The irony of multiculturalism and diversity being seen as a positive in every aspect of Australian life except mens football is not lost on me.  In most other cultural and social areas ‘the ethnics’ are celebrated but in football we have actively shunned them. Bizarre and backward thinking. And out of step with modern Australia. But it’s not irretrievable.

South Melbourne has had three bites at it (entering the A-League), and at least for the 2nd and 3rd tries, missed out to inferior bids.
Damage done I'd say.

But we happy to taste the food though! 

Funny country.

Define popular? We were averaging 10k for years, there is nothing wrong with that.

In my opinion  what makes a sport ‘popular ‘ is that it is immediately identifiable by the average ‘joe blow’. When the A-league, the Socceroos or the Matildas are mentioned  it’s ‘blank looks’ by the majority of the populace. Whereas cricketers, ‘footy’ players of any of the other codes even tennis players are instantly recognised. Perhaps it is down to a lack of publicity ( must admit even my wife knows who Tim Cahill is and she has zero interest in football).

Define popular? We were averaging 10k for years, there is nothing wrong with that.

one word... Eurosnobs. 

Professional football is popular in Australia.

We’ve just made some poor assumptions and decisions over the last 50 years.

Over the last 15 years we thought a professional league based on Australian sporting culture would do it.
In fact we promised the owners riches beyond compare, setting a policy course that doesn’t meet our expectations nor the expectations of those who invested in the League.

We thought marquees would be a game changer.

We thought if only there was less or no ethnic clubs then the Australian masses would see less of an impediment to crossing over to the beautiful game.

They thought getting rid of  active support, seen as rowdy and symbolic of the ethnic Football days as the way to attract the threatre goer.

We thought World Cup qualification would be the game changer and everyone would just hop over to the true football.

We think winning a World Cup will do the trick without any thought or consideration in what is needed to achieve that.

The owners brought over Scudamore to tell them how to make the game more popular, but didn’t like what they were told.

The journey to what we want for the game here is a long one. And we’ve lost a lot of time, sidetracked by distractions of grandeur.

We have to be more Club focused, Clubs are the engine of the game the World over, they are the marquee. Great players have come and gone through Real Madrid, but people support Real Madrid not the galaxy of stars that have passed through.

To win a World Cup our players need to be playing and dominating in the top 5 leagues of Europe. With the top 5 clubs in those leagues.

To get those players to those clubs and leagues we have to have a vibrant and competitive league here, that includes transfer fees, promotion Relegation, a connected pyramid, diverse and innovative player development especially at the youngest ages (I’m talking ages 4 to 12), parental education on how they can best help the kids get the skills they need just to enjoy the game. We have to come to the realization that not every kid is elite, but if they stay in the game taught to love it they will be the next administrator or sponser or coach etc.
we have to stop saying, AL you are the professional clubs, NPL you are the development clubs, Community you are for the masses. Telling Clubs this is your territory, and the people in this territory belong to you. Clubs siloed into a specific roles is like creating an East German sports model without the drugs. Even those  clamoring for age restrictions on clubs In competition don’t get it, just playing youth in the AL NPL or wherever isn’t the game changer people think if the kids aren’t good enough they’re not good enough.

And we can’t have arbitrary player payments regulations, Licensing conditions etc etc that don’t reflect the financial capacity and level of the game. We have to have more of an organic approach and that takes time. Like the Japanese who have a 100 year plan.

So my point we need to accept we are in the long game, there is no silver bullet, there is not one thing we can do that will change our circumstances, but there are many small things we can do and build on. In particular we need to equal regulations for all Clubs within a free market framework.
Could write a lot more on this but I think I’ve put my view across.

It was a very respectable and relatively popular league with a decent slice of the summer pie and then S Lowy and Gallop went to war with its own fans.

The game has never recovered since.

I agree Allsvenskan is a good benchmark for us.
They have some advantages but their population is one third of ours and they have strong competition from other sports as well.
That's a pretty lucrative TV deal they have managed to put together (I guess it's only marginally higher than what our was before it was halved).
We should really be aiming for the same sort of dollars.

I hope for Australia's brand of football to be built around a variety of styles. Football with a mishmash of various different types of of footballers. Some robust defenders and midfielders, some defenders and midfielders with great football IQ whose positioning and passing allows the team to dictate (not to the point of being terrified of surrendering possession in the final third). Some attacking players who want to craft the "team goal" who takes minimal touches before passing and, as a team, manage to pass the ball into the back of the net (having outmaneouvred the opposition). And some attacking players (particularly a striker) who are a bit selfish with the ball and, using great dribbling ability, speed and an accurate shot, will take opponents on 1 vs 1.

To that end, we need a football environment that encourages all these types of footballers, including the slightly selfish 1 vs 1 type. And Australian football certainly shouldn't discourage footballers who are athletic (fast), even if they're tall.

Organically attempting to play football in the manner of Barcelona (while, to an extent, misinterpreting how Barcelona actually play football) + lacking the pathways for developing footballers + lacking decent coaches + lacking a competitive professional competition + lacking things such as street football = recipe for mediocrity.

Small wonder the broader Australian public isn't inspired by football in Australia.

In terms of more players that like the 1v1 the problem is that Australian sporting culture like team players and not selfish players. I.e they get called ball hogs

The Mbappe story which is on Optus sports explains the French like to develop individuals with flair and discipline over hard working team players, whilst here it’s the opposite.

Even Mombearts said it that Australian players are not taught to be more aggressive with their mentality rather they are told to stop after they dribble. 

Its a cultural problem that needs addressing.

+1

It might be a kind of manifestation of "tall poppy syndrome".

And it's such a stupid mentality. Thierry Henry (1.88m tall) was one of the best 1 vs 1 players in history, imo. His ball control was immaculate, he was incredibly fast and agile with absurd acceleration. He was also very strong. And then there was his the accuracy of his finishing. He could just spot weaknesses (whether in a defensive line or with the goalkeeper) and he'd exploit those weaknesses.

Absolutely prolific. Jamie Carragher reckons he was one of the best. He said

Sometimes as a defender against some of the top players we had at that time; Alan Shearer, Didier Drogba, Wayne Rooney, Robin van Persie – there’s not a lot you can do in certain situations because they were that good. But in his prime, Henry would simply run past you and there wasn’t a lot I could do.

and

I’ve used this analogy before and I make no apology for using it again. When he hit top gear and ran past you, it was like trying to chase after someone on a motorbike.

And yet despite these demonstrations of remarkable 1 vs 1 talent and plenty of shooting, Henry was a team player who contributed a huge number of assists. In the 2002-2003 season, he contributed 23 assists. But no. In Australia, you're either a ball hog or a selfless team player. Yet another false dichotomy that holds back Australian football.

Australians also generally are not real good at sport - even though they have some weird belief they're the greatest sportspeople on earth,. Look at Aussie rules, Ffs you can come from overseas and be a professional in a year at it - they're not even good at their own sport. Maybe football hasn't taken off massively because it's too much of a challenge to actually get good at?

The Aussie Rules example doesn't really back up your point, imo. The reason you can come from overseas and become professional at Aussie Rules (as an adult) is that there's a sheer lack of technique compared to football, tennis, cricket, etc.

For those other sports, there's so much technique involved that athleticism on its own isn't enough. Generally, most pros (and probably almost every world-class player) started playing the sport at a young age. That's basically the only way for your level of technique to be world-class at the sport.

Aussie Rules is literally all about athleticism and/or size/strength (depending on position), helped along by great sports conditioning and focus on HIIT/stamina. Technique doesn't matter.

Imo, relative to population size, Australians competing in sport at the highest level are (or have been) very good. Sure the sports we've been good at aren't always the most global of games. But the reality is there's only one truly global game and that's football. So if we're to argue that Australia's not good at sport, then the same goes for all countries except Brazil, Germany, Italy, France, Argentina, etc.

I'd argue that Ben Simmons and Patty Mills are outstanding at sport and exceedingly athletic. Then if you look at tennis, the "SpAussie" Alex de Minaur is considered one of the quickest (if not the quickest) on the men's tour. Then in cricket, the hand-eye co-ordination and reflexes of Steve Smith are essentially unsurpassed in that sport at present. Bit further back, and there's Ricky Ponting, Greg Chappell and, ultimately, Don Bradman. And then there's all those tennis players (Rod Laver, Roy Emerson, Tony Roche, John Newcombe, etc.) and swimming (Ian Thorpe, Grant Hackett, Susie O'Neill, Kyle Chalmers, etc.). And then some of the athletic Aussie Rules players who, unfortunately, didn't play football instead, such as Cyril Rioli. Australian sport bleeds talent to a code which isn't played outside VIC/SA/WA.

Australians aren't the "best" at sport on the planet. No nation can reasonably make that claim. Currently, Australia's the equivalent of an average European country. But it's categorically untrue to suggest that Aussies are "not real good at sport" or that haven't been "real good at sport" in the past. Another false dichotomy although I don't single you out there, tsf, I mean another false dichotomy that prevails in Australian society.

The stats in fact show we are to a worrying degree a nation of obese couch potatoes.  

Australia has always been the best or close to the best in almost every sport.

However with football we are light years behind the top 10 teams in the world and no amount of hard work can change that.

It's a pipe dream to think we can be a top 10 team so most fans aren't remotely interested in the game and watching our mediocrity.