 30 rounds so everyone plays each other 3 times. Then, if they must they can have 2 rounds of finals for the top 4. Total 32. How hard is it?

The issue I see is something that was raised when the new teams were announced & public discussions happened around the draw.

Very early on GoR made it clear that Foxtel tv deal only covers 26 games & they weren’t willing to cover the extra production costs. This makes sense when it comes to the performance/metrics of the league & the tv deal. We are currently being held to ransom by Fox.

On 25/05/2019 at 2:58 PM, btron3000 said:

So are there good reasons why all games have to be on tv? Is it that the travel costs for away teams are restrictive?

I don’t see why they don’t go down the route of streaming games similar to what they do for FFA Cup games & have these games streamed on YouTube (much like the current set up for games that are streamed to countries without a broadcast deal).

Maybe it cheapens the product not having broadcast quality images? Perhaps it’s in the contract with fox sports? Or perhaps FFA just don’t have the money? Does anyone know the production costs per game? Perhaps it for VAR, need all the camera angles for VAR & unfair to have 3 rounds without VAR? How does that matter when they’ve admitted fairness & integrity has nothing to do with the competition.

Share this post


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

Perhaps it for VAR, need all the camera angles for VAR & unfair to have 3 rounds without VAR? How does that matter when they’ve admitted fairness & integrity has nothing to do with the competition.

:lol:

Yeah actually having the same level of tv coverage for VAR is a valid argument.  But not having all games televised is a good excuse to get rid of VAR!!

Fox probably also don't want people using other methods of viewing - people might see they don't need Fox and it is outdated. I mean, Uncy Rupert sabotaged the NBN so that Fox was still relevant, I'm sure Fox would have no problem in slowing down the takeup of legitimate competitors like streaming options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I’ve harped on it about it before we are reliant on the cash cow of fox as a code so seeing them dictate the schedule is no surprise 

Without any thought I’d suggest something wacky like play home and away 

break the top 6 off and play each other once 

1st starts in 6 points 

6th on 1 

so something likewise to the bottom 5 

the top bottom 5 side plays the last top 6 side in elmination finals qualifier 

then run Your post season cup with GF

We already acknowledge the home and away doesn’t count for much 

this way those last 6 games would at least keep people interested and you would assume increase ratings 

Edited by GunnerWanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/05/2019 at 6:30 PM, Edinburgh said:

After 29 rounds there will be 3 rounds of finals. Total 32.

For fairness there should be 30 rounds so everyone plays each other 3 times. Then, if they must they can have 2 rounds of finals for the top 4. Total 32. How hard is it?

Playing each other 3 times needs 33 rounds.

I don't see a problem with next season having a bodgy fixture.  It's an interim measure.  The season after with 12 clubs it's fixed.  Clubs play each other home and away in 22 rounds and then the top 6 play each other once and bottom six sides play each other once.  All clubs have 27 games.  If people are concerned of unfairness in the late season arrangements with the bottom 6 having an advantage this can be overcome by limiting the number of clubs in the bottom 6 that can get into the final 6.  Something like:- A minimum of 4 of the top 6 make the final 6 and a maximum of 2 of the bottom 6 can make the final 6.

Once we have 14 clubs then its home and away, 26 rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GunnerWanderer said:

I’ve harped on it about it before we are reliant on the cash cow of fox as a code so seeing them dictate the schedule is no surprise 

Without any thought I’d suggest something wacky like play home and away 

break the top 6 off and play each other once 

1st starts in 6 points 

6th on 1 

so something likewise to the bottom 5 

the top bottom 5 side plays the last top 6 side in elmination finals qualifier 

then run Your post season cup with GF

We already acknowledge the home and away doesn’t count for much 

this way those last 6 games would at least keep people interested and you would assume increase ratings 

The way Fox look at it they would say why bother with a split. This way they get the "good" matchups for TV and make them play 3 times while all the "bad" matchups for TV that would be in the bottom half anyway are limited to two. Fox don't care about showing Wellington vs Mariners even even if they were 1st and 2nd.

Maybe next year with SWS they'll agree to a Scottish style split closing stage.

27 minutes ago, Flytox said:

 If people are concerned of unfairness in the late season arrangements with the bottom 6 having an advantage this can be overcome by limiting the number of clubs in the bottom 6 that can get into the final 6.  Something like:- A minimum of 4 of the top 6 make the final 6 and a maximum of 2 of the bottom 6 can make the final 6.

A split league teams wouldn't be able to rise or drop between their half of the league.

It'd probably mean switching to a 4 team, two legged finals system, because otherwise you have a closing stage that only exists to determine the seeding order for the real closing stage ie the finals series. Which seems utterly pointless and likely to detract from interest not improve it.

Personally with 12 teams I'd go to the AFC and ask for a temporary exemption on the requirement until we get to 14 teams so we can play a normal home & away season while fast-tracking Canberra, Wollongong or South-East Victoria teams to get to 14 teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mack,  My preference is to get rid of the finals and replace it with a knock out League Cup including the clubs from the second division.  The winner of the home and away would be the Champion and we would have an FFA Cup winner and a League Cup winner.  This gets rid of an unbalanced fixture list and provides a few extra games a season for each club to build up the length of our season.  It also provides an end of season game with a trophy that should satisfy the broadcasters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/05/2019 at 12:13 AM, mack said:

Mariners had a fan forum tonight they expect that we're going to play them at the new stadium in round 1.

That would be awesome, 'tradition' (lol) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The A-League can’t stay with Fox otherwise they are going to kill it. Their own internal problems are being forced upon us and it’s almost as if they’re dragging us down with them. They’re already turning on Super Rugby and we will be next. The relationship for me has gone beyond the standard tv network having a say due to their investment - they literally say jump and the FFA ask how high. It’s not healthy. 

The J-League broke from traditional TV rights to predominantly streaming and signed a 10 year, ¥210 billion deal. That took their annual rights income from 5 to 21 billion. The deal means they have complete control of content and scheduling too. There’s a lot to be learnt from their model and growth. 

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/sports/2016/07/20/soccer/j-league/j-league-makes-shift-tv-live-streaming-¥210-billion-broadcast-deal/#.XPBWLaR_WEc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hughsey said:

The A-League can’t stay with Fox otherwise they are going to kill it. Their own internal problems are being forced upon us and it’s almost as if they’re dragging us down with them. They’re already turning on Super Rugby and we will be next. The relationship for me has gone beyond the standard tv network having a say due to their investment - they literally say jump and the FFA ask how high. It’s not healthy. 

The J-League broke from traditional TV rights to predominantly streaming and signed a 10 year, ¥210 billion deal. That took their annual rights income from 5 to 21 billion. The deal means they have complete control of content and scheduling too. There’s a lot to be learnt from their model and growth. 

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/sports/2016/07/20/soccer/j-league/j-league-makes-shift-tv-live-streaming-¥210-billion-broadcast-deal/#.XPBWLaR_WEc

Yup. We've hitched our wagon to Foxtel and it going down means we will as well. Need to diversify the revenue stream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/05/2019 at 12:13 AM, mack said:

Mariners had a fan forum tonight they expect that we're going to play them at the new stadium in round 1.

Isn’t there some rugby festival on that weekend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GD07 said:

Isn’t there some rugby festival on that weekend?

FFA decided to start the season on October 11th-13th. The Rugby 9's thing is the week after on Fri 18th & Sat 19th.

So we can be home Round 1 to Mariners, away Round 2, knowing FFA they will probably have a home derby in Round 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/05/2019 at 8:29 AM, hughsey said:

The A-League can’t stay with Fox otherwise they are going to kill it. Their own internal problems are being forced upon us and it’s almost as if they’re dragging us down with them. They’re already turning on Super Rugby and we will be next. The relationship for me has gone beyond the standard tv network having a say due to their investment - they literally say jump and the FFA ask how high. It’s not healthy. 

My only issue with the J-League comparison is that it isn’t as simple as comparing apples to apples. They’ve got the financial stability of a tv deal under pinning the league. You also see how long they’ve taken when they started the process to where they are now, it didn’t happen overnight. It was a long process but they got the fundamentals right which have provided a proper foundation for the success & growth underpinning the league

Back to Australia. Lets say that they decide to go with the streaming model, you’ve seen the modest rise in subscribers with Kayo on Fox. I’m just unsure that if the A-League were to have a stand-alone product that it would attract the amount of subscribers to drive a TV deal of similar value. If you compare this to Japan when they started the process to pro/rel & multiple divisions, would they have been able to take on such a monumental leap?

A second division will be a good indicator of where we stand in terms of how they broadcast the competition & who will pick it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/06/2019 at 7:06 PM, mack said:

FFA decided to start the season on October 11th-13th. The Rugby 9's thing is the week after on Fri 18th & Sat 19th.

So we can be home Round 1 to Mariners, away Round 2, knowing FFA they will probably have a home derby in Round 3.

From the O'Rourke interview posted in another thread, the intent is to bed down the interaction with police and security with a couple of less intense match ups before having anything like the derby.  But, it's FFA ......

Share this post


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

So basically rewards the teams at this point who have settled squads and are on top - that’s fine, as long as they don’t change the rules when we get back up there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much every rule change to the cap has been done to explicitly favour SFC or MVC. The loyalty bonus only existed because MVC wanted to keep Archie Thompson. The new loan rule only exists so SFC could steal Da Silva from the Mariners.

Nothing will change in our favour if we go back to the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/06/2019 at 6:24 PM, Unlimited said:

So basically rewards the teams at this point who have settled squads and are on top - that’s fine, as long as they don’t change the rules when we get back up there

A salary cap rule that cements those at the top somewhat defeats the point of it 

it’s like the European financial fair play rule it’s just the big clubs taking ladder away from underneath themselves 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFA refuse to release crucial Stajcic documents

Quote

The controversial sacking of former Matildas boss Alen Stajcic is yet again in the limelight, with reports Football Federation Australia is refusing to supply their own compliance committee with documents which show why the popular national team coach was abruptly axed.

The Australian newspaper obtained correspondence between FFA chief executive David Gallop and FFA Compliance Committee chairman Greg Griffin over the documents.

Griffin requested the documents last week for his committee which were established as part of last year’s Australian football governance reform to oversee the FFA’s complaint handling procedures.

Gallop rejected Griffin’s request on behalf of the FFA Board claiming there had been no complaints involved in Stajcic’s termination.

“The basis upon which you have sought access to confidential board documents is therefore in the respectful view of the FFA board misconceived,’’ Gallop wrote in correspondence obtained by the Australian.

In this correspondence, Griffin clearly expresses his disdain with Gallop's decision vowing to fight for the documents to be released.

“To be blunt, I find your response not only unacceptable but dismissive of what are entirely proper matters raised,’’ Mr Griffin said.

“I think the board has made a serious error in judgment but it is not one that cannot be addressed and remedied. I therefore urge the board members to reconsider the position they have taken.’’

The FFA has maintained Stajcic was sacked solely for football reason and not for any misconduct during his time as Matildas manager.

Criticism of Stajcic’s untimely axing, only five months out from the Women’s World Cup, has resurfaced after the Matildas slumped to a 2-1 defeat against Italy in their first match at the tournament on Sunday.

The documents Griffin is seeking would reveal the main discussion points of the board ahead of the controversial vote behind Stajcic’s ousting.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone's head needs to roll for this! *fingers crossed its Gallops*

This cannot be swept under the carpet like the FFA is hoping to do as per usual, glad this Griffins guy is not backing down on this issue..

Share this post


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

The Australian newspaper obtained correspondence between FFA chief executive David Gallop and FFA Compliance Committee chairman Greg Griffin over the documents.

Wonder who leaked these documents :rofl:

49 minutes ago, Davo said:

Gallop rejected Griffin’s request on behalf of the FFA Board claiming there had been no complaints involved in Stajcic’s termination.

:rofl:

No complaints? :lol: Nothing to see here folks, stock standard dismissal. Everything above board. Nobody seemed to raise any issue over the AS sacking, all amicably dealt with by the FFA & clearly nothing has happened over the last few months. :rofl:

This is why Lowy & co didn’t want to implement any of these pesky little FIFA statutes. Oversight, who needs that :lol:

Hoping that common sense prevails & the documents are released. Transparency is a must as we move forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m still one of the few people to feel some sympathy for Gallop? He takes hospital pass after hospital pass for the Board, yet more often than not he’s the only one people commenting online want to see fired (as though any other CEO would be different with a Board like the FFA).

Share this post


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

I’m still one of the few people to feel some sympathy for Gallop? He takes hospital pass after hospital pass for the Board, yet more often than not he’s the only one people commenting online want to see fired (as though any other CEO would be different with a Board like the FFA).

1) That's his job.

2) If he didn't like it he should have quit.

3) He is part of the reason these issues exist in the first place with his poor governance.

4) He gets paid millions to do it.

Share this post


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

1) That's his job.

2) If he didn't like it he should have quit.

3) He is part of the reason these issues exist in the first place with his poor governance.

4) He gets paid millions to do it.

Well said Mack.

And DG is just not a leader, he is leeching off us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or Heather Reid resigns, id be happy with that as i believe this was her doing as she set things in motion once she became a board member that she wanted AS gone as she never liked him.. Then she comes out with those comments about "If you only knew" which fueled the fire and only apologized because she was forced to for legal reasons.. Now shes in France at the expense of us enjoying herself *ffs*

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  

×