Marquee
2.1K
·
8.2K
·
about 17 years

Time for a white noise press release to put a bit of pressure on?

Cock
2.7K
·
16K
·
over 14 years

I actually feel sorry for Andy Martin in this case and I have added my own guestimations below based on what I read.

 

 

I think some people would be well advised to take pause and think for a moment before calling this a shambles, swept under the carpet or another NZF fix up. There has largely been a clean sweep out after all this. Ricki and BT are gone, McNumpty is gone along with FVH and while FDJ is there, I wonder how much input he had into the national team and all that. Yes he was the mouthpiece in the media but was he the decision maker? I'm inclined to cut him a little slack for that considering he was not long in the role either. Martin has to own the mistakes of a previous regime that he has no idea about and then promise to learn from them. Hard to learn from something when you don't know about it but also the guys that have made them have all gone!

I also think that in order to get the full picture of what was happening, Martin had to promise absolute anonymity otherwise how was anyone ever going to know the full story of what everyone said, felt, saw? He is a new CEO and if he got the half baked version with everyone pulling punches, how is he expected to fix things. I think what he has done has been the right move especially at a time when its been quite known that people have been getting off board the NZF train for a while so he needed to get the absolute truth about the state of his national side.

It does seem from what is being put out there that there is a blame at Ricki for the preparation, BT for the warm ups and lead ins and the board for letting this happen all unchecked. It seems the players wanted a voice and it got ignored and really, it all points back to a fucked up culture that had no checks and balances. It would appear that everyone left Ricki to his own way because 'well he got us there last time so......' I hate to harp on about it but you have to wonder how much of this would have happened on Ryan's watch (being a big time player, reputation and also the desire to speak out) and when you think about that, how much did he stop some of that crap with WC2010? The stories have been about for a while about how he got some Blackburn staff on board to help with some things and whether its true or not, taking into account Honiara horror, it does point to being a bad culture for quite a long time. I think if Martin works on fixing that, a few problems will come into line on there own.

 

I wonder if there was any comment in there at all about how it was probably a mistake with hindsight to keep Ricki on after Honiara. Be intrigued on the players thoughts on that one.

Stage Punch
2.1K
·
11K
·
over 16 years
james dean wrote:

Time for a white noise press release to put a bit of pressure on?

 

Sure.
Cock
2.7K
·
16K
·
over 14 years

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/10032290/Plumb-Time-for-football-grassroots-to-rise-up

"I talked to Martin on Friday morning and, in a half-hour meeting, he confirmed the terms of reference for the review were signed off before he started as NZ Football chief executive in February"

 

I feel sorry for Andy Martin. He has absolutely been given the wheel to an ambulance heading off a cliff on this one.

Must try harder
96
·
1.5K
·
almost 17 years

NZF may be incompetant troughers , but they cover their own arses very well ....

Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years

I normally try and take a pretty balanced view of NZF. They fuck a few things up but I appreciate that they have a tough job to do and the resources they have to do it don't always equate to people's high expectations.

This thing with not releasing even a summary of the World Cup Review is just stupid though.

I think the first, simplest and fairest thing we should do is simply ask them to change their mind.

I'm going to email Andy Martin directly and ask him to  consider at least publishing a summary or redacted version of the report and it would be good if some other people did too.

If you don't ask you don't get.

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

See Romanos article in Wgtonian

Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years

This one?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/sport/opinion/joseph-romanos/10036820/NZ-Football-doesn-t-do-itself-any-favours

He's right, but doesn't say anyhting new.

I'm more interested in what we can actually do about it.

Just firing off a bunch of emails asking them to reconsider would be a start.

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

I think the word is they will speak more about it after the Sth Africa fixture  

Marquee
970
·
6.5K
·
over 11 years
terminator_x wrote:

I normally try and take a pretty balanced view of NZF. They fuck a few things up but I appreciate that they have a tough job to do and the resources they have to do it don't always equate to people's high expectations.

This thing with not releasing even a summary of the World Cup Review is just stupid though.

I think the first, simplest and fairest thing we should do is simply ask them to change their mind.

I'm going to email Andy Martin directly and ask him to  consider at least publishing a summary or redacted version of the report and it would be good if some other people did too.

If you don't ask you don't get.

There is another way. Maybe the report's author (Stephen Cottrell of Cottsport) could be tempted/persuaded to spill a few juicy beans. Podcast?

Starting XI
910
·
2.3K
·
almost 12 years
Feverish wrote:

I think the word is they will speak more about it after the Sth Africa fixture  

Why? What's the relevance of the SA fixture?

 

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

So they can speak to the players on the findings. Not that most of them will be there.

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

NZF move quickly on FIFA rules alignment

Following a worldwide review by FIFA of its member association rules, New Zealand Football has moved quickly to begin the alignment of the national body’s regulations with FIFA statutes.

Governing body for football, FIFA have asked all member associations to ensure their regulations are in step with FIFA Statutes within the next three years.

Michael Anderson, board member of New Zealand Football and chair of Northern Football, is part of a seven-member committee formed to guide the change process in New Zealand.


“The working committee has been established to consult with the game and develop the required changes to New Zealand Football’s rules,” Anderson said.

“The review of the rules we have in place will ensure our processes align with FIFA best practice guidelines which safeguard the rights of all stakeholders in the game, not only in this country, but around the world.”

Following a consultation process with key stakeholders in July, proposals for rule changes will be put to the New Zealand Football Congress in September 2014.

No new elections or appointments will be made to the NZ Football board until new rule changes are in place.

NZ Football Rules Working Committee:


Chair: Nick Davidson (President, NZ Football)
Members: Bill Moran (Interim Chair, NZ Football), Michael Anderson (NZ Football and Chair of Northern Football), Phil Barry (Working Committee Leader), Patsi Davies (Chair, Waikato-Bay Of Plenty Football), Rod Pelosi (Deputy Chair, Referees Committee), and Stephen Williamson (Chair, Auckland Football)


Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Expect to see the appointed board positions to be scapped.

Starting XI
480
·
3.5K
·
almost 14 years
2ndBest wrote:

Expect to see the appointed board positions to be scapped.

Does that mean all current appointed members should have to then stand for an election effective immediately?
Stage Punch
2.1K
·
11K
·
over 16 years
JonoNewton wrote:
2ndBest wrote:

Expect to see the appointed board positions to be scapped.

Does that mean all current appointed members should have to then stand for an election effective immediately?

 

And does it mean they will flow those same rules down to the Federations?
Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years

I'm not sure I like the sound of that.

All-elected Boards sound like a wonderful, utopian idea in theory but in practice are too easily dominated by poorly qualified numpties who can't see past their own specific agendas in order to govern in the best interests of the whole game.

It's possibly not such a big issue at NZF level but at Federation level - yuck. People are fond of saying "the clubs need more representation" or "the clubs should be running the game" but the truth is "the clubs" themselves don't often agree on very much.

The appointed positions at least allow for a bit of quality control, and there's still a basic level of democracy because on a seven member board the three elected members (presuming they agree on something) only need to influence one appointed member to get a majority. I've always thought that provides a nice buffer against letting clubs (at Fed level) and Feds (at NZF level) completely run the asylum.

That said I don't much like the way the current system only lets most NZF members vote at club committee level but not Federation or NZF.

I guess the devil's in the detail of what a new system might look like. And I suppose after a few go-rounds of having idiots elected to Boards the voters might actually start to take it seriously, which would be an improvement.

The most interesting line in that release to me is "No new elections or appointments will be made to the NZ Football board until new rule changes are in place". There were two elected positions meant to be up for grabs at the next Congress. Does that mean they won't get elected now until after the new rules are adopted at Congress? Does that mean Frank van Hattum gets yet another reprieve? It's going to be getting close to a year since he announced his resignation. He resigned in January. Congress was meant to be in May but got shifted to September. Now it sounds like they won't elect any new Board members until after that.

Marquee
1.1K
·
7.6K
·
over 12 years

Anyone know Simon


Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years
2ndBest wrote:

Expect to see the appointed board positions to be scapped.


How do you know this anyway 2nd Best?
Simon Plumb's rant on Twitter is because he doesn't know what rules they are changing and he thinks they're not being transparent.

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Heard that FIFA don't like unelected position of boards. No idea else is on the cards.

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years
terminator_x wrote:

I'm not sure I like the sound of that.

All-elected Boards sound like a wonderful, utopian idea in theory but in practice are too easily dominated by poorly qualified numpties who can't see past their own specific agendas in order to govern in the best interests of the whole game.

It's possibly not such a big issue at NZF level but at Federation level - yuck. People are fond of saying "the clubs need more representation" or "the clubs should be running the game" but the truth is "the clubs" themselves don't often agree on very much.

The appointed positions at least allow for a bit of quality control, and there's still a basic level of democracy because on a seven member board the three elected members (presuming they agree on something) only need to influence one appointed member to get a majority. I've always thought that provides a nice buffer against letting clubs (at Fed level) and Feds (at NZF level) completely run the asylum.

That said I don't much like the way the current system only lets most NZF members vote at club committee level but not Federation or NZF.

I guess the devil's in the detail of what a new system might look like. And I suppose after a few go-rounds of having idiots elected to Boards the voters might actually start to take it seriously, which would be an improvement.

The most interesting line in that release to me is "No new elections or appointments will be made to the NZ Football board until new rule changes are in place". There were two elected positions meant to be up for grabs at the next Congress. Does that mean they won't get elected now until after the new rules are adopted at Congress? Does that mean Frank van Hattum gets yet another reprieve? It's going to be getting close to a year since he announced his resignation. He resigned in January. Congress was meant to be in May but got shifted to September. Now it sounds like they won't elect any new Board members until after that.

Think we are in a unique situation here. 
Removing unelected positions is to prevent corruptions/nepotism. Which is something we have very little of. 
However, our small population size, and lack of money, means there is a potential that the elected people are muppets.

On a side note, I think the congress was shifted to accommodate the changes they need to make.
Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

Where are we at with releasing the AW WC report now?

Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years
2ndBest wrote:
terminator_x wrote:

I'm not sure I like the sound of that.

All-elected Boards sound like a wonderful, utopian idea in theory but in practice are too easily dominated by poorly qualified numpties who can't see past their own specific agendas in order to govern in the best interests of the whole game.

It's possibly not such a big issue at NZF level but at Federation level - yuck. People are fond of saying "the clubs need more representation" or "the clubs should be running the game" but the truth is "the clubs" themselves don't often agree on very much.

The appointed positions at least allow for a bit of quality control, and there's still a basic level of democracy because on a seven member board the three elected members (presuming they agree on something) only need to influence one appointed member to get a majority. I've always thought that provides a nice buffer against letting clubs (at Fed level) and Feds (at NZF level) completely run the asylum.

That said I don't much like the way the current system only lets most NZF members vote at club committee level but not Federation or NZF.

I guess the devil's in the detail of what a new system might look like. And I suppose after a few go-rounds of having idiots elected to Boards the voters might actually start to take it seriously, which would be an improvement.

The most interesting line in that release to me is "No new elections or appointments will be made to the NZ Football board until new rule changes are in place". There were two elected positions meant to be up for grabs at the next Congress. Does that mean they won't get elected now until after the new rules are adopted at Congress? Does that mean Frank van Hattum gets yet another reprieve? It's going to be getting close to a year since he announced his resignation. He resigned in January. Congress was meant to be in May but got shifted to September. Now it sounds like they won't elect any new Board members until after that.

Think we are in a unique situation here. 

Removing unelected positions is to prevent corruptions/nepotism. Which is something we have very little of. 

However, our small population size, and lack of money, means there is a potential that the elected people are muppets.

On a side note, I think the congress was shifted to accommodate the changes they need to make.


Yeah, I'll be really interested to see what they come up with.

Elections also only really work where you have engaged voters, which by and large we don't. Most club committees in NZ are elected by the 15-20 people who can be bothered turning up to the AGM, and the committee members themselves are often elected unopposed because no-one else wants to do it. That's then your pool of candidates for Fed Board elected positions, and on up to NZF (under the current set-up).

We also have these voting rules where only club reps can vote for Fed Board members and only Fed Board reps can vote for NZF Board members. I think that's probably historical and largely to do with making election administration easy and cheap (in the past, if you allowed all NZF members to vote for Fed and NZF Boards how do you easily/cheaply verify legitimate votes?).

Maybe it's time to take advantage of technology (and the Sporting Pulse database) and actually allow all NZF members to vote electronically for their local Fed Boards and the NZF Board? You would still have a major problem of voter ignorance/apathy though.

Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years
Feverish wrote:

Where are we at with releasing the AW WC report now?


They're not going to. Andy Martin's explanation on the podcast was basically that the public will find out everything it needs to know when the new High Performance Plan comes out, which will have taken into account all the recommendations from the review.

That's a bit like saying you can find out everything you need to know about Star Wars by watching The Empire Strikes Back.

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

time to stop raising player subs?

NZF records 2013 surplus

Monday 16 June, 2014

For immediate release


New Zealand Football announced on Monday a surplus of $6.1 million for the 2013 year.

For the sixth year in succession, New Zealand Football has delivered a positive financial return, again highlighting the success of the Whole of Football Plan, now entering its fourth year, and the continued growth in the game allowing continued investment into both community and international football.

New Zealand Football chairman Bill Moran says while the surplus was boosted by television revenue from the FIFA World Cup Intercontinental playoff with Mexico, the day-to-day operations produced another strong result.

“While our surplus was boosted by the significantly higher than expected broadcasting revenue received from the November 2013 FIFA World Cup qualifier, I am pleased to confirm our underlying business was once again positive,” Moran said.

“Due to the strength of our position, we remain totally committed to investing in both the community and international game whilst retaining our focus on robust financial management.”

The strong financial results for 2013 has seen $3.1 million transferred into the International Teams Activity Reserve, set up in 2010, to fund the next four year cycle and beyond for New Zealand’s elite representative sides.

At grassroots level the code continued to expand and strengthen as the number of registered players grew by 13 percent across all age groups – the third year since 2010 in which player numbers have grown from the previous year.

Underpinning that increase in players, $3 million was invested in grassroots programmes, of which $1.5 million was delivered to the seven regional football federations who continue to deliver the award-winning Whole of Football plan.

A further $500,000 was transferred to a newly created Whole of Football Reserve set up to ensure additional funding will be available to support the coaching, development and infrastructure costs of the award-winning plan in future years.

Meanwhile, the Football Foundation - established in 2011 - passed the $500,000 mark in grants made to the grassroots game.

After a successful 2013 result, Moran identified the key milestones for the organisation in the next 12 month period as the build up continues towards the 2015 FIFA U-20 World Cup in New Zealand.

“For 2014 the focus is very much on aligning ourselves to new FIFA standards for the game as a whole, resetting our ambitions as a country for the elite game and continuing to drive the Whole of Football programme into the youth bracket.”

The full financial results will be presented later in the year at New Zealand Football’s Annual Congress scheduled for September.


ENDS


For further information contact New Zealand Football Communications Manager Steven Upfold on the details below.

Stage Punch
2.1K
·
11K
·
over 16 years

So the thing that strikes me about this is...

When they made an actual loss, they transferred money in from the international fund and called it a surplus.

Now, they appear to have an actual surplus, and be transferring money OUT to the international fund, without deducting it from the total.

Is that right?

If so. What the f.?

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Did it last time. Set aside some money from a large payment now (TV rights, WC participation last time) in the expectation it will be needed to fund games later in the cycle when regular income is much lower. They then draw money from that fund for the upcoming year.

Seems logical to me.

Phoenix Academy
43
·
500
·
almost 12 years

There is some accounting/media spin on the release. 

Considering where NZF have been it is positive that they are in surplus and able to build reserves. 

Before anyone moans about the cost of NZF fees there is only a couple of other sports cheaper than Football. 

Starting XI
550
·
2.4K
·
over 14 years

TV rev + playoff home game gate money = $3.5mil take that away from $6.1mil = $2.6 million. ???

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

Dino11 wrote:

There is some accounting/media spin on the release. 

Considering where NZF have been it is positive that they are in surplus and able to build reserves. 

Before anyone moans about the cost of NZF fees there is only a couple of other sports cheaper than Football. 

Don't NZRFU actually contribute not collect?

Listen here Fudgeface
3.7K
·
15K
·
about 14 years

I'm okay with the adding/deducting of money to the fund, but like Smithy says, not deducting money that is added to the fund from the years total is bizarre considering they've include money added from the fund in past years.

Marquee
970
·
6.5K
·
over 11 years

Anyone got any idea how much $$$$ the Under-20 World Cup will convey into NZF's coffers? Do we sell TV rights? Or does FIFA pocket the lot then give us a handout?

Must try harder
96
·
1.5K
·
almost 17 years

"For 2014, the focus is very much on aligning ourselves to new Fifa standards for the game as a whole, resetting our ambitions as a country for the elite game and continuing to drive the Whole of Football programme into the youth bracket."

The last sentence concerns /excites me ....

Marquee
2.1K
·
8.2K
·
about 17 years

terminator_x wrote:
Feverish wrote:

Where are we at with releasing the AW WC report now?

They're not going to. Andy Martin's explanation on the podcast was basically that the public will find out everything it needs to know when the new High Performance Plan comes out, which will have taken into account all the recommendations from the review.

That's a bit like saying you can find out everything you need to know about Star Wars by watching The Empire Strikes Back.

They absolutely got away with this one..  No way the High Performance Report will be anything other than aspirational goals etc, you are not going to get any analysis of what specifically needed addressing

Marquee
2.1K
·
8.2K
·
about 17 years

Dino11 wrote:

There is some accounting/media spin on the release. 

Considering where NZF have been it is positive that they are in surplus and able to build reserves. 

Before anyone moans about the cost of NZF fees there is only a couple of other sports cheaper than Football. 

Football should absolutely be the cheapest sport to play.  No special equipment needed, infrastructure is generally in place.

Still Believin'
750
·
5.7K
·
almost 17 years

Smithy wrote:

So the thing that strikes me about this is...

When they made an actual loss, they transferred money in from the international fund and called it a surplus.

Now, they appear to have an actual surplus, and be transferring money OUT to the international fund, without deducting it from the total.

Is that right?

If so. What the f.?

They are a bit cheeky with their press releases.

This is a real surplus - but completely a one-off windfall that won't be repeated for at least another 3 years.

And their claim that this is the 6th successive surplus in a row is total BS. They haven't been making operating surpluses for the last few years - just transferring money from reserves, which had run out until we lucked out (?) getting Mexico for the WC play-off.

Anyone who bothers to actually read the accounts will see the true picture though. Let's just hope they use the topped up international reserve very wisely leading up to the next WC.

Marquee
2.1K
·
8.2K
·
about 17 years

terminator_x wrote:

Smithy wrote:

So the thing that strikes me about this is...

When they made an actual loss, they transferred money in from the international fund and called it a surplus.

Now, they appear to have an actual surplus, and be transferring money OUT to the international fund, without deducting it from the total.

Is that right?

If so. What the f.?

They are a bit cheeky with their press releases.

This is a real surplus - but completely a one-off windfall that won't be repeated for at least another 3 years.

And their claim that this is the 6th successive surplus in a row is total BS. They haven't been making operating surpluses for the last few years - just transferring money from reserves, which had run out until we lucked out (?) getting Mexico for the WC play-off.

Anyone who bothers to actually read the accounts will see the true picture though. Let's just hope they use the topped up international reserve very wisely leading up to the next WC.

They should really take that Mexico TV money over a 4 year world cup cycle

Starting XI
880
·
2.5K
·
about 12 years

Dino11 wrote:

There is some accounting/media spin on the release. 

Considering where NZF have been it is positive that they are in surplus and able to build reserves. 

Before anyone moans about the cost of NZF fees there is only a couple of other sports cheaper than Football. 

this dosn't sound right to me - do you have some stats to back this up?

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

http://www.foxsportspulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=3234276

Rule changes move NZ Football forwards New Zealand Football Chairman Bill Moran has released proposed changes to NZF’s constitution as the national body participates in a worldwide move to modernise its governance arrangements and be more inclusive.

Consultation document http://www.foxsportspulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=3234273

Questionarie http://www.foxsportspulse.com/get_file.cgi?id=3234274

Cock
2.7K
·
16K
·
over 14 years

Parts of it I have read are interesting.

If I read it right, it says that the Phoenix get a decent say in what happens in the game? I can see a mushroom cloud over Kiwitea...

You’ll need an account to join the conversation!

Sign in Sign up