https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ffvmedia/ClubsRelease18FFVMedia300913.pdf


UPDATE No: 18 – 30 September 2013

To All Clubs & Co-Signatories – Release to FFA, FFV & Media

1. Magistrates Court today

At the Magistrates Court today the judge’s decision on the plaintiffs request for an injunction to halt the announcement of the FFV's NPL applicants has been delayed until Wednesday 2nd Oct. We will provide you with more information on that day.


2. FFV Zone Representatives vote to remove FFV Board and halt current NPLV

The minutes of the 27th Sept FFV Zone Representatives meeting have been submitted to the court this morning. The voting outcomes are below.

78% of the Zone Reps have passed the following Special Resolution to remove FFV Board


Special Resolution

That by reason of;

a) seeking to implement and establish its National Premier League (NPL) competition for Victoria, as provided for in the documents entitled 'Part 2-Participation Criteria' and 'Part-3 Participation Licence Agreement', produced and distributed by the FFV to football clubs and other interested parties in April 2013; and

b) continuing with its proposed establishment and implementation of the NPL competition described in sub-paragraph a), not withstanding that only 15 applications to participate in the NPL in 2014 were received by the FFV and that none of the applications were submitted by any current Victorian Premier League club;

the FFV Board of Directors are acting contrary to the best interests of Registered Participants and Clubs in Victoria, and the members of FFV hereby resolve, pursuant to section 78 of the Associations Incorporation Reform Act 2012, to remove all current FFV Directors from their positions.


100% of the Zone Reps have passed the below Resolution to halt the current NPLV

Resolution

That Football Federation Victoria Incorporated (FFV) immediately cease the establishment and implementation of its proposed National Premier League (NPL) competition for Victoria, as provided for in the documents entitled 'Part 2-Participation Criteria' and 'Part 3 Participation Licence Agreement', produced and distributed by the FFV to football clubs and other interested parties in April 2013.



3. Statement by Richmond Soccer Club 30th Sept 2013

RICHMOND SC JOINS LONG LIST OF DISGRUNTLED CLUBS

Release: Monday, 30 September 2013

Richmond Soccer Club has joined the other 59 Victorian Football Clubs in urging the FFV to listen to the member clubs, adopt the NPL in 2014 in a manner that is financially viable for all clubs and takes the game forward.

Whilst we still believe in the fundamental concept of an NPL are keen to be part of the NPL in 2014, to do so under the current terms and conditions would be fiscally irresponsible and delinquent of the board. For the avoidance of doubt we met with the FFV earlier this year to highlight the unviability of the NPL based on the criteria that were being set and the structure that was imposed by the FFV. We were hopeful that the FFV would come to adopt a more considered and conciliatory approach to the introduction of the NPL in the best interests of all parties but this has not been the case.

The Board of Richmond has observed with dismay the intransigence of the current FFV Board and its lack of desire to enter into any meaningful dialogue with clubs at all levels and skill level within Victoria. Additionally, the lack of governance and transparency is now being echoed by FFV board members (Mr. Da Zilva) which is extremely disconcerting and given rise to great concern that the President and board are not acting in the best interests of football in this state. It is apparent to Richmond Soccer Club that the present FFV board is not capable of making strategic decisions that will better the game moving forward.

We will continue to urge the FFV to stop the stubborn antics and bullying employed to date, behave in a manner that is befitting its' charter and focus the club funded resources in a manner that provides a positive outcome for football in the state. The current stalemate and inadequate NPL competition is not a solution to improving the level of football in the state, it is instead farcical. How the FFV board or any board can ignore the voice of the majority (60 clubs) is nonsensical and if not addressed immediately will have an irreversible impact on football in Victoria.

Richmond SC will continue to work with the other co-signatory clubs to achieve the outcome that represents common sense and prudent management to ensure our game develops in a positive manner and becomes the a strong viable code that we all want it to be.

Wolfgang Smoger
President



We would like to welcome the following co-signatory club in joining us in opposition to the FFVs attempt to alter the fundamental principles of our code:

- RICHMOND SOCCER CLUB

60 Clubs to date have joined the co-signatory group in a united voice for a viable and successful NPLV model rollout in 2014, which works for community, country/regional, state and NPL clubs.

These 60 Co-signatory clubs combined constitute over 100,000 football club members / supporters / youth teams / juniors / sub juniors / parents / coaches / administrators.



The Victorian football clubs will be scheduling a meeting to review what steps we need to take to protect the financial integrity of our football landscape. We will send out details shortly.


Our united position on the NPLV
1. We are all committed to a successful NPLV model rollout in 2014 which works for both community and NPL club.
2. The NPLV should be financially viable for all clubs, modelling by clubs reflects otherwise.
3. That the NPLV be introduced after proper consultation with the clubs and after taking genuine account of their concerns.
4. To date the FFV has not properly consulted the clubs but rather has merely informed us of how its proposed model will operate. Even the peak Council body that represents councils, Parks Leisure Australia, in a letter attached to all clubs (29th July) made reference and supported all of these similar concerns about the FFV's approach and failure to properly consult.
5. We are united and determined to work for the good of the game in Victoria. It is unprecedented in Australia that 60 clubs have come together in a united way.
6. No one can reasonably argue that the NPLV could proceed viably, let alone succeed, without the participation of the top 30-60 clubs in Victoria at all levels: Men, Women, Junior Boys and Girls.
7. The 60 clubs are all run by volunteers who have no personal financial interest in any of these issues and are working for a viable NPLV model. The contribution and legacy of all these clubs, large, small and everything in between, should be recognised, respected and preserved. That will not happen under the proposed model.


Yours in football

Nick Tsiaras, Vice President, Box Hill United Soccer Club
Tom Kalas, Club Director, South Melbourne Football Club

Mahony it wouldn't be right for me to comment while the Presidents technical director husband along with the senior coach is out of the country travelling business class to Italy accompanying the u16's team travelling at the back end of the plane . I have been told that if you happen to be in a looming plane crash ,then the back end of the plane is the safest place to be .It was also explained to me that it cost extra $$ up front & it's very lonely at the front end .... I guess some people just prefer their own company unaware there is a global financial crisis .....Que sera sera

As long as you are prepared to admit you get your info from an internet blog that's fine by me :lol:

It was first hand information.

Yes - I was hiding. You got me.

Thanks for the answer - however it does raise the question about how a meeting that is not a General Meeting can remove the Board?

After days in hiding, mahoney finally returns after reading some second hand information on an internet blog :lol:

Onya matey \:d/

And to answer your question, yes I do believe it will be going ahead on Friday :-$

I will - but I am not even sure why :lol:

Did the proposed second Bulleeen General Meeting to sack their board and/or withdraw their NPLV application o ahead? I though it was schedulled for the 21st?

Is this proposed 'General Meeting' to sack the board still going ahead? :-"

Wow - really! That is news to me, well it would have been if I had not already read the court documents at the moment they were listed for a hearing? Also, from memory, Pave mentioned it on twitter didn’t he? Or was it just his recent election? I cant remember. However, I like Pave. I have never met him, but he seems to be a very decent bloke who genuinely cares about Victorian club football, unlike some of the crazies on the interwebs.

Anyway, to the substantive point I was making. The individuals involved are not involved as individuals (hence the association) and the court could not care less if the plaintiffs are members (Constitutionally defined) of the FFV or two ‘randoms’ from the moon. It will be a legal decision made on its legal merits. Nothing more. Nothing Less.

http://ffvmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/FFVMembersResolutions6Sept2013.pdf

Not like I said anything about this :-" :lol: :twisted:

Thanks mate for the clarity.

Wrong Priest

Read it again..... But slower this time.

It's not falling apart you broken record, the board was always split..

FFV Hierarchy is falling apart


GEELONG ADVERTISER
Court fight hits NPL plan
September 4th, 2013

AS North Geelong joins a 50-club consortium in court against the state game's governing body, Football Federation Victoria's plans to introduce its National Premier League for 2014 remain in jeopardy.

The co-signatories, including all Victorian Premier League clubs, are preparing their joint case for the Court of Arbitration for Sport, to seek changes to the current NPL criteria, with the date for mediation between the two parties set for September 23.

Meanwhile, an FFV official involved at the start of the application process for the mooted league believes the current administration is failing to cater to the needs of its member clubs.

"When it comes to issues with councils and clubs trying to explain the trouble of access to grounds, as well as costs, the board is simply burying their heads in the sand," said the source, who asked to remain unnamed.

"Now you have the issue of clubs taking the FFV to court, because there has been a complete breakdown in communication."

While the FFV released a statement acknowledging the mediation date, the governing body's CEO, Mitchell Murphy, declined to comment further.

One of the main points of contention with the current NPL criteria is access to required facilities, with several clubs failing to muster respective council support to host an elite competition over a 40-week period.

Other issues have arisen in terms of cost and the introduction of a player zoning and points system.

Through the zoning and points system, FFV hopes to promote youth development by encouraging clubs to bring players under the age of 25 up through their ranks, and provide a possible pathway to an A-League club.

The Geelong Advertiser understands, however, that the co-signatories have received backing from

Professional Footballers Australia against the points system, on the grounds of a restriction of trade.

North Geelong president Boo Sesar, who also confirmed the club's rejection of Geelong Galaxy's proposed access to its Elcho Park facility, shed light on the status of court proceedings. "At the moment, the case hasn't gone past the initial process. We're supporting the co-signatories in their stand against the new league coming out," he said.

While some areas of the criteria for the NPLV have been heavily scrutinised, it is widely believed that the main motivation for clubs to seek legal intervention has been the lack of bilateral dialogue between the clubs and FFV.

"The way the Federation has gone about it, we do not approve of, and we don't want anyone to dictate how we are to run our club in the future."

FFA has no jurisdiction.

New NPL model sees room for regional sides to jump up to the top level of the comp, protects the best interests of the game (keeps the clubs strong, raises coaching standards, improves player pathways, raises general standards, etc.)

The sad thing is that mediation shouldn't be required - there should have been a genuine and open consultation from the start. I believe if there had been open consultation we would have ended up with something similar to the new proposal, but with perhaps more regional involvement, and far more good will between parties. Instead we have bitterness and the probability of a new FFV board within the next 12 months.

Football in this state does need an overhaul, but there are so many opinions around about how that will occur. A pure zonal proposal is divisive, but some parts of its intention may well be valid, but I guess its all a matter of who holds the power.

I agree that the proposed FFV structure for the NPL needs work, given the amount of backlash and lack of support, but I am not sure some of the suggested alternative proposals go far enough to putting football on the right path in this state.

There is far too much self-interest at this stage, as there always has been. Whether that is the FFV or some of the clubs. If I was the FFA, I would be stepping in now to at least mediate before it does even more damage to the game here.


Edited by heart_fan: 3/9/2013 09:03:18 PM

UPDATE No: 14 Tuesday 3 September 2013

To All Clubs & 50 Co-Signatories – Release to Media, FFA & FFV




1. The Zonal system and impact on all clubs in our state

Many clubs have written to us concerned that if the current FFV NPL model is not challenged (which the Co-signatory clubs have begun via the courts) it will establish a zonal system that will force clubs to be ‘subservient’ to their zone’s “Elite” club, starting as of 2014.

Some clubs have considered the NPLV to:

"not be of concern to them - we are a community club, it won't affect us".

Close scrutiny of the current NPLV model suggests otherwise.


Not only will community clubs be ‘subservient’ to their zone’s “Elite” club, as of 2014, but the utilisation of already scant playing facilities will come under further pressure by the successful NPLV clubs seeking access.

What the current FFV NPLV model will also do is stop a club from progressing on merit via the ‘promotion/relegation’ system that currently operates in Victoria & all round the world.

A zonal system will not allow this to occur, plus our advice is that a zonal system contravenes FIFA Regulations

Clubs that wish to join the 50 Co-signatory clubs and lobby against these changes to fundamental principles to our game need to contact us.

The 50 Co-Signatory clubs are forming the “Association of Football Clubs Victoria”

in order to protect the fundamental principles of our game. Please contact us on the following email addresses:

Tom Kalas - Director South Melbourne FC tom@smfc.com.au

Nicholas Tsiaras - Vice President Box Hill United SC nicholas.tsiaras@gmail.com




2. The NEW NPLV model sees the continuance of football’s fundamental principles with the adoption of the FFA’s NPL criteria (attached PDF)
The New NPLV model has many similarities to those implemented interstate

The New NPLV model complies with the FFA objectives (refer PDF document Page 3 and repeated on Page 11)

The New NPLV principles we have documented will be beneficial for our code and help improve the standards for Community, State League, Country/Regional and VPL Clubs

The New NPLV will incorporate a state wide competition that will see the inclusion of 2 Country/regional teams in the NPL and 2 Country /regional teams in the NPL1





3. Melbourne Councils that have reviewed the New NPLV model have embraced it and remarked: “why was this not tabled from the beginning?”

· It does not displace players/parents

· It allows juniors and sub juniors to remain with their clubs

· It allows clubs that aspire to improve and get promoted to do so if they wish

· It allows the freedom of movement of all players across the state with no artificial barriers due to zoning

· It incorporates the FFA’s NPL criteria (e.g. coaching accreditation improvements)

· It does not put financial pressure onto clubs to comply with the financially unviable FFV model

We need to begin repairing the reputation of what the NPLV stands for with councils and other stakeholders in Victoria.

Councils play a significant role in funding the improvement of our code’s facilities.


The New NPLV stands for a rebranding of a new state wide competition, comprised of clubs which are embedded in their local communities and have both highly skilled and developing players, together with a senior team which is a drawcard for supporters of our game.

Our united position on the NPLV

We are all committed to a successful NPLV model rollout in 2014 which works for both community and NPL club.

The NPLV should be financially viable for all clubs, modelling by clubs reflects otherwise.

That the NPLV be introduced after proper consultation with the clubs and after taking genuine account of their concerns.

To date the FFV has not properly consulted the clubs but rather has merely informed us of how its proposed model will operate. Even the peak Council body that represents all councils, Parks Leisure Australia, in a letter attached to all clubs (29th July) made reference and supported all of these similar concerns about the FFV's approach and failure to properly consult.

We are united and determined to work for the good of the game in Victoria. It is unprecedented in Australia that 50 clubs have come together in a united way.

No one can reasonably argue that the NPLV could proceed viably, let alone succeed, without the participation of the top 30-50 clubs in Victoria at all levels: Men, Women, Junior Boys and Girls.


The 50 clubs are all run by volunteers who have no personal financial interest in any of these issues and are working for a viable NPLV model. The contribution and legacy of all these clubs, large, small and everything in between, should be recognised, respected and preserved. That will not happen under the proposed model.


The 50 Co-signatory clubs combined constitute over 100,000 football club members / supporters / youth teams / juniors / sub juniors / parents / coaches / administrators.

We call upon the FFV to respect the concerns of its clubs and act as its mandate requires it to do; in the best interests of the game.

No, the points system is the same right around Australia (until the PFA challenge it).

The differences between the others states and Victoria have been discussed at length - but it is essentially a question of in every other state the top division has simply been re-branded as the NPL with certain criteria to be met by clubs within a fixed time-frame; whereas here in Victoria the status (earned on the pitch) of clubs is irrelevant, the FFV plan to bring in a zonal system, with an NPL club in each zone and all sides below that level being subservient to the zonal NPL club.

There are also objections to the wording of the FFV's documentation which essentially says "You do as we say, and you pay for it, we won't guarantee any income, and we take no responsibility for any losses"

Beyond this - there is tremendous acrimony regarding the 'consultation' process, which has consisted of a few information sessions rather than any meaningful discussion.

My money is on the court case being dropped soon, but probably another one starting which won't take long and see the clubs get their way :cool:

And mahony can keep studying legal sports cases in the meantime :lol:

I'm so confused.

So the main differences between the rest of the NPL and those proposed in Victoria and Western Australia is the points system that promotes youth. Correct me if I missed completely.

More to the point than the financial modeling, zoning and PPS - the issue for an FFV model NPLV is that we will have 12 (from 15) inferior bids, spread around the state, with low support and poor commercial connections, playing the top tier competition, meanwhile, 12 (or more) stronger clubs, with better facilities, established support and commercial connections, strong volunteer lists, etc., will be playing in the 2nd tier non NPL league. These two sets of clubs will be competing for the best players and the 2nd tier will be able to afford to pay higher fees. Having spoken to a lot of players - including young players with A-league aspirations, the majority will be staying with their current clubs, or in the familiar league, rather than transferring over to new entities for an experimental competition.

In short, I don't see how the FFV NPLV system will raise standards in any way, it will be a league not unlike the current VPL u21 league, but with a lot of the best players missing.

But it's OK I'm sure you know better than I do :lol:

The FFV are being taken to court by 2 zone reps my friend

Oh dear...........

(1) You do know that liability has nothing to do with who initiates a civil action? Look at my original post and try again.

(2) with reference to the quoted text. For a group of people who “are not taking the FFV to court” there are a lot of lawyers and court applications flying about? If the clubs (even as members of a new association) are not taking the FFV to court then how on earth did the FFV end up with a summons?

(3) The edifice of an association won't save clubs if the FFV has a case against any principal agent. The insurance they seek through an association does not provide indemnification - and they know it.

An alternative view is that the legal system is designed to ensure that associations can be established to facilitate unlawful acts or omissions without legal recourse.

Good luck! ](*,)

Edited by mahony: 2/9/2013 11:33:01 AM

What a fool :lol: For someone who knows everything, you don't seem to know much. The clubs are not taking the FFV to court. So are not liable for anything.

Sooner than the next election champ :)

I didnt say when the next election would be? How can the next election be "sooner" than the next election?

Nah - with your last two posts you have already achieved the mission :lol:

On a serious note, the clubs are well furnished with counsel and will be well aware of their legal exposure should they get to the SC in particular. I was at the derby yesterday and everyone was talking about it. Punters are not stupid. We know politics when we see it and we don't ever assume that disputes such as this are a simple matter of right and wrong.

Life is much more complicated than that - and this is why lawyers are wealthy and most of us are not.

Funny how you can't tell me how the FFV will come after the clubs for damages :lol:

That’s a reasonable view from a person who is prepared to think it through.

I think there are quite specific problems with (1) financial modelling, (2) zoning administration and (3) the PPS. All of these could be overcome in time and in good faith though.

Ultimately none of us are Nostradamus - but we can all try. We all want what’s best for the game and hopefully it will work out that way.