The FFA Board was hit for six - mostly of its own making - with the handling of the Stajcic sacking and Reid behaviour, but they're working to make up for the early misstep
A year ago today, the new FFA Board was formed with the election of Joseph Carrozzi, Chris Nikou, Remo Nogarotto and Heather Reid to join the then two existing directors of Kelly Bayer-Rosmarin and Crispin Murray. It came after a vitriolic battle of more than three years as the A-League clubs – and latterly Professional Footballers’ Australia (PFA) – fought for greater representation within FFA Congress, with a promise to try to reunite the game after 15 years of disenfranchisement of many longstanding people in the football community.
One month after the Board election, the new FFA Chairman Nikou issued an open letter to the football community with a 100-day plan. As part of that, the Board set themselves a not particularly ambitious 10-point plan which set out a process for management of some long-standing issues that had split the football community, such as (but not limited to) the review of the National Club Identity Policy.
We assessed the first 100 days of this Board here awarding an overall result of C-.
A-League expansion
Around the same time, thee Board made its first major decision with expansion of the A-League, opting for Western United in Melbourne and Macarthur FC in Sydney. Inevitably, there were those who thought this decision was the right call, and those who thought it wasn’t.
Our analysis showed that, despite the popular view, the Board didn’t simply opt for the most money – although the proponents of Southern Expansion believe they ought to have.
Instead, they were enticed by the promise of a bespoke boutique stadium in an as yet mostly uninhabited part of western Melbourne, and the region which is set to be the biggest growth area in the country with the construction of the new Sydney Airport in far south-west Sydney.
A sod is yet to be turned for the Western United Stadium in Tarneit amidst secrecy about their financial backers, claims that funding has fallen through because the original backers have walked away, and that the local Council has not actually determined the zoning for the planned stadium site. The club has yet to show it has a natural fan base in any great numbers, but it is performing well on the field in fourth position with Mark Rudan at the helm as head coach, and some genuine quality amongst the playing squad led by Alessandro Diamanti.
Macarthur FC has a further 12 months to get ready for the A-League and appears so far to be ticking a number of boxes with its development and initiatives, with the biggest potential game-changer being the establishment of the Charles Perkins Soccer Academy.
A-League separation
The other big A-League decision was around the separation of it from FFA’s management. It is a move long advocated by many (including me) and coveted by the A-League clubs. While it has been approved in principle – a type of decree nisi – the decree absolut is taking a little longer than many would have hoped, not least because the state member federations – with zero skin in the game of the A-League – have a huge say in the final terms of the separation settlement.
What we do know is that FFA will be an organisation that is more likely to have revenue of around $50 million a year (rather than $130 million), and will be able to focus on its core business of participation, football development, talent identification, coach and referee development and fan and volunteer engagement. This is a good thing, as internal attention and resources have always been sidetracked by the day-to-day exigencies of running league competitions.
Regrets, they must have a few
The new Board's tenure wasn’t helped with the way it and FFA management handled the termination of Alen Stajcic's employment as coach of the Matildas in January this year, with the subsequent fallout including Heather Reid's temporary step-down from the Board.
Reid’s stepping-down due to health reasons came within hours of a 'cease and desist' letter from her to this writer – not something sanctioned by her fellow Board members – for revealing Reid’s messaging on the issue to a wide range of people in the football community – including Andrew Webster of the Sydney Morning Herald.
Ultimately, Reid and the Board were forced into an embarrassing mea culpa and apology to Stajcic.
Outside of the Stajcic sacking, the Board has been let down also by other poor decision-making, slowness of effort, and a lack of transparency around some matters.
For example:
What has happened to the inquiry into the national teams (aka the 'Stajcic Inquiry) which was due at the end of October?
Why did it take an accidental – and unrelated – journalist's inquiry to find out about an alleged incident in Cambodia involving four Under 23 players?
What was the rationale for appointing Amy Duggan and Mark Bresciano to the Board, compared with other potential former Matildas and Socceroos with a business background? This is not a reflection on Duggan or Bresciano, who will bring a fresh eye to proceedings, but no reasoning has been given to the football community.
Why hasn’t anyone announced the premature resignation of Bayer-Rosmarin and Murray? Their terms were due to expire at this week's annual general meeting (AGM) but as we revealed last week, they resigned from the Board just under seven weeks before their term was up for reasons that are unknown.
Why are matters such as calling for nominations for directors or the notice of meetings published on the FFA website?
Why isn't there public disclosure about the nominees for directors?
It's unclear why it took the Women's Council – an unelected, unrepresentative group put there by a bunch of mostly male Congress members – 12 months to come up with “a plan that goes beyond strategy” with a “road map” to drive women and girls football.
Why hasn't anyone announced the resignation of one member of the Women's Council, Maha Abdo OAM, who felt as if the other Council members did not really value diversity and inclusion?
What do the regular overseas trippers ‘bring back’ for the Australian football community? FIFA hosted a conference on women’s football issues at the time of the World Cup in June, at which the FFA Board and Congress had several representatives: where are the ‘learnings’ for others working in this space?
And, the biggest issue of all in football: why does it cost so much to play? While it is good news that more and more people are playing the game, why is it that the costs keep going up? Where is this money going? What about economies of scale?
In one part of regional Australia with which we are familiar, a local academy supported by the local football association is charging $670 for Under 5s and Under 6s to train once a week; if they actually play a game as well, they are charged an additional $350 for the year. That’s over $1,000 for Under 5s-6s! It's pricing the game out of the reach of many.
Congress is culpable too
However, the Board's performance should not be considered in isolation from the changes to the FFA Constitution of this time last year and the performance of the Congress.
The FFA Board and anyone standing for it runs the risk of their main focus being to get re-elected.
This is particularly the case with the Constitutional change which requires the FFA Chairman to be elected every 12 months. What this effectively means is that a Chairman barely has any time to get their feet under the desk, before having to worry about the forthcoming AGM and whether he will be re-elected. In this first 12 months – one of significant change and upheaval and the departure, or imminent departure, of senior staff from the organisation – it's particularly short-sighted to change the Chairman again so soon.
This, in turn, causes instability and uncertainty at Board and management level and, for example, leads to the rumours flying around the football community last week which we wrote about here. As we said then, if the rumours are true, it is unacceptable and unedifying behaviour; if they are not, the Board needs to address the widely-held perception of disunity and personal ambition outweighing the best interests of the game.
While the FFA Board tends to be the centre of attention – in terms of both brickbats and rarer bouquets – the real powerbrokers in football are the 29 people who currently form the Congress, that is: the state member federations, the A-League clubs, the PFA and the non-elected, non-representative Women's Council.
A case in point is Reid's position. In any other Board in corporate Australia, not only would her return to the Board not be tolerated but someone in her position would not even try to return.
As we have previously indicated, we understand several Board members have suggested to Reid that she should stand down permanently but instead she has dug-in, comfortable in the knowledge that the FFA Congress will not move against her. For a start, the PFA with its five voters will support their candidate through thick-and-thin. (FFA CEOcandidate and PFA Chairman Brendan Schwab, recommended her nomination last year.) Reid is also likely to continue to command the majority support of the state member federations, and the A-League clubs are agnostic – all they want is their 'divorce agreement' settled.
In Reid's favour, therefore, is a perfect storm of a FFA Congress that is more interested in maintaining their role in football than good governance and appropriate Board behaviours, and the focus on gender equity in the FFA Constitution.
It was also the FFA Congress which, for eight years while a Lowy was at the helm, failed to raise one relevant or 'uncomfortable' question about the train wreck of the 2018/2022 World Cup bid. That's conveniently swept under the carpet for most in this country (though not in others), even when, for example USD$500,000 of Australian football's money was given to former FIFA Executive member, Jack Warner, who is still fighting extradition to the United States; and Australia received an award for a $5 million donation to the Asian Football Confederation, of which only half is accounted for.
It is the same FFA Congress which holds approximately $38 million in cash reserves, yet continues to cry poor when it comes to facilities and programs.
It is the same FFA Congress that charges registration fees to every young player, and uses activities such as coaching programs and national youth tournaments as a 'cash cow' for their operations.
It is the same FFA Congress that signed-up to Constitutional changes this time last year which, inter alia, included a 40/40/20 gender mix which is met by only Northern NSW, Victoria, Western Australia and the ACT – and not one A-League club or the PFA.
Only yesterday, we learned that Football Queensland Board member Robert Cavallucci was appointed CEO of FQ (as predicted here) after a “worldwide search”. How was that conflict of interest managed within the FQ Board?
What it boils down to is that the level of transparency and accountability from the 'governing bodies' (plural) of the game are inadequate, and if they're going to do something about their performance, then ultimately the fault lies with the rest of us – the football community.
Progress
The Board should also be applauded for the progress it has made on some issues and for its willingness to be accessible.
Returning to their 100-day plan, they have rescinded the former NCIP to a ‘lite’ version of it. They have set-up a working group for a review of the NPL competition and another on the national second division – although there are fears that plans for a national second division have dropped off the radar in recent months. They continue with the bid for the 2023 World Cup where our greatest hope lies to combine with New Zealand. They have appointed a National Technical Director and, from the outside, government relations activity looks to be better coordinated nationally. While Nikou was elected to the executive of the Asian Football Confederation – part of a ticket supported by one of the most notorious men in world sport, Sheikh Ahmed of Kuwait – there is still work to do in terms of building relationships with AFC and FIFA.
Nikou has certainly put in the time and effort to meet and speak with many in the football community. He turned-up at the community forums conducted by FFA – the first time a national ‘listening tour’ has occurred. He has attended events such as the Football Writers’ Festival, a briefing on the national second division to AAFC members, and meetings of state member federation boards.
A corporate lawyer, Nikou’s natural milieu is not in front of cameras. However, in the effective absence of a CEO which has required him to be a quasi Executive Chairman for the past six months, we applauded, for example, Nikou doing a short video grab around the announcement of the Matildas pay deal (although in typical #sokkahtwitter fashion, we were criticised for praising him!).
Nogarotto, Carrozzi and Reid are active on Twitter which is mostly welcome, although they might benefit from a social media policy for Board members.
Both Nogarotto and Carrozzi have also pulled their weight in terms of chairing committees and getting work started in a variety of areas. This has included spearheading the recruitment of new Board members, overseeing recruitment of the David Gallop replacement, chairing the national second division working group and, more recently, a heritage and history committee which is already planning its first heritage related event for June next year. Reid was well enough to travel to France for the World Cup and represent FFA at a FIFA conference.
The Board brought the end-of-year financial position in at a modest surplus of $435,000, and slashed executive management salary costs by $700,000. Perhaps both are lower than they had hoped, but it’s in the right direction and certainly against expectations.
So what’s the verdict?
Putting aside the Stajcic sacking, Reid’s behaviour and Reid’s expected return, we give the FFA Board a C on its first year of operation. We would have stretched to a C+ if it wasn't for the recent alleged machinations around the Chairman and CEO roles reported here.
However, with Reid’s expected return – a matter entirely for the FFA Congress, and not the Board – the level of accountability in Australian football overall will be diminished and we stick with our assessment of February: C- (which many see as 'generous'). In other words, the Board is marked down because of the inaction of the Congress.
If the past year has shown us anything, it is the following:
While the Board is the focus of attention, it is the (mostly) faceless people of the FFA Congress that need to be made fit-for-purpose, better performing and more effective.
Football needs certainty and stability, which is not helped by electing, and potentially changing, the FFA Chairman every 12 months. This should be changed in the Constitution.
A new CEO can’t come quick enough! As we have written previously, whoever is selected, it must be someone who instils confidence and credibility and who will work for all stakeholders in the game, including and especially those not represented at FFA Congress.
Football in Australia still has a way to go in being best practice in terms of transparency and accountability. That is not just about the Board, but the organisational and individual members of the FFA Congress also.
For the sake of the game, we hope it continues to improve.