What happened to the good old days when we dreamed that a press expose would destroy the Trillian Trust and put domestic football back on a fair footing. But it came and went and nobody GAF.
Not sure all clubs complain....some clubs need ACFCs money(when it comes from WC Champs). Some clubs also run a development model so not sure they care too much.
What happened to the good old days when we dreamed that a press expose would destroy the Trillian Trust and put domestic football back on a fair footing. But it came and went and nobody GAF.
If Trillian trust (or any trust) were destroyed it would destroy the game here as 80-90% of it is funded by trusts, the only difference with ACFC and Trillian compared to other clubs is the scale
What happened to the good old days when we dreamed that a press expose would destroy the Trillian Trust and put domestic football back on a fair footing. But it came and went and nobody GAF.
If Trillian trust (or any trust) were destroyed it would destroy the game here as 80-90% of it is funded by trusts, the only difference with ACFC and Trillian compared to other clubs is the scale
Also it's not Trillian that is at fault - they make funding calls based on the applications infront of them - if a club has a successful application and then uses the funding on something else that's on them not Trillian. (not saying ACFC do this, just using an example)
What happened to the good old days when we dreamed that a press expose would destroy the Trillian Trust and put domestic football back on a fair footing. But it came and went and nobody GAF.
If Trillian trust (or any trust) were destroyed it would destroy the game here as 80-90% of it is funded by trusts, the only difference with ACFC and Trillian compared to other clubs is the scale
Also it's not Trillian that is at fault - they make funding calls based on the applications infront of them - if a club has a successful application and then uses the funding on something else that's on them not Trillian. (not saying ACFC do this, just using an example)
"What is notable is that the trust has for years approved just about every application made by the clubs for funds. Other clubs miss out or get partial payouts but Auckland City and Central United, with rare exceptions, get their money as regularly as clockwork."
What happened to the good old days when we dreamed that a press expose would destroy the Trillian Trust and put domestic football back on a fair footing. But it came and went and nobody GAF.
If Trillian trust (or any trust) were destroyed it would destroy the game here as 80-90% of it is funded by trusts, the only difference with ACFC and Trillian compared to other clubs is the scale
Also it's not Trillian that is at fault - they make funding calls based on the applications infront of them - if a club has a successful application and then uses the funding on something else that's on them not Trillian. (not saying ACFC do this, just using an example)
"What is notable is that the trust has for years approved just about every application made by the clubs for funds. Other clubs miss out or get partial payouts but Auckland City and Central United, with rare exceptions, get their money as regularly as clockwork."
Look I'm as anti about City/Central as the next person - but just because they always get their applications accepted doesn't mean the money isn't being used in the places they say it is - If I have learned anything from Grant Funders it's that if someone can make applications that tick all the boxes and they complete their audits in time and with no questions etc then that group is going to become easy to fund - that's the nature of the beast.
Trillian fund a lot of other clubs besides City and Central - I would not assume the funding would remain in Football if Trillian were to disappear
Perhaps the reality is that there is no smoking gun and most of the gossip that is shared on the side of a football pitch is largely hyperbolic nonsense?
Perhaps the reality is that there is no smoking gun and most of the gossip that is shared on the side of a football pitch is largely hyperbolic nonsense?
When van Beynen's articles came out it really looked like it was all over by the shouting; that the Charities Commission or the IRD would be forced to investigate and it would be all over for the Trillian Trust. And yet, it never happened, despite all the obviously dodgy stuff van Beynen documented. Friends in high places?
Perhaps the reality is that there is no smoking gun and most of the gossip that is shared on the side of a football pitch is largely hyperbolic nonsense?
When van Beynen's articles came out it really looked like it was all over by the shouting; that the Charities Commission or the IRD would be forced to investigate and it would be all over for the Trillian Trust. And yet, it never happened, despite all the obviously dodgy stuff van Beynen documented. Friends in high places?
If you read their grant reports NZF and Eastern Suburbs are paid high monthly amounts as well so there is probably very little desire to see NZF and one of the junior biggest clubs in Auckland lose a funding source
Perhaps the reality is that there is no smoking gun and most of the gossip that is shared on the side of a football pitch is largely hyperbolic nonsense?
When van Beynen's articles came out it really looked like it was all over by the shouting; that the Charities Commission or the IRD would be forced to investigate and it would be all over for the Trillian Trust. And yet, it never happened, despite all the obviously dodgy stuff van Beynen documented. Friends in high places?
Did it? he ignored the fact that DIA have audited Trillian and ACFC about 3 times in the last 6-7 years.
While van Beynen focused on ACFC & Trillian, if it was all over it would bring down the majority of sports in this country - it's not just clubs, governing bodies also get a lot of their money this way.
It's a b00locks system where we are relying on the poorest to fund community sports organisations (and have them competing against more worthy things like women's refugee's for funding) but until an alternative is worked out it will go on
It will be quite disruptive if all the 'coaches' they have employed, up and leave Utd. As Helen Lovejoy would say "Won't somebody please think of the children"
It will be quite disruptive if all the 'coaches' they have employed, up and leave Utd. As Helen Lovejoy would say "Won't somebody please think of the children"
It will be quite disruptive if all the 'coaches' they have employed, up and leave Utd. As Helen Lovejoy would say "Won't somebody please think of the children"
Think you'll find they employ coaches beyond just the first team ones...
Needs to be some jeopardy for teams finishing bottom or even bottom two. Otherwise you get too many pointless games in the final few rounds when top two is already confirmed.
Needs to be some jeopardy for teams finishing bottom or even bottom two. Otherwise you get too many pointless games in the final few rounds when top two is already confirmed.
Ifill is a bone average coach. Chch utd were lucky on multiple occasions not to have dropped points in the Southern League, eg 1-0 to FC2011 in extra time. They are trading on paying foreign players to work as academy coaches or glorified kitmen and having a team that on average, player for player is better than others. Ifills coaching has little to do with it. The National league will always be who pays the most , wins the most. On the aside, the fact that the 2 SL teams are 3&4 should point to the SL getting a 3rd spot and get rid of the automatic phoenix place and stop pandering to the phoenix.
Needs to be some jeopardy for teams finishing bottom or even bottom two. Otherwise you get too many pointless games in the final few rounds when top two is already confirmed.
Like what?
Your region losing a spot.
Jumping on what the last poster said about the well performing Southern teams, you could give them an extra spot next year and take away a Central spot, given Petone have already finished last and second last will most likely be another Central team as well.
Certainly would give the Southern League something to play for. A 3rd place would be a heck of a race for Ferrymead, Coastal, Dunedin, Nelson....but won't happen unless the clubs that never get a look in fight for change....NZF couldn't do less if they tried.
Needs to be some jeopardy for teams finishing bottom or even bottom two. Otherwise you get too many pointless games in the final few rounds when top two is already confirmed.
Like what?
Your region losing a spot.
Jumping on what the last poster said about the well performing Southern teams, you could give them an extra spot next year and take away a Central spot, given Petone have already finished last and second last will most likely be another Central team as well.
This is a different debate - but yes when the bottom three are all from Central League it raises eyebrows.
As I've said before, it's likely Aucklands new franchise will get a guaranteed spot like the Nix at some point (next year too early though), that gives you 11 teams then one more Southern spot brings that up to 12.
Needs to be some jeopardy for teams finishing bottom or even bottom two. Otherwise you get too many pointless games in the final few rounds when top two is already confirmed.
Like what?
Your region losing a spot.
Jumping on what the last poster said about the well performing Southern teams, you could give them an extra spot next year and take away a Central spot, given Petone have already finished last and second last will most likely be another Central team as well.
Not a bad standalone idea but don't think it'd solve the problem of pointless games - it's probably not going to motivate the individual teams any more or less.
Don't really think there is an easy fix to the system. With NZF giving the ok for teams like University of Canterbury, which has no junior club, no pathway, unless you go to University, not sure how they fit the Licencing requirements anyway to enter the Southern League over Roslyn, historic club, juniors through to old buggers...who knows what will happen
The way the league is set up currently is a reflection of NZF's funding situation.
It is clear we have top contenders and the league can grow, but NZF can't fund an 18+ game National League season. The current league doesn't even have a sponsor.
The best outcome would be for the best performing teams in each region to have a safe spot for the coming season and the incumbent team to have a playoff against the top performer from the league below.
Based off the table as of today Auckland City Olympic Cashmere Chch Utd Eastern Suburbs Manurewa Phoenix Napier Petone
That would mean Chch Utd would play off against the top performing Southern side, Manurewa against the best Northern side and Petone against the best Central side. From a player welfare perspective this means top players can focus on the National League rather than having to play and train from February through to early December every year.
The way the league is set up currently is a reflection of NZF's funding situation.
It is clear we have top contenders and the league can grow, but NZF can't fund an 18+ game National League season. The current league doesn't even have a sponsor.
The best outcome would be for the best performing teams in each region to have a safe spot for the coming season and the incumbent team to have a playoff against the top performer from the league below.
Based off the table as of today Auckland City Olympic Cashmere Chch Utd Eastern Suburbs Manurewa Phoenix Napier Petone
That would mean Chch Utd would play off against the top performing Southern side, Manurewa against the best Northern side and Petone against the best Central side. From a player welfare perspective this means top players can focus on the National League rather than having to play and train from February through to early December every year.
Do you mean running a ten-team standalone league? Rather than the current format where it is essentially an elongated finals' series; a continuation of the regional leagues in my view.
If you view the league as a pathway into professional football, be that in Wellington, Auckland, Europe or North America, then players need as much match experience as possible. Auckland City had 40+ games last year, but they are exception and also carry a very deep squad; even their reserve side won the league. An eighteen-game season (plus however many cup games) would really not suffice. As it is (or was, just before covid) players, especially young players, are/were behind their European equivalents in terms of training/playing minutes, per a FIFA report. We are trying to catch people who run faster by starting further back in the pack.
If we want to be competing with the bigger countries in development we need as many matches as possible. Leagues in Europe typically bottom out at 30 or so league games per team (15x2). You could look at doing something like a league split, twelve-team league would get you up to 32 games (11x2 and then 5x2) without having it unbalanced of who plays who. In that case, you'd still only end up with one more league match than what a top-four Northern League side gets at the moment, so workload is not a massive increase.
Of course that all relies on making it a whole season-long league, and you'd struggle to fund the travel. Maybe FIFA+ would give it some more funding in exchange for more content, they certainly push the league a lot on their socials, more than I've seen any other.
It would also necessitate the removal of any geographical quotas, which would be great but difficult. It is hardly fair that a team in seventh would have to play off to keep a spot - let alone one in fourth - as ninth place sits carefree, after all. Having one/two 'fixed' reserve sides would also need to be looked at. Logically open pro/rel goes next after that, 1.5 teams from below or so (maybe have a four-team playoff, with regional winners and ninth-place and top two go/stay in the league). Could end up losing a bit of Central League representation based on how they've had the tenth-placed side the last two seasons, but that's football, in stays in flux.
Don't really think there is an easy fix to the system. With NZF giving the ok for teams like University of Canterbury, which has no junior club, no pathway, unless you go to University, not sure how they fit the Licencing requirements anyway to enter the Southern League over Roslyn, historic club, juniors through to old buggers...who knows what will happen
Plenty of sour grapes here... Roslyn have had their chances to compete in the Southern League and haven't taken them. Were lucky to be in the playoff this year for starters.
Without a major sponsor (ideally an airline or motel chain), I imagine a season long National League would become a big financial black hole for NZF. Don't forget that there would also then be an expectation to fund a full season long Womens National League. The unsustainable costs for the teams in the old Handa Prem, basically lead to it's demise.
The current models would just be hundreds of thousands of dollars cheaper. And don't really see the extra cost being worth the return.
Of course this could all change if the AWs qualify for the 2026 WC (as they should) and NZF gets a $USD10M windfall or whatever it will be. Then you'd think Albany can look at some serious domestic development & competitions.
I tell you one thing. Auckland are the most boring side to watch in the league hands down. They have one tactic and that’s to pass the ball to death until the other team falls asleep.
