FFV have just released the results of their Football review and link is below

 http://www.footballfedvic.com.au/independent-final-report-released-for-stakeholder-feedback/

It's positive that FFV is independantly tackling major football issues like cost of playing, player development, competition structure, etc and would be interesting to hear peoples feedback. 

  There’s a lot of separate issues being looked at in this review. Obviously, this is just the initial report and those different issues can be examined further in the next phases. There’s nothing in the report that stands out as being wrong to me.
I think the competition at both a senior and junior male level certainly needs a restructure. I’m not sure how big an impact some of the initiatives will have on reducing junior fees, but I’m willing to accept any attempts. I like the idea of trying to make competitions at NPL level more competitive, also allowing stronger junior community teams into the tiered structure (to show that it’s not NPL or nothing). Gippsland certainly need junior representation, not sure if Sunraysia would work though.
I prefer the Scenario 2 Junior Model.  
Some interesting points were raised in the Community and Regional forums, especially around player points, visa spots and travel costs (I have a bit of a pro-regional bias).
One idea that caught my attention (it’s not included as an action to investigate) would be allowing clubs to field multiple teams across different divisions of the Men’s State Leagues rather than forcing thirds teams into the Metro Leagues (very much a Sydney association’s set-up). Maybe even a decoupling of reserves teams leading to a huge increase in the number of State League divisions. Eg. A community clubs first team could be in State League 2 NW, their second team in State League 5 W and their third team in State League 9 W and so on. Each being promoted and relegated independently.

I like the review. Any review is a good one as it means serious people are thinking about our game. 

One part of the review I think is a bit of a red herring is the obsession with participation and keeping players in the game. This seems to be conventional wisdom accepted by the masses. 

I reckon this is driven by senior managers who have KPI's around 'revenue' and hence the drive for participation. From a parents, and previous player perspective, I won't be judging the success of my kids youth years by how long he/she sticks with soccer. From a holistic approach we do want our kids to remain active but sometimes leaving for a while, trying something else, doing a sport that is less competitive and less time consuming is entirely appropriate. Kids only have so much energy. So the choice could be to be pretty good at soccer (NPL level) which still involves 5 days per week in a pretty intense and stressful environment, and be pretty good at school (or any other interests kids invariably have).

The other excellent option is to step back from the competitive team environment and maybe concentrate energy on study or step back into community soccer or other sports, like running, cycling, swimming etc that don't require these kids to commit to the rigours of such a structured environment. 

The conventional wisdom that players dropping out of the system is a disaster doesn't also factor into the account that team sport (soccer included) isn't always 'fun'!  Playing at a high level required dedication and commitment and as the kids get older it becomes more and more competitive. Some kids love that environment but I reckon lots of these kids probably don't need that layer of stress and make the wise decision to try something new.

So although I would like my kids to stick with certain activities, sometimes trying something new is the best result. I would guess that if we were to dig down into the figures quoted in the report - most of the kids dropping out have done so with sound judgement.

I also reckon that many of the best 10-14 year olds drop out (again normal) because they realise their is very little pathway to playing the professional game (a-league clubs). These kids are usually motivated / smart kids and when they see no real carrot (and hear stories of great youth players not making an a-league squad) then risk vs reward has to come into play. If the child is happy and motivated to play NPL then that is a different story. My guess is 100 pct of NPL kids dream of playing in the a-league or Europe

https://dailyfootballshow.com/2020-vision-ffv-review-mens-and-boys-npl/
Outcomes of the review. Seems good to me.

The best thing is too Peter would seriously consider the recommendations.

I think it's a great outcome - de-coupling the juniors and seniors is a great step forward. I also like the removal of costs and overheads for the second and third divisions away from 'NPL' status. Will allow more clubs to operate at a higher level before deciding whether they want to make the giant leap into NPL status.

I do disagree with the stadium arrangements however. They were a great excuse to lobby councils and local governments into investment into stadia.