The Crawford Report / Restructuring Soccer Australia

[Navigator]

Some great posts on this page gentlemen and well done and thankyouto all.
The comments on David Hill and his performance as the onetime head of SAare no surprise to me, butI had no idea he had stuffed up just aboutevery other managerial position he held too. I think the biggest damage Hill did to SA is best outlined in the below quote that Fan Baller posted -
Soccer in Australia is rooted in the immigrant communities that created their own clubs and expressed their heritage, but under Hill's guidance, Soccer Australia has grown to fear that history.
This action by Hill really left many fans astray and away from the action. He practically ripped the heart and guts out of what many identified with soccer in Australia. That being things like multiculturalism, heritage, club colours and so on.When once certain communities rallied behind "their" teams and it's history and heritage, Hill basically told them "no more" and telling them "if youdon't like it then tuff"But what he neglected to take into considerationwas that there were generations of soccer fans who would be effected by his actions. It wasn't just the "current" soccer fan that was being told to "change" or else; it was also their families, and their families family's and so forth. By stripping these fans of all they had (heritage, pride, etc) he also succeeded in loosing these fans for good. Or changing the type of supporters soccer had.
I think many have returned since those days, but not all. I remember the days when the younger crowds were the minority at club soccer games in Sydney. Does anyone else remember those days?Where it would be predominantly a mature family orientatedcrowd enjoying a sporting Sunday afternoonwith their families and friends. Now days, it's more the teenagers and young adults who frequent these games in the hope of some off-field "action" rather than what happens on the ball. You'll be lucky to find maybe two dozen people at bestwho even resemble the word "maturity."
I don't hold David Hill responsible for all of SA short commings and issues, but his reign at the top didn't help the cause. Like Fan Baller also said -
You were given that very same opportunity (to wipe the slate clean and start all over again)yet you abused your position and left SA in shambles.
He most definitely should have done much better than he did, given his position and weekly cheque. SA made him a wealthy man. He didn't give the performance that warranted his healthy salary.
And to finish off on a comment made by MFC -
For me, its up to the individual clubs to make the NSL successful
I don't agree with that at all. I beleive SA and its administration need to set the example first. An example must be set by a higher power before a standard can be maintained, or more importantly, surpassed. SA is a far higher power than any club or clubs could ever be. They are the governing body. They are the teachers. They are the leaders. They need to do better, for individual clubs to take notice and prosper. It's only then that all NSL clubs will reap the benefits and follow suit. You cannot have one or two clubs in the NSLbe head and shoulders above all others and expect all to be sweet. Especially when the head administration (SA) is bathingin the shite house. It just cannot work without SA taking the lead.
SA needs tobe asuccesfully run organization/business...and only then will soccer in Australia beenriched at all levels.
The Crawford Report in conjuction with the business identities showing genuine interest, is the first step on the long recoveryroad back.
It really could be the last hoorah.

 

[Navigator]

Before I sign off for the day and the weekend, I'd just like to print parts of a well written article by Les Murray on the SBS page,and his opinion on Frank Lowy's proposed interest in running SA.
Les Murray clears the air to those who suggest that Lowy is on a power trip.
The persona of Frank Lowy commands enormous respect and the power of it almost guarantees that the movement for change will succeed. To invite him to lead the transition has been a masterstroke by Crawford. To reject the opportunity to be led by such a 'corporate colossus', as Nogarotto called him, would have been just about unthinkable.
But it is not about Lowy. It is what he represents: a successful and talented leader who once made a crucial, positive impact on the game but then left it because its system left him with no further room to lead.
There is a poignant lesson to be learnt here, which might tell us why the Crawford recipe is right and why Lowy has been chosen.
And that is that Frank Lowy has not coveted this job. Unlike his predecessors, George, Brusasco, Constantine, Hill, Scarsella, Labbozzetta, Knop and Nogarotto.
Lowy neither needed nor wanted it, and he took quite some time to decide to accept it.
Whoever covets the job of Soccer Australia chairman, in my view, is wrong for it, for there will always be the suspicion that he wants it for vanity and power. Someone like Lowy will not be the subject of such suspicions. Someone with his wealth, status in international business and social standing, is unlikely to want to satisfy his vanity by being a soccer chairman.
But he might just be tempted to perform a mission and take Australian football to where we have all dreamed it should be.
That said the incumbent board has acted commendably in agreeing to step down on May 3 and allowing Lowy to step in.
It could not have been easy, for these seven men genuinely believe they have done a good job and have had the interests of the game at heart. But the weight of Crawford, the report's vast public popularity and towering Lowy persona was irresistible.
The whole article (and it answers an earlier question which Infuzer asked)can be viewed here: It's about the ball...not the manby Les Murray
Have a great weekend all

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Navigator - Appreciate your response, but i don't think your looking at the issue in the same way that I am. I won't doubt for a second, that a well managed and functioning governing body is essential.

However....

The NSL admin can only manage what it has on its books. Id use the analogy of a coach only being as good as the players he has to coach. And if you look at the NSL in 2003, you see a comp that has seen:

- Numerous clubs fall over in the past 5yrs
- Clubs struggling to keep up with payments
- No crowds

Now previously, i used the examples of Perth, Northern Spirit and to a smaller degree, Newcastle, succeeding in spite of the setup (at varying times). I feel that all clubs (bar perhaps one or two) are capable of acheiving similar successes. Clubs such as Marconi and Olympic Sharks have every right to be successful. Whilst i cant speak for the sharks, i can definitely say that club mismanagement, not NSL mismanagement has left them up the creek.

Its up to the clubs to pick up their act. Sure, they get NSL funding, but still, the majority of income will come from the conducting of their own operations. If the clubs don't pick up their act, there is only so much that the NSL can do with them. Bring in new clubs i hear you say? Nope. I dont think that works. Parramatta Power were the perfect example of this. A club that had everything going for them except a well managed board.

I contend that its up to the clubs to pick up their act whilst at the same time acknowledging the importance of a well run NSL

Cheers,
Moffo

 

[TheSaint]

The biggest problem is that their aren't many clubs that the vast majority of people can relate to or support.

Parramatta Power is a failure because people see the team as the Eels Eleven. That's fine if you follow the Parramatta Eels but the tribal loyaltiesa good majority of people bring in from League or AFL (Carlton and Collingwood) mean you alienate people from the club.

The only clubs worth keeping are Newcastle and Perth. Every other franchise has to be started from scratch.

 

[imported_Outlaw]

Good coments MFC. I understand real well where 'tis you're coming from.
The Saint, can you clarify the below statement you made please?
The only clubs worth keeping are Newcastle and Perth.Every other franchise has to be started from scratch.

Why are they the only two clubs worth keeping? What do you base this statement on?And why start every other team from scratch? And change exactly what facit?Surely you're kidding when you mean scratch, right? This could never work!
But I'd like to hear your reasons before I clarify my own statements.
Bloody great thread BTW!

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Saint, kicking Marconi out of the NSL would be like kicking souths out of the NRL or the Yankees out of the MBL.

Marconi are one of the few teams in the NSL with a rich history. They have a potentially huge supporter base, its just that the club is in asorry phase of mismanagement. They should never be kicked out. They are in the centre of the biggest soccer community in Australia

Cheers Outlaw for the comments, it has been an interesting read this thread

Moffo

 

[Navigator]

Thanks for the clarification MFC. I apologise for my lack of insight into reading your post with an open mind. I missread/missinterpreted your post. Good follow up too.
Clubs such as Marconi and Olympic Sharks have every right to be successful.
Absolutly MFC. Marconi has a very rich history. With a huge and diverse following located in a big residential area almost smack-bang in the centerof South-WesternSydney, it holds the cards toan 'advantage' that many clubs would opt for at a heartbeat. Although, say within the last 6-7 years (and I have no figures to back this claimas am only assuming based on my own attendance to prior matches in previous years)and based on home crowd figures at most games, you'd never believe they're a team with a huge following. They barely drew like 2thousand fans a few weeks ago for the home round clash at MS against Glory. That is simply unexceptable for a team of the magnitude (all things considered) of the Stallions.
With Marconi being the second most successful team in the NSL's history in regular season performances (behind Sth Melb) and the third most successful team in NSL's history in final's performances(behind Sth Melb and Olympic Sharks) source, the Stallions should be overflowing with success from all corners.
But then I take myself back to the poster who earlier in this piece mentioned some 'in-house' problems with the Stallions. It makes one wonder wether there are any honest people left in administritive positions anymore.
I contend that its up to the clubs to pick up their act whilst at the same time acknowledging the importance of a well run NSL
I understand now what you are saying and do not for one minute disagree with you. The funny thing is, I have a gutt feeling that the clubs are saying the opposite. A case of passing the buck if I've ever seen one.
I don't understand The Saint's coments in post # 24, and I await him to return to this topic to clarify his remarks. His first and last sentence in that post has me wondering.

And I'll end this post with a peice I copied from the NSL site -
The NSL was established in 1977 and lays claim to being the first sport in Australia, to become a truly national competition. In its 26-year history, the competition has undergone many changes, but it is one of the true survivors of Australian sport and will continue to survive for many years to come.

.....and well written too.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[imported_Aaron C]

Just tobriefly sway away from this excellent discussion

Navigator & Outlaw,
Don't hold your breaths (or any other body parts for that fact) waiting for The Saint to reply. This guy is the master of selective replies. I remember this quite clearlyfrom the old WORL boards.
And if he does happen to reply, it's jibberish 99 out of 100 times...as his earlier post displayed. He'll come on, make a remark or two, and rarely come back to reply to enquiries. I've seen it happen many times.
Just a friendly warning.
Cheers/AaronC

 

[Vertigo]

Well said Aaron
V.

 

[imported_E_A__]

Infidels!!!!

You should cringe in his presence you mere mortals. How dare you malign the greatest mind ever to sign up for a passport with MSN!!!!

BASTARDS !!!!!!!!!

This man is considered a GOD at KRL. We hang on his every word. The term Literal Genius when used in regard to The Saintis sobelow him it is considered insulting by his hordes of worshippers.

Let us pray,

Almighty Saint, our heavenly poster, thou art the guiding light for us unworthy plebs.

We beg thee to take pity on your worthless devotees and post a note or two occasionally, so that we may bask in the glory that is a posting from The Saint.

Please do not become irate at the tone of the postings from the jealous few. Be safe in the knowledge that we love you and we all want to root you. Except me, for I am unworthy.

Amen.

 

[imported_Outlaw]

Update... FoxSportsAus
<span>Soccer warfare looms
</span> <table cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width=170 align=right border=0> <tbody> <tr> <td align=middle>

Lowy: fight on the cards
</td></tr></tbody></table>A PLAN for an interim board led by business tycoon Frank Lowy to take over the running of Soccer Australia is in danger of collapse.
The Australian understands there is growing disenchantment among the game's stakeholders at suggestions they will not have a say in the make-up of the six-person panel recommended by the Crawford Report as part of sweeping changes to the governance of the sport. Their mood wasn't helped yesterday when it was revealed that David Crawford, who headed the Independent Soccer Review Committee, had written to them saying it would not be helpful if they nominated candidates for the board. This follows reports that nominated interim board chairman, Frank Lowy, is ready to ignore a compromise deal offered by the SA board last week. Under the proposal, three current SA commissioners and/or stakeholder nominees would have the opportunity to join Lowy and businessmen John Singleton and Ron Walker on the composite board. The appointments of the Lowy-Singleton-Walker triumvirate and the SA contingent will go before an extraordinary meeting next month of SA's stakeholders, who will hold a preliminary meeting in Sydney today. The stakeholders are keen to have some involvement in the selection process of the interim board, with several soccer powerbrokers likely to nominate their own candidates. However, it is believed Westfield chief Lowy, the second wealthiest man in Australia, has started to hand pick the people he wants, thus putting him on a collision course with the stakeholders. It is understood Lowy has approached former SA commissioner Cheryl Bart. Former premier of Victoria Jeff Kennett, 1974 Socceroos World Cup goalkeeper Jack Reilly and former NSW Amateur president Jim Forrest have also been mooted as front-runners for the independent panel. Crawford acknowledged the role of the stakeholders last week. "It was always the intention of the review committee that the stakeholders determine the composition of the interim board," Crawford said. "But, the proposed chairman (Lowy) must be consulted and agree with the composition of that board." SA commissioner Paul Afkos, who has been strongly linked with a position on the interim board, said he was disappointed by the latest developments. He said he had been inundated with calls over the past 48 hours from concerned stakeholders. "It is the view of the stakeholders that they have some say on the make-up of the interim board," Afkos said. "It would be naive of the (federal) Government and the Australian Sports Commission to ignore the wishes of the stakeholders." Another commissioner labelled the likely board make-up as "a Liberal Party convention". "I don't think the stakeholders are going to fall for it," he said. "If anything, the latest developments will only harden them." The first chink in the proposed compromise deal appeared on Sunday when SA chairman Remo Nogarotto, who had been expected to fill one of three vacant positions, announced he would not nominate for the interim panel. In a surprise decision, Nogarotto told SBS he was going to "exit stage left" after declaring that "the other side are not falling over themselves extending the same olive branch that I've extended to them". "I hope that's not a sign of things to come," he said.