http://ffvmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/No8Update14August2013.pdf


http://ffvmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/SupremeCourtAction15Aug2013.pdf

Edited by troy5: 14/8/2013 09:55:19 PM

Edited by troy5: 20/8/2013 06:14:04 PM

Why aren't there 51 clubs listed as participating in the legal action I only count 14?

Edited by Joffa: 14/8/2013 10:01:19 PM

Its for coordination reasons, you can't expect 51 people/presidents being called into meetings every day

The 14 are the organising committee.

The 51 have all written formal withdrawal letters (they have been previously published) and joined as Co-signatories in the design of the new NPLV.

Key note on the above statement:



This is not the aggressive language of brow-beaters - this is solid advice which has yet to be taken by those remaining in the process.

Email just received.



Good evening all,

Please be advised that Court Proceedings were issued late this afternoon.

Documents will be served on the FFV tomorrow, Friday 16 August 2013.


For the handful of clubs remaining in the EOI process, we advise you to:

· Obtain legal advice regarding the concerning provisions in the Licence Agreement and the Participation Criteria documents you have received from the FFV before proceeding.

· Obtain your local Council’s endorsement and approval before proceeding with an application


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, 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 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

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

Yours in football

Nicholas Tsiaras & Tom Kalas

I agree - indeed the seek leagl advice and speak to your council messages are also in the NPLV application documentation. Very sound advice!

Withdrawing their EOI does not mean they are prepared to take the FFV to court.

A fundamental tenant of our code is that you need to earn your place to the top tier.
Advancement / Relegation is a core part of our game

The clubs that have submitted applications are in attempt subverting the principles of our game.
They like all the other clubs have a 'moral obligation' to the tenants of our game.

The FFV has shown a gross dereliction of its charter. The courts will take them to task and the FFV Board members will be financially liable for it too. That's why the smart board member (or members) have resigned, they can see what's coming.

To be complicit in this 'leap frog' by aberrant consortiums/clubs, needs to be highlighted and in due course dealt with

The NPL is the delivery mechanism for implementing the national curriculum nothing more nothing else.

Except the FFV model doesn't seem to.

Lynch has summarised well.

Clubs want a model that rebrands the top tiers.
They keep their community links and play were they are entitled to play.


The Age
17 Aug 2013

CLUBS TAKE FFV TO COURT

M Lynch

The ill feeling between Football Federation Victoria and most of the leading clubs in the state shows little sign of abating, with the clubs having instituted legal proceedings against the FFV on Friday.
The dispute over the creation of the National Premier League Victoria drags on.

The clubs want the FFV to abandon the current, disputed model that, they argue, does not serve the sport's future development, and instead embrace one which allows them to remain community focused while fielding sides in the top flight.

It's charter (The Constitution of FFV Inc.) says nothing about protecting promotion/relegation. It is however deeply concerned with managing and developing football in Victoria.

See Constitution 1.1(e) and 1.1(i)- http://www.footballfedvic.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Corporate/FFV_Constitution_and_ByLaws/Constitution.pdf

Again, the court proceedings don’t seem to be questioning the constitutionality of the proposed NPLV (at least as best I can see from the available material).

Case is finaly listed in the Civil list of the Melbourne Magistrates Court on 26 August for an "interlocutory injunction" - i.e. please stop the FFV process so we can have time to make arguments in the Civil division of the Supreme Court to end it permanently or at least force a binding mediation.

20 August 2013 – UPDATE No: 11



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

---

As advised last Friday, we have begun legal proceedings against the FFV.



The court hearing is scheduled for the 26th of August.

The matter comes before the court for the first hearing (a Directions Hearing).

Orders will be sought for it to be transferred to the Supreme Court due to the importance and complexity of the case and for the further conduct of the case.



On the same day, 26th Aug at 7pm, we are convening to consult, design and agree on the ‘New NPL V’ model that will be rolled out for 2014.



Invitations will be emailed out in due course.



Upon completion of the ‘New NPL V’, the FFV will be consulted in relation to the implementation of the new model.



We again call upon the FFV Board (whose names are listed below) to suspend the current NPL process.



Nick Monteleone (President)
Aldrin De Zilva
Zak Gruevski
Karen Janiszewski
Lynne Jordan
John Lewis
Steven Milicevic
Kimon Taliadoros



We have been advised that Karen Janiszewski has resigned from the FFV Board on the 16th of August.



We are advised that out of the 15 applications received by the FFV on the 16th of August:



6 are from the Country/Regional areas

2 are current Metropolitan clubs

7 are new consortium / entities



Most have not received council approval; nearly all are ‘non-compliant’ bids.



We’d like to commend all of the now 50 clubs/associations for taking the difficult but principled decision to stand together and achieve a successful NPL model that works for both community and NPL clubs in Victoria.



It’s not only a historic stand, but such a vast number of clubs representing a wide cross section of Victorian football demonstrates the concerns that we all hold for the current model are valid and justifies our stance.





These 50 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.



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, 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 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.



5. We are united and determined to work for the good of the game in Victoria. It is unprecedented in Australia that 50 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 30-50 clubs in Victoria at all levels: Men, Women, Junior Boys and Girls.



7. 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.



It's disappointing that we need take to task the organisation that we fund.

We will succeed and do so in readiness for a new NPLV model in 2014.



On behalf of the 50 Co-signatory Clubs



Tom Kalas - Director South Melbourne FC

Nicholas Tsiaras - Vice President Box Hill United SC


Edited by troy5: 20/8/2013 06:16:48 PM

The steak is now on the grill

"Upon completion of the ‘New NPL V’, the FFV will be consulted in relation to the implementation of the new model".

:lol:

Kimon Taliadoros, a FFA political whore & suckhole if there ever was one.

An alternative view is that he is a highly educated and articulate migrant who made a tremendous contribution as a pro in his adopted country, a leader of the player union committed to player welfare and someone who cares deeply about the future development of the game and the interests of players.

Just a thought.

Further than that, another view would be that Kimon is the newest member of the board and appears to be the least 'tainted' by previous decisions. He also appears to be one of the few who is willing to listen to common sense and is willing to meet with the clubs to try and settle things sensibly.

Your fucken kiddin. You wouldn't know shit about Kimon. If it was up to Kimon, all you pretenders and your mono-ethnic clubs in the VPL would be history by now. Kimon is the one who's going to push the "mono-ethnic club self-destruct" button soon. You'rs are fucked. The end is near.

How did you come to that conclusion?

Are you off your meds again, dear?

ton.of.bricks OD'ing on powdered sugar for sure.

-PB

Calling mahony for his expert analysis of what is to happen after the mediation.. \:d/

I did prepare a 465 word consideration and then I thought "nah - he's a dickhead" and deleted it.

You will have to make do with this 29 word version :lol:

Awesome. Tell us about how it's got no chance of going to the supreme court again because there is no case against the FFV :lol:

I said it was "unlikely" (I see no substantive point of law but a magistrate still may), and the plaintiffs are further away from the Supreme Court today than they were when I said this. Regardless, my character assessment of you remains and is demonstrated further with every post you make.

You should post here more mahony :D Come one, it can be just like the old days!

Just posted

CLUB UPDATE LEGAL ACTION 19 SEPTEMBER 2013 - ALL CLUBS, FFV, FFA, MEDIA‏

As you are all aware, the legal action brought by two of the FFV Zone Representatives, Pave Jusup and Ezel Hikmet, on behalf of the Clubs proceeded to Mediation yesterday. Unfortunately, the Mediation was unsuccessful.



The Co-Signatory Clubs are disappointed at the outcome of yesterday’s Mediation conducted at CAS (Melbourne) by the Honourable Jerrold Cripps, as agreement for an acceptable NPLV to the Clubs commencing in 2014 couldn’t be reached with FFV.



The main concerns of the Co-Signatory group were the FFV’s conditions that the proposed NPLV requires the Clubs to be in and operate from zones, restricts the number of teams which can be fielded and splits many of the players and members who currently follow their Clubs.



These three conditions sought to be imposed by FFV are not mandatory requirements of the NPL pursuant to the recommendations of the National Competition Review (NCR) conducted by FFA.



Notwithstanding the present impasse, the Co-Signatory group and Plaintiffs support the implementation of a NPL based upon the aims of the FFA’s NCR recommendations but without the previously mentioned conditions which are imposed on the prospective applicants and the broader football community by the FFV.



The Co-Signatory group continues to call upon the FFV to implement a revised version to the current NPLV, which is in its discretion to do, and follow models implemented in other States.



The Co-signatory group are supporting the proceedings by the Plaintiffs and is hopeful that the matter will be transferred to the Supreme Court on 23 September 2013.



Finally, and on a separate note, in an earlier update we advised that we would be providing a detailed response and analysis to the statement circulated by the FFV on 12 September 2013 relating to the FFV’s position on those aspects of its proposed NPL which are in dispute. Given that the matter is presently before the Courts and is expected to be transferred to the Supreme Court, the Plaintiffs have been advised by their lawyers to ask us not to circulate our response at this time.




Nicholas Tsiaras - Vice President, Box Hill United SC

Tom Kalas - Director, South Melbourne FC