Victoria’s new state football competition could be dead before it begins as clubs take back their expressions of interest and abandon the project.
More than 40 teams have joined the battle, including high profile premier league teams, lower leagues and regional teams, to fight for a more workable model of the National Premier League of Victoria (NPLV).
In a media release on Monday this week, an initial 24 clubs – including the Greek sponsored premier league clubs, South Melbourne, Bentleigh Greens, Oakleigh Cannons, Northcote City – have claimed the proposed model is “financially unviable, fails to implement the recommendations of the National Competition review, [and is] lacking in consistency of those rolled out nationally”.
Director of South Melbourne and a main campaigner in the battle, Tom Kalas has hit out at Football Federation Victoria (FFV), who he claims have not taken on any of the clubs’ suggestions.
“What they’ve (the FFV) proceeded to do is gone ahead and ignored the clubs concerns on a range of issues,” he told Neos Kosmos.
Fifteen clubs met last Tuesday to discuss whether to proceed with the NPL structure or remove their expressions of interest. Since then, the cohort stands at 39 individual teams (not including the women’s sides) and just four teams are believed to be still holding expressions of interest.
Collectively the clubs have disagreed on aspects of cost, changes to youth team structure (the NPL wants to see only one team per age group) and have been angered at a lack of collaboration between the FFV.
The clubs have drafted a financial model based on common costs and found if they implement the current suggested model, each club will be $140,000 out of pocket.
The FFV is standing firm and has denied the costings, saying they are “exaggerated”.
But, as Mr Kalas explains, even if they disagree with the costings, there is no safety net for the clubs to reap losses. When Neos Kosmos asked the FFV if they would financially assist a club if it was hurt implementing the NPL, FFV CEO Mitchell Murphy didn’t promise anything.
“There are many variables in any financial model and all applications will have different cost and revenue projections,” he said.
“Change is challenging and business has been tough going for many sectors in recent years, including sporting organisations. FFV completely understands some applications may not be fully compliant on all fronts on day one – it is a balance between being financially viable off the field and competitive on the pitch.”
Mr Murphy says clubs will be free to make up their own costings for the NPL.
“A logical approach would be to operate within their means from the outset and build momentum over the coming years.”
Mr Kalas says there is no wiggle room for clubs to choose what they invest their money in, when the current program means lower registration fees thanks to lower team numbers and higher refurbishment costs for pitches.
“The financial risk rests with the clubs, not the FFV,” Mr Kalas says.
“We asked the FFV to examine the modeling and take it to external auditors to run the numbers.”
The FFV has not released a financial model for the proposed changes.
A spokesperson for the FFV told Neos Kosmos on Thursday they are still in talks with many clubs and it is business as usual. They are “very confident” the NPLV will be passed in the coming week.
Applications will close on August 16 as planned and there is no intention of revisiting the criteria.
The clubs opposed have hit out saying the consultation process was more “information giving rather than consultation”.
The FFV disputes the feeling and counteracted by saying the clubs failed to attend a meeting scheduled for this week.
“Respectfully, email and media campaigns that potentially damages the code’s reputation isn’t productive – coming to the table for a rational and robust discussion would be more effective,” Mr Murphy said.
The clubs are at odds as to why the FFV has chosen to move away from the already successful state models of the NPL. NSW, Tasmania, Queensland, South Australia and Canberra (Capital Football) have all established their models but each state has tweaked the competition format, easing the entry criteria to ensure that the participating clubs buy into the concept.
If there is no compromise, the clubs are ready to take the matter to the courts and lawyers have been consulted.
Clubs who have disagreed with the NPL process from Friday 2 August 10am:
1. Northcote City FC
2. Box Hill United SC + Women’s side
3. Morland Zebras
4. Dandenong Thunder SC
5. South Melbourne FC + Women’s side
6. Oakleigh Cannons FC
7. Pascoe Vale SC
8. Whittlesea United SC
9. Bundoora United
10. Heidelberg United + Women’s side
11. Bundoora United
12. Sandringham + Women’s side
13. Ashburton + Women’s side
14. Altona Magic + Women’s side
15. Calrnlea + Women’s side
16. Preston Lions + Women’s side
17. Collingwood City FC
18. Penisula Strikers Senior FC
19. Langwarrin SC
20. North Geelong SC
21. Seaford United SC
22. Malvern City FC
23. Kingston City FC
24. Sporting Whittlesea
25. Heidelberg United Alexander FC
26. Southern Stars SC
27. Port Melbourne SC
28. Bentleigh Greens
29. Northern Roosters FC
30. Clifton Hill FC
31. Richmond
32. Green Gully Cavaliers
33. Hume City
34. Melbourne Kights
35. Fawkner
36. Fawkner Blues
37. Gippsland Soccer Association
38. Western Suburbs
39. Casey Comets Womens