"National Premier League" in essence should represent the strongest clubs outside of the HAL

in every state that has been adhered to

Not sure what FFV are trying to formulate with their model but it is obvious that the FFV have conveniently pealed certain recommendation of the NPL NCR from the FFA and tried to drag and drop them into their existing zonal system - very convenient as this sits within their current strategic plan rather than building a new one which truly captures in essence what the NPL set out to achieve

what does this mean for south?

- no point in participating in a competition in isolation with the like of Ballarat and surfcoast - no disrespect for these teams - however not a growth strategy - happy to entertain these team if they were a part of a more established and centralised model with established teams

- south now widely recognised as the 3rd largest football broadcaster nationally - yet the NPLV guidelines would not allow smfc tv to broadcast?????

- smfc this season has over $300K in sponsorship - the FFV is yet to determine revenue streams yet wants control and ownership of clubs trademark

- a football club's value is assessed on 2 pivotal measures - on field performance and membership - yet the FFV is determined to have clubs marginalised to 1 team per age group effectively marginalising a clubs membership base and scrapping small sided games and teams

- zonal system - as mentioned the legacy of the underachieving Champions league which never took off at senior level - it is obvious the FFV plans to have 1 representative in each zone - and all other clubs to be the subservants of each zone - meaning clubs like Melbourne Knights weould utimately be restricted to play senior football in its zone???

- Financials - costly exercise with a block on current revenue streams - yet no direction on new revenue streams - only that these streams would be in the full control of the FFV - an organisation who's number 1 sponsor in the last 10 years has been through fining clubs rather than creating revenue channels

- weaker competition - The VPL is widely regarded from a talent perspective as the strongest state comp in Australia - yet the NPL_V version would make it the weakest - rather than having the best players in the state participating - you would have the best players in a zone participating via their zonal rep - meaning players that missout in a zone may be better than the players representing another zone......compounding this would also seriously dampen the prospects of the Vic team's performance in a national comp at the end of each season which is the only commercial reality granted so far on the NPL vy the FFA not the FFV

the NPLV lack allignment with the FFA NPL model and what the other states have executed - having a competition with category b sides based on an EOI regardless on their ability to deliver is a monumental concern

Without being arrogant smfc gave the NPLV some credibility last year by publicly stating that we welcome "change" however it is clear to see the NPLV have taken a rigid approach primarily to protect its current underachiving summer zonal league minus true feasibility study

You cannot have a Premiere league without clubs with advanced infrastructure such as the Knights - Heidelberg - Green Gully - Bentleigh - Preston - Sunshine - etc etc

Had we adopted the NSW version we would easily achieve 2 tiers including the enablement of some of our major regional centres to participate

admit you got it wrong FFV and the quicker we can structure a competition to launch next year in its capacity

clubs should be judged on their infrastructure - not your formulated version which in all honesty asks powerful clubs to risk 50-60 plus years of evolution

These clubs would me more than happy to participate and share the stage with the lesser knowns - none off the clubs want to hijack the game - the game requires teams to be healthy - however your model is way over formulated and the NPL-V is something that should be relatively simple and executed by now

You gloat about the 40 something EOI's - this is just engagement from the clubs to remain in contact - not a commitment

Scrap it and start again - epic fail FFV

When I see plans like this it basically suggests there are too many middle managers in your offices all having an input in the final version



Edited by chris: 11/7/2013 10:21:30 AM

Honestly, the scary thing is no matter how many time people belittle Chris, he is always right. Shows the average intelligence of this forum is very low.

The franchise model is a joke.

Very good summation

Saw a spreadsheet yesterday that even on the most conservative grounds shows that the NPL Model in Victoria is unsustainable.

Even paying senior squad players O dollars brings up a deficit, and this is meant to be a semi- professional league underpinning the Aleague!

Has anyone got any latest info on what the clubs are planning to do to the "Evil FFV Empire"

Patrick Lane wrote this in the Melb. Leader Yesterday....

"TWO thirds of Football Federation Victoria clubs to have submitted expressions of interest for the proposed National Premier League Victoria will withdraw their applications.

No current Victorian Premier League clubs remain in the race to join the nationally-streamlined second tier of domestic soccer, while all but four State League 1 clubs have turned their back on the venture.

Only Sunshine George Cross, Werribee, FC Bulleen and Fawkner Blues are yet to convey their withdrawal from the State League 1 ranks.

Although the governing body has kept expressions of interest confidential, documents seen by Leader show 44 initial candidates, with 27 of those originally submitted by existing clubs.



The remaining applicants are consortiums, such as Greater Geelong Galaxy, Wodonga Diamonds and Northern Raiders.

Tuesday's meeting was convened by a group of clubs - Pascoe Vale, Moreland Zebras, Box Hill United, Northcote City and South Melbourne.

Central to their concerns is a devised hypothetical financial model, which found clubs in the NPLV could accrue debts of more than $140,000 each year.

The financial model was endorsed by five Victorian clubs, and is believed to have been devised on conservative estimates.

It is understood a FFV board member was at Tuesday's meeting.

No representatives of Tuesday's meeting would comment, while FFV chief executive Mitchell Murphy said in a statement the governing body had received only one official withdrawal.

"FFV is extremely confident Victoria will see a strong National Premier Leagues competition in 2014. Our NPL team is currently working with many NPL applicants who are putting the finishing touches on their applications," Murphy said.

"FFV has only received three official withdrawals from the 45 applicants and one applicant, a club, recently retracted its withdrawal and has decided to submit an application."

I'm surprised at Sunshine.

http://www.parksleisure.com.au/documents/item/2016

=d>

Apparently decision has been delayed

of the 44 entries 29 about to pull out

Of the 15 that remain

5 x clubs
10 x consortiums

goes back to what I was saying above

FFV dragging and dropping their failed summer league within the boundaries of the NPL

FFV to be the MAIN beneficiary of the licences that will be delivered to these consortiums

THIS IS A FUCKING JOKE

More to come>>>

Victoria's VPL is the strongest state league in this country and it is being systematically dissasembled

Next week will be a historical moment for football in vic
30 clubs - mass drop out from All the key EOI clubs - one voice
football in vic is about to experience an earth tremor
nplv will predominantly consist of consortiums and some regional entrants

Edited by chris: 27/7/2013 01:47:39 AM

So much is left unanswered in all of this. Have the FFV given reasons for their blueprint varying so much from the other Federations? Has a study, or an estimate, been made regarding the Vic clubs' feasability if they were to adhere to, say, FootballWest's model? Is there anything to suggest that the clubs that pulled out - the VPL and SL1 clubs - did so as a group, potentially with a unified plan for a rebel league?

Surely a withdrawal this large would force the FFV's hand in bringing their model in line with other states' (or force FFA's hand in making FFV do so), or perhaps just delay the entry to the NPL until the clubs can come to an agreement. This is going to be an interesting saga to watch.

As I understand the clubs that have withdrawn have pretty much all stated that they would be happy to enter the NPL-VIC if it was run on the same system as the NPL-NSW. Considering the NPL-NSW is run on the FFA's guidelines, it's a damning comment on the stance of the FFV that they would alienate so much of the football community in order to chase something that even the FFA don't feel is required.

http://www.mfootball.com.au/nplv-to-go-ahead-says-ceo-with-others-to-play-in-sl1-style-league/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=nplv-to-go-ahead-says-ceo-with-others-to-play-in-sl1-style-league

Please note : 4 pm tomorrow





5 August 2013 – UPDATE No: 3

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

An update on where we currently stand in the design of a new NPLV model in our state.

'FFA encourages all parties to work for the good of the game in Victoria. In any change
process, issues will arise, but as we've seen in other states these matters can be best
resolved without the intervention of FFA.' David Gallop FFA CEO 2 Aug 2013

We are aware that the FFV is separately contacting the clubs which have withdrawn from the EOI process
and is seeking to have them re-join the application process in many cases by misinforming these clubs about
what has recently occurred.

Should the FFV contact you, please refer them back to myself &/or Tom. This strategy is designed to split the
strength of the clubs working together.

We would like to welcome the following co-signatory clubs withdrawing from the NPLV process.
- Avondale Heights
- Hume United

We’d like to commend all of the 47 clubs/associations for taking the difficult but principled decision to stand together and try and achieve a successful NPL model for Victoria. It’s not only a historic stand, but such a vast number of clubs representing a cross section of Victorian football demonstrates that the concerns that we all hold for the current model are valid and justifies our stance.

The FFV induced many of us in submitting an EOI on the basis that our concerns with the proposed model would be addressed by way of a proper consultation process before applications closed. We subsequently found out that the FFV had no intention of changing anything.

The FFV’s latest move in response to our action asking clubs to submit ‘non-compliant’ bids should they wish to do so, smacks of desperation, division within the FFV itself, is legally questionable and leaves the EOI and application process in tatters.

So how exactly will they compare equally the "dozen clubs/consortia" they claim are left in the process (from initially 45) with the non-compliant bids from other clubs? This is ridiculously inept, the whole process has been farcical.

FFV NPLV Licence Agreement

We have attached the FFV NPLV Licence Agreement for the few remaining clubs in the EOI process to re-read and advise their members about what is expected in the current model.

There are many provisions in the FFV Licence Agreement document that are alarming.

For Instance:
 Bank Guarantees
 Commercial Rights
 Intellectual Property
 Indemnities
 Termination

There are many other concerning provisions which no doubt you will identify for yourselves. Clubs and members need to obtain their own legal advice on the terms of the Licence Agreement before deciding whether to proceed.

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 clubs
2. The NPLV should be financially viable for all clubs. The clubs’ concern about the proposed NPLV model is that it is not financially viable.
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 all councils, Parks Leisure Australia, in a letter attached to all clubs last Monday 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 47 clubs/association 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 30-40 clubs in Victoria at all levels: Men, Women, Junior Boys and Girls
7. The 47 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.

It's disappointing that we need take to task the organisation that we fund, but we will succeed and do so in readiness for a new NPLV model in 2014.

See you all on the 26 Aug 7pm, there we will discuss and agree on a resolution which we will put jointly to the FFV.

Next Steps

1. The co-signatory clubs will call upon the FFV to halt the current NPLV process, by Wednesday 7 August 2013.

2. If this does not occur, South Melbourne Football Club will lead a court application by a number of willing clubs, to suspend the current NPLV process.

3. All the co-signatory clubs will convene on Monday 26 August 2013 to agree on the minimum requirements to be contained for the “NEW NPLV” model for 2014. It is intended that after this meeting we will consult with the FFV in relation to the implementation of the new model.

4. We advise those clubs considering withdrawing from the Current NPLV process to submit
their letter of support to the group.

These clubs/associations have publicly withdrawn from the NPLV process and/or submitted statements to the co-signatory group and formally to the FFV.

Bentleigh Greens Box Hill United South Melbourne Womens Dandenong Thunder Fawkner Blues Sandringham Womens
Northcote City Heidelberg United Box Hill United Womens Oakleigh Cannons Moreland Zebras Heidelberg United Womens Pascoe Vale North Geelong Warriors Bundoora United Womens Port Melbourne Sharks Gippsland Soccer Assoc. Ashburton United Womens South Melbourne Bundoora United Altona City Womens Southern Stars Altona Magic Casey Comets Womens Green Gully Cavaliers St Albans Saints Preston Lions Womens Hume City Western Suburbs Cairnlea Womens Melbourne Knights Peninsula Strikers Seaford United Langwarrin Collingwood City Malvern City Fawkner Cairnlea Kingston City Preston Lions Sporting Whittlesea Waverley Wanderers Avondale Heights Whittlesea United Northern Roosters FC Clifton Hill Hume United

---

South Melbourne board member Tom Kalas said: ''We are all committed to a successful NPLV model rollout in 2014 which works for both community and NPL clubs. [Our] concern about the proposed NPLV model is that it is not financially viable.'

Somebody had better explain this to Bulleen Lions because its currently not getting through to them

they've got cash to throw down the drain when the sale of Chaplain finally happens

Don't know if this is one of the biggest bounces ever, but reading the prediction on the outcomes pretty much stop on.

PPS the player point system is a joke and holding back the playing level and youth advancement.
Having no Domestic Transfer System is a disaster.

same shit different day.
So sad and frustrating our game can't get anything in motion for the better but smokes/mirrors and talk.....

Any chance of the State league fixtures being released?