UnSeatted

UnSeatted

Changed the heading because Oi Oi's was superb.
Hard News2008-03-20 15:16:53

had a wee chuckle at the TVNZ headline...

Writing up or making up?

Feverish2008-03-20 17:05:03

"We love you Settles we done oh Settles we love you"
Graham has been great for the game on two of the levels.

1. Activity the elite level which was clearly lacking.

2. Directly or indirectly lifting the profile of the game.


































graham has been great for the g

Hello you don't get elite than Brasil

what do you mean by indirectly lifting the profile of the game? I am guesing you are about twelve

FFS if Fred is the next CEO I'll become a cricket fan.  What, apart from being the worst football presenter in the universe and a former player, qualifies him to run the game in New Zealand?  Has he ever had a proper job at all?

Croquet are on a recruiting drive for more fans.... so I hear

To be honest we someone like John O'Neil's level of organisation.

Also getting David Crawford who had a better follow up on the community for the restructuring the Australian football across the board and propose a stronger infrastructure make-up. The Crawford report is far superior to NZS report in analysis and depth with structural thought. The NZS report was missing gaps as well as loyality because hardly anyone in the public were given much time to respond and only certain groups were sounded out. Most people who heard about it only after it was done and not before. Most people on this forum still don't know it and haven't read it still. Public broadcasting isn't one of NZF's strongest forte. Newspaper ads are not enough, Sustainable TV news and Close-up or John Campbell is better. TV media drives the papers and not the other way. You need to hear the non-footballing public and the parents of children as well because they do have a number of good ideas and they are the ones you are trying to convert to football.

you raise some good points in my opinion AWB re NZFs lack of media influence

But really we just lack resources and budget to sustain an suitable level of international football competitiveness as well as trying to build a strong domestic league. Success on the international scene will drive the domestic scene and success on the domestic scene will build the national team. You need both.

Losing players from school age to club is a big problem but noone is going to play senior in the long term unless they had been given suitable football coaching at a skillful level. Targeting the best of the youth and leaving the rest out in the cold will just turn most players away and also the bulk of revenue for the game itself.

Can't expect regional football to relied on the money of parents. More senior players more money by volume and more sustainability. We need coaches that coach coaches and feedback assessment for the children coaches (parents) as well as a suitable coaching development strategy of what each child should be aiming towards at each age/stage of development.

Overall, it's hard to everything and so there is a deliberate three core focus on the NZFC, national teams at tournaments and adjusting to capitalized without Australia in the OFC by the NZF in the last three years.

. . . quite understandable but its the conversion from school to club for these kids. As well as the lack of football practices during the week for both school and club. Two practices sessions for social comp, 3 for semi-competitive comp, 4 for top competitive comp, 5 for semi-professional/regional, 6 for semi-professional, 8-10 for professionals. Tell me why we don't have the psych for this where other countries do?

The aussie govt is redoing their website so I found the victorian football's one instead. It can be saved as a PDf file and it is the 2003 australian government report on the recommendations in changing football in australia because of the ASA financial failure and their lost of Oceania nation cup that year. this is were FFA was born. It is historically the most changing infrastructure of football organisation along with the Japanese football.

Crawford Report

There are two reports, the coaching education review and the Strategy plans. (assume that you seen this as I post it on the other thread) Between the two were the lack of submission for the coaching review and the apparent strategy plan loosely based on the Crawford Report and in-house ideas of their own that were largely collected around the Auckland regions.

The NZS report was mainly the 2006 coaching education review from the NZS website. I only got wind of it 4 months after the submission dates after I removed regions. It was specific to coaching but had elements of the bigger problem in the submissions.

The thing was, that there was no submission about infrastructure problems and the need reorgnization of the football adminstration. Although you can see they are aware of some of it in the strategy plan. But a fair bit come from the Crawford report (Australian one) and their own ideas. There was never really a call to the public for submissions like the governmental Crawford report, it was very very in-house and had an slightly Auckland view on things. (well it certainly had that feel to it)

Although it uses analysis model (in the strategy plan). it lack the element of reporting from an independent POV and so it avoids the main issues (eg NZS admin) and the lack of community feedback (grassroots/club needs) and then they blames everyone for not getting together better and devised goals expecting to getting people together but not changing any structural make up leaving most of the donkey work on the Federations to organise themselves with little directive until the federation report comes out and is reviewed by NZS for feedback.

nz soccer review coach_education

Then there was the Strategy plan as goal objectives. I think you have seen this.

strategy plan

There was limited public submission on both reports and it was not independent evaluated. Very little follow up and so lack of depth and was pointing away from NZS administrative infrastructure. Very one-side.

When compared to the Crawford report, of course. The gem of the Crawford report was community feedback across every thing and follow up to generate the response. The details was amazing as well as the independent board with Frank Lowery and john O'Neil following up the Crawford Report Recommedations in organising FFA.

Basically we need a Rich Businessman to run the show not old footballers. Someone like Terry S.

cheers AWB, failing a rich business man taking a keen interest in NZF/All Whites , we might have to make do with SPARC helping NZF to open their eyes a bit

or some ruthless prick like this guy who gets results (edit: and just noticed you said this below, but damn it is soo true, and needs to be said again and loudly, so that someone who will catch a ride on the momentum of the Phoenix and the All Whites and the Olympic footballers) ...hate his guts but absolutely have to admire his achievements...What's Ralph Norris doing?

can't see it happening, but do you think we could go and beg him to get involved with NZF?

martinb2008-03-21 21:45:58

It's not just about finding a random rich dude.

Frank Lowy got involved in the FFA because it was in his interests - both personal and business - to do so.  Those personal and business reasons outweighed (clearly) the financial cost to him of getting involved.

If you want a rich bloke in then you'll have to have a business case.

Anyone know if our cardboard mogul has any interest in expanding his empire into asia and the world on the back of the world game?  Anyone know any of the shareholders of Sky TV who might want to fill their satellite network up with local football content?

Other ideas?

I don't get it, SPARC wants NZF to put more money into grass-roots footballing, Yet NZF fund the Grassroots program and don't get a cent back from the federations register fees. As its been spoken of before more then 100,000 kids play football in NZ, Were is this registering money going? Why is it these fee`s are always fluctuating from club to club and year & year? why should NZF have to put more money into it when the numbers of Jr players clearly outnumber that of any sport in NZ...... Also how can SPARC say "You cant have a strong National team without strong grassroots program???? WTF Isn't it more like these kids need to look up-to guys like Nelson and co in the AW?. Would kids play Rugby if they hand no-one to look up-to?.

To me John O'Neills name is one I have mentioned for the last 3 years privately. Look what he has done in Australia for their sports.

NZF (and I say this with all seriousness because I look at the outcome) need to frind a CEO like John that is going to cost them more than they can afford. They do because ultimately, those CEOs have gotten results in the past and ordinarily, wouldn't spit in the direction of the NZF CEO role..

Scenario: "John O'Neil? Yeah its Johnny Morris here, how are ya? New Zealand Football Chairman... You know New Zealand, the place where you got Robbie from.... yes thats the same bunch of sheep shaggers. Listen mate, we need ya, bloody hell we need ya. The creditors have gotten all the blood out the stone and now they want the veins that pump it too. Listen mate we'll give ya 2 million a year for 3 years. you work us a miracle and we'll drop 7 in your backburner in 3 years time buddy.

The game needs someone how is high profile and has a track record of success to be able to come in and go right, chop this, fix that, you do this, I'll do that, go ask him for money, sign him up.

John would be perfect and I think if he got on board, others would come out of the woodwork pretty quickly.

Its all a pipe dream anyway. I'll throw out David Parker Auckland Football CEO and Craig Ross ex Rowing NZ CEO. Just say no to Thunderbird De Jong

Without Ryan Nelsen, their star player, they were never at full strength as they sought to shrug off the disaster of the Adelaide Oceania Cup fiasco but ill-advised games _ like those played in Central and South America at a huge cost _ were never going to prove anything.

From Madafords article...I dunno- I thought that those games were a great idea- they kept the publicity on the All Whites. And they were quality opposition. The players and coach involved will only benifit enromously from such experience. What we needed was a decent tv feed. These were games against exciting, attractive opposition.

THE ALL WHITES NEED MORE GAMES AGAINST QUALITY OPPOSITION AND NOT LESS. THEY ARE A TEAM NOT RYAN NELSENS HOLIDAY HOME...

I think this was a success of Seatters, and certainly the way Smeltz played against Wales, in fact the whole team played with confidence and was not cowed at all by reputation was, I think , a watershed moment. If they could have replicated it in South America or further in Europe?

both tours were a great idea, and we need to be able to fund more of them...Waitak vs Auck will not cut it as the pinacle of our football aspiration...though credit here too- this is a damn good rivlary, and easily accessible, if at times poorly supported.

Couldn't agree more with you Martin. We just need a way to play top opposition and turn a profit. TV revenue from showing these tours would be a start. The people with the money are slowly waking up to the code's potential though...Sony first with the 'nix and now Nike on this site. It's just a shame that TVNZ and other channels are traditionally slow on the uptake.

Incidentally, for our Auckland members.  Dressmart Nike in Auckland has the current All Whites shirt for $60.  Multiple sizes in the Blue away, but only XL in the home...

Which suggests to me that they're getting rid of the current stock to make way for the release of the new range inside the next six weeks.

Cue Rex Dawkins and LOTTO !!!!

I'd actually like to throw a different name into the CEO mix

Wynton Rufer. Why is he left out in the cold especially when you look at his successes as a footballer, ambassador for football and his academy (as a business man)

Am I missing something here?

Fret not, my son. Nike's contract has a wee while to run yet.

That reason was that the parents of some of the boys in the squad didn't like him for not playing their boys in any game at the U17 World Cup when it cost them their own money to send them to the Cup. I guess Rufer wanted to have the best team on the park at every game.

Anyway, maybe later down the track. He still wrapped as an independent football provider and it's not aligned to the NZF as well as being having different football ideas to NZF. But he hasn't particularly have a strong interest in the job either but rather looking at being coach of the North Queensland Thunder A-league expansion team in the following season.

He's more ideal as coach for a Christchurch A-league expansion team, if Canterbury get off their lazy @. . . . and do something about it. I sort of sick hearing off the backroom talk and like to actually see something.

As CEO, he's not the type to talk in a board meeting but prefers to get more hands on like Ricki. He loves the game too much to be totally suited up. Maybe when he loses a bit of steam on the sidelines and do more administrative stuff, you may think about it. But not now.

I don't think people realised what a tough job being CEO of NZF. You need top administrative skills. The best on the NZ football regional/franchise administration around the clubs may not even be up to it.

You need vision, flexiblilty and creative business ability to turn thing around as well as a successful administrative skills.

May I suggest a couple of people who is involved with the business round table with actual ability? There are plenty of ideal people there.

Here's a half of them that may be suited to the sporting arena if they would dare and their personal topics of interest;

Angus McNaughton
Chief Executive, Kiwi Income Property Trust, Auckland
Topics: The listed property sector; Investing in commercial property.

Norman LaRocque
Policy Advisor, New Zealand Business Roundtable, Wellington
Topics: Education; Tertiary policy; Student loans; Regulatory frameworks; Private education; School choice.

Dr Kevin Thompson
Managing Director Opus, Auckland
     
Bryce Wilkinson
Director Capital Economics Ltd
Topics:
The role and size of government; Government regulation; The Fiscal Responsibility Act

Tony Falkenstein
Executive Chairman, Red Eagle Corporation Ltd, Auckland
Topics: Entrepreneurship, Marketing, Business education

Phil Barry
Principal Taylor Duignan Barry Ltd, Wellington
Topics: New Zealand's economy in comparison to OECD countries; The difference between the public and private sectors.
     
Roger Bell
Chief Executive, Vero Insurance NZ Ltd
Topics:
Insurance; Accident compensation issues; Business excellence; Baldridge criteria (programme to enhance organisational performance)

Diane Foreman
Chief Executive, Emerald Group
Topics:
Entrepreneurship

The chances are they would be out of our price range but it's worth to give them a call if they have a side interest in football. Multiple CEO position is getting a bit common with some. I think that each of them will bring huge contracts and side deals that we need to tap into.

I rather trust them to convert the financial sides of things. Growth has a price at the beginning but with their track record we know that we be in safe hands. I don't like running to the Govt when we are short of cash, i like to see self sufficiency instead as well as strong links to the business roundtable. they will turn football into the number one sport if anyone could.

Are you advocating a CEO that is more Financial/Administration based and then getting in the football minded people around him/her to do the football stuff?

There is merit to that but wasn't that Seatters story, Marketing Director at Lion Breweries?

Just taking the Wellington situation.  Most clubs are charging juniors at around $60.00 per player.

Capital Football Levies range from $140 at 7th grade to $375 JPL/Promo.  This equates to between $25 - $30 per player, depending on squad size.

Most of this goes to Excel for ground costs, but a levy is included in the higher age group to NZ Football (10th Grade up from memory).

The rest of the fees clubs use to provide the day to day equipment that teams need. 

Most footballers accept that a ball per child is required for training.  These last a season or two if you're lucky.  Minimum cost for a ball of reasonable quality $15.  Shirt cost about $8 per season (life of shirt around 4 years). I understand that in Auckland, people buy their own shirts,(only hearsay) and the subs are also far higher.

Not a lot left after this is there to cover the overheads of the club   Let alone any development a club might to progress.

Seatters is no way near their league. Seatters is good at marketing no doubt. Football more a business not just a game, and Seatter would be the first to tell you that. I remember that there was a TAB bet by NZS that paid off during the 2006 WC, that was Seatter idea. He had good ideas which worked. Football needs to be more out of the square. Why you think Man U put their club in their share market? There are more avenues for football in NZ which hasn't explored in depth like properties, building for football development, many self funded schemes. The business of beer-making where Seatter was from is more marketing than expansion and building up but the above people I mention actually build their business from the ground up and were experience in a number of areas and not in one or two areas. Areas and expertise greater than Seatter.

NZS was in the right direction when they took Seatter but there are better people out there and have greater CEO experience. I think that we didn't have a big list to chose from at the time. Seatter was adequate worker but he was slightly disappointed at the football community slow responses. He did do a lot in three short years than others before him. I guess he overestimated the football community because he is more use to the business community being more responsive, Thats why a even more flexible businessman with stronger creativing business experience is need. Seatter didn't have the business from scratch but has more business acquired skills in an established company. There is a difference. Seatter is fine but we need better robust feel to it.

I do wish him luck for the future. He is still a good business manager, but football in NZ is backwaters compare to other sports. In another country, he would be very success, even Australia isn't a bad idea for him to consider. NZ football has a poor business infrastructure that isn't address and until it is sorted then we will have repeated problems as before. The infrastructure is still better than years ago, however. Like Seatter said, NZF needs someone new to lead into the next stage of development. Seatter has made some good ground work stuff in very little time. They were not easy decisions for him to make either. I wouldn't like to be in his seat on some of the decisions and over 95% of the posters here would struggle to get better than he did.

CEO of NZF is a poison chalice, only the best need to apply. However with Sparc help on the board then we know that there are good advice about on financial risk and steady growth should happen but if not then Sparc is probably obligated to pull us out now that they are on board.