Football Todays article

http://footballtoday.news/football-media-watch/ffa-congress-ffa-cup


FFA Congress reform

It was revealed yesterday evening via Vince Rugari of AAP that the Congress reform could be derailed. The existing FFA Board needs only three of the existing ten voters to disagree with the recommendations when they come to a special Congress meeting on 7 September and the Congress Review Working Group's (CRWG) recommendations will fail. The AAP reports are also included in the Fairfax press. 

Ray Gatt writes that the four smallest state federations of Northern NSW, Tasmania, the ACT and NT have been 'convinced' by FFA to vote against the recommendations of the CRWG whose report has now been submitted to FIFA. You will recall that the four state federations represented on that working group were the other four. Gatt reports that FFA/the four states are concerned that the PFA is to have two votes - which, if the case, is the first time this particular objection has been raised.

Emma Kemp reports that there was a "flurry of last-ditch lobbying" by Steven Lowy and David Gallop to ensure that the recommended changes do not proceed. She also reports that the lobbying was so intense that FIFA intervened with a conference call on the weekend to remind the state federations of the "virtues of the working group's process" but Steven Lowy believes he has a right put his view directly. 

Whatever happens on 7 September, Steven Lowy is finished as Chairman of FFA. Quite why he would want to derail an agreed process overseen by an independent chair - with an FFA Board member included on the CRWG also - is anyone's guess. It certainly isn't a move to 'save' his legacy. 

• CRWG have sent the recommendations to FIFA
• FIFA okay them this month
• Recommendations will be put to an EGM by Sep 7
• 8 out of the 10 need to vote FOR the recommendations
• If 3 or more don't , it goes back to FIFA to see what they will do.
• Rumours are that at least 2 and maybe 4 are AGAINST them

Grauniad article

Time for FFA to show real leadership and bring miserable chapter to an end

After two years of futile bickering, a normalisation committee is now the circuit breaker the game needs

On 4 April Football Federation Australia issued a press release headlined: “Fifa announces terms of reference for congress review working group.” In the release FFA offers its support for the CRWG– which was unsurprising as it represented an alternative to the board’s removal by Fifa and the imposition of a normalisation committee.

“Football Federation Australia chairman Steven Lowy AM welcomed receipt of the terms of reference and said FFA looked forward to working with Fifa, the Asian Football Confederation and all Australian football stakeholders to expand the congress,” the media release read. At long last an end to this interminable saga was in sight.

Four months later, and on completion of the CRWG’s deliberations, it now appears FFA has had a change of mind. The recommendations of the CRWG remain under wraps but it is safe to assume they propose disrupting the status quo FFA’s leadership has managed so assiduously since the organisation’s formation. How much disruption remains to be seen, but clearly enough to spook FFA’s leaders into action.

Instead of accepting in good faith the recommendations of a group constituted by Fifa that includes an independent chairperson and a member of FFA’s own board, not to mention the chairmen of the four largest member federations, two A-League club representatives, and the CEO of the players’ union, FFA has instead sought to exploit a procedural loophole to circumnavigate the review body and drag out the fiasco. You almost want to applaud the brass neck.

Point VI of the review’s terms of reference indicates any recommendations need to be passed at an FFA special meeting, and for that to take place no later than 7 September. Back in April it was presumed this would be a formality, a ceremonial rubber stamp marking the end of one process and the beginning of the next. Apparently not.

Under FFA’s constitution when such a meeting addresses changes to the organisation’s fundamentals, 75% of votes are required to pass the motion – in other words at least eight of the 10 current congress members.
It appears at least two (Capital Football and Football Federation Northern Territory) and as many as four of the smallest member federations (none of whom were on the CRWG) are now prepared to vote against the acceptance of the CRWG recommendations.
It does not require a wild imagination to believe that such member federations are not acting without encouragement.

It is the latest and most desperate attempt yet to cling on to power by FFA’s intransigent leadership. If the CRWG recommendations are not accepted by the existing congress in September the ball passes into Fifa’s court once more. Already unimpressed with what they’ve witnessed over recent days it is hard to envisage anything other than the imposition of a normalisation committee. Based on the experience of the previous two years of futile bickering, a normalisation committee is looking increasingly like the circuit breaker the game needs.

FFA continue to insist they are doing all of this for the good of the game. It is no longer possible to agree that the good of the game is best served by this behaviour. Under the auspices of Fifa the CRWG started with a blank sheet of paper and an independent chair, and through the course of its investigation counselled the game’s stakeholders from the top of the pyramid to the bottom. If the outcome of that is not to FFA’s liking, they might want to look in the mirror.

This is an organisation that has had 13 years to do something about its poor governance (at least the two most recent of these have been on notice from Fifa) and by failing to do so have succeeded in putting all manner of stakeholders offside, including the A-League clubs, the professional players, and the member federations representing the lion’s share of registered Australian players. They have already lost one congress vote on their preferred model for reorganisation and yet they continue to shift the goalposts until their preferred outcome materialises. It is unseemly, shameless, and leaves football in Australia in a state of uncertainty at a time when big decisions need to be made.

The member federations should not escape censure either for their part in enabling this behaviour. In fact, if this shambles plays out to script it will be the banner case in point for proving how absurd the system is, one where organisations like Football Northern Territory, led by Stuart Kenny, and Capital Football, chaired by Mark O’Neill, could combine to form a 20% voting bloc yet represent less than a 10th of registered participants in football in Australia.

Change is long overdue. There is now consensus among stakeholders about what the future should look like. It is time for FFA to show real leadership and bring this miserable chapter to its conclusion. If they can’t then we should hope Fifa has the gumption to end it for them.