NZFC future (take 10 - plus Cantab fail)

I agree with you Thinker that the pussying out of the Nat league by Canty is a bad thing for the region, and NZ football.  I put the blame at the hands of the local admin, and NZ football. 

Tribalism (and it has some faults) at least means that people care and that to me is the major issue with the NZFC. I'm sick of the hypoctrisy that surrounds some of the franchises. Why can't we just call Auckland City Central and Waitakere waitakere City. They are successful because essentially they are one club based franchises and the people involved with them care.I'm not so sure that it applies to the other franchises.

Blame the government who took the best sponsor of sport from Football Rothmans ,they said that the Anti Smoking would fund for 3 year, people have not stopped Smoking but the Government have stopped funding our sport.NZ football have reaped the benefits of the Southern Trusts sponsorship and deprived the clubs of the funding because of double dipping. 

Larry,

Thanks for that Bruce, you reminded me of the levy that us Canty players pay for Canty Utd.  I'll be expecting a refund to be arriving shortly!

hang on a minute there bruce.  first you are telling us that we must go back to a club based national league cos nzfc doesnt work but now the nzfc maybe does work for some people just not waikato.  Thats a bit of a change of tack.  Maybe you should make your mind up.  Or maybe you dont really give a sh*t whether its nzfc or not as long as what happens in your area suits you?

So Bruce, Do you think it better for Hamilton not to have a side in the national league ?  Do you honestly see Melville (let alone Wanderers) playing at that level again ?  You know the troubles a seperate entity had in hamilton can you see one of the existing clubs flying ?

what was wrong with waikato fc last year anyway? they did pretty well on a shoestring...why cant they do it again? why the sudden need for change just to follow in the footsteps of Village of the Damned United?  the are probably just too busy stabbing taxi drivers and asians...isnt that all anyone in chch does? oh and driving their sh*t cars round and round in circles hurling beer cans at the cops actually them being out of the nzfc is probably a good thing - nobody likes going there anyway

i dont think bruce's comments are as black and white as people are choosing to interpret them as. i dont necessarily agree with them, but his comments are thoughtful and all the issues he raises are real. there are pros and cons to the different league models (and there are things that probably could be done better irrespective of the model itself). we will indidivually have different views about the balance and weight of those pros and cons, including me and incuding bruce. but its definitely unreasonable to imply bruce is bonkers or somehow thinking only in self-interested terms because he's prepared to set out some of the realities and challenges. Marius Lacatus2009-06-17 15:59:29

The NZFC is def worse off without a Canty utd, hometown of Ryan Nelson and Breeding club of Ben Sigmund one of our most successful graduates from the NZFC, Also former club of Andy Barron, Brent Fisher, Kris Bright, James Bannatyne (I think). And they tell us its not a pathway to the All Whites. In fact Id like to compile a list of all the all whites that have come from the NZFC Andy boyens another one, Aron Scott, Ivan Vicelich. I bet there are loads.

one thing you have forgotten both Waitakere City and Central Utd did not win promotion to the National League they got in on criteria,now they dictate the NZFC and because of their success they represent NZ in the O league and World Champions.13 Clubs formed the Waitakere United club how many players come through that system

Waikato FC probably works for the Waikato region and better than ever from a community perspective based on last summer's dramatic last gasp effort by locals to rescue the "club". Auckland City FC and Waitakere United work well - four FIFA Club World Cup campaigns have ensured their interests in the NZFC surviving.

Youngheart Manawatu cried poverty then stumped up with enough cash to lasoo any unwanted tier two type player from a big city to bolster their NZFC drive. The fact that the club landscape in the Manawatu has been totally wrecked is another matter.

If Canterbury United is about to be replaced by two interested CHCH-based entities, well, that's great on one hand for the average football fan, but what the hell happened to the so-called loyal one-eyed Cantabrian we hear so much about in rugby circles?

Otago simply need to be put down humanely.

Hawkes Bay United seemed to do quite well last season and Team Wellington is based in a town where there is reportedly enough dough to keep it afloat + The Phoenix and the so-called Phoenix Lite.

My idea? I believe we cannot afford an NZFC. If you look at the document NZS sent out all those years ago, designed to raise the bar, they demanded a lot from media areas, basins and showers in the referees room type of thing, financial transparency and rah rah rah.

The media hasn't responded. The sponsors haven't fallen in behind a product that looks poor on television. The franchises have depended far too much on trust funds to make them work. And, most telling of all, the fact the NZFC winner qualifies for the FIFA Club World Cup doesn't matter to anybody in the media or wider New Zealand football community than those at Kiwitea Street or Trusts Stadium in West Auckland.That is probably most disturbing of all.

A return to a 10 club National League seems unthinkable given the NZFC was designed to lay that particular beast to rest once and for all, and a return to regional football would appear to be a return to the Superclub - again, not going to happen.

What looks realistic is a federation-based tournament:

Federation 1-7 - winners progress to a final play-off. So, home and away in your own federation (for a total of 18-22 matches), then a home and away (one round, venues subject to finance and convinience - let's not forget, like the Chatham Cup, we cut our cloth according to the size of our budget) tournament over 2 months, with the top two qualifying for the O-League.

The issue here is that the O-League is structured to match the domestic match calendars of all the OFC member associations. A winter/summer competition might cause logistical issues.OFC would face interesting logistical issues if the O-League qualifiers were Woolston and Western Suburbs.

I am picking that unless clubs had the same power as Auckland and Waitakere, they would struggle in the O-League. In fact, it would hand a real advantage to the OFC member association clubs, particularly because the O-League has now been expanded to an eight team competition.

Bruce's suggestion that a league comprised of clubs/entities made up from around the country, in a form that best suits the lay of the land, i.e. Auckland City FC as a franchise with feeder clubs, or a Woolston from CHCH (if that's what spins your dials), then so be it. But once again, its all about the money. And what of the relegation issue.

Just some thoughts to stimulate discussion, I'm not pretending that these suggestions are the ultimate answers.

My own view is that I would prefer the NZFC to survive. New Zealand football needs consistency, a legacy, a product, and credibility. I always believed that the NZFC should have progressed to a 28 match competition and the code itself converted to a summer sport.

But there is money to fund that dream. It looks over.

thats ok but why do we need Federations so big through out the country we know longer dont recognise who is who?

Larry, I am not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse, or simply misinterpreting my comments. Bruce Holloway2009-06-17 19:52:13

yes Bruce I can sympathise with you because I know what a commendable  jobyou have done in the Waikato Area,with people like Steve Williams,Steve Owens and Brian Coe and many others I have administered,coached and played in the National League when Muir Park was a fortress,so was all other home grounds of National league grounds that has diminished because the NZFC has caused that.

gave myself a very solid uppercut - like a tim brown tackle...then i passed the ball away like tim too.

anyway.

that last post of yours i agree with pretty much all thru...dont know how you got there from your first post on the other page...but anyway...the shifting sands of your point of view have arrived at a place where i can agree with you.  wonder where they will go next.

by the way im not deliberately obtuse...maybe just dumb tho.

Larry, I have to agree with the last line you mention and so I also forgive you as a fellow poster. I wasn't sure if you were deliberately obtuse, or simply misinterpreting my comments as well.

But I better reply before you get get your nose out joint.

A couple of years ago when Manawatu was looking to lose their licence (but regain it) during the licence renewal, It was clear from the financial people that looking after the books at the time, that only the two Auckland teams were doing enough on the profit side and that Wellington was breaking even. All other NZFC teams were losing money. Simply because the lack of enough sponsorship money to fit the criteria and the cost of venues. To gain the extra sponsorship money meant for these other franchises to ask for more money from existing sponsors rather than expanding the number of sponsors. The catchment area of people that are able to support a NZFC franchise at the time was only the three teams. $300,000 is a lot of money to fit the existing criteria to upgrade grounds and other cost when you are running an amateur clubs.

However as you know, Team Wellington nearly not start last season and Waitakto FC had to change a number of things to continue to play NZFC. This means breaking a few rules such as allowing Waitkato to play at Ngaruawahia rather than Hamilton Stadium, Youngheart Manawatu to play in Memorial Park rather than FMG stadium, Otago United to play in Sunnyvale Park rather than Carisbrook as well as cutting the NZFC to 14 rounds. The stadium criteria rule was relaxed in order to keep the top players playing in some format in the year. The question of getting bums on seat is tough at these venues but with the NZF financial state at a lost and franchises making losses themselves, they were all willing to just do with smaller grounds and less seats and less games.

Anyway Bruce does raise a number of fine points about the trouble of running the national competition.

Too much cost, Too little punter that feel that NZFC matters, not enough crowd numbers. Although we would like to have about 5,000 in a crowd paying $5-10 each home game in 28 round league competition to have a decent financial break even situation for the franchises which will release the sponsorship money on players and other stuff instead.

We can't rely on gaming trust money as they have cut the funds short. A serious competition cannot expect to stick with gaming trust money. They need a business model that will sell to the population or to the government as long as it has a return of the investment.

my nose is only out of joint from my tim brown style uppercut.

I have been involved at both Auckland City and Waitakere Utd since the commencement of the NZFC and prior to that was involved in the last club based National League.

I have just flown back from watching Australia v Japan World Cup qualifier and ran in to Wynton Rufer at the airport.

On top of that I was up at 4.30am Melbourne time to watch the All Whites v South Africa.

It may be this post is better suited to the NZFC Review topic but Bruce has led us down a path of commenting on league structure here.

As Barry Smith (who is on the review committee) said to me two weeks ago organising a competition is easy.

The hard bit is determining what the objectives the league can and should fulfill.

For my mind it needs to be

1. Competitive - and this is playing and coaching strength determined on the park
2. Financially sustainable.
3. Our best players and coaches (the serious ones) need to be involved for 9 months of the year.
4. Cater for the members of our age group national representatives. (Squad quotas for age groups)
5. Preserve the integrity of the Chatham Cup.

1. Competitive - the down side of the NZFC is that we are not guaranteed to have the best players and coaches working at this level. Take for example Chris Milicich and Paul Marshall. Both want to coach at the highest level possible and neither can get a job. One is the highest qualified coach working in the domestic game (UEFA A Licence) and the other has won two National Titles and is half way through his UEFA A.

It is the perogative of club chairman / boards to appoint the caching staff of their choice but the unsuccessful cant' pick up another club and work their way up to National League level.

The same happens with players - there is only one player that has been at Waitakere all five seasons. Players who miss out on squad places due to coach preference can't work up to NZFC with another club. It has been suggested they move around the country like Ian Hogg or Chris Bright have done previously but if they have a career or family is it realistic to move town for a 14 game season last year?

Therefore any structure should allow those who aspire to the top level the opportunity to do so. This also applies to club administrators and backers.

2. Financially Sustainable

Ever since 1970 the participants of the National League have carried a huge portion of the league. So the financial burden has been borne by 8-14 club / entities each season. Now that this cost has risen to a minimum cost of $200-$250k. It is getting beyond the reach of the average club administrator.

As a sport we need to accept that it does not have huge spectator appeal. This is due to the natural laws of quality. We participate in the world's most popular game however what we produce on the field is a long way from the highest quality available to a viewing audience.

When you consider how much football is on our TV - World Cups, Euro Champs, Qualifiers, Champions League, English Premiership, Spanish and Italian Leagues, A-League and the list goes on. It will take a lot to take the descretionary viewer down to our local park. Trying to put our local game on TV (filmed with 1,2 or 3 cameras) is never going to compete both in standard of play and production of coverage.

We therefore need to spread the financial burden of the National League across more clubs / entities. In return for asking clubs to contribute financially they need to have the right to compete.

Levying clubs for their franchise or federation simply builds resentment if their is no access.

This is where a Regional League structure leading in to a National League (not unlike Super League) would achieve. 30 - 40 Clubs contributing $10,000 is far easier to achieve than 8 clubs raising $50,000 each.

There are further financial strategies to strengthen the league finances but will leave that out. They include Club World Cup, Oceania, Phoenix, Sponsorship.

This should accumulate up to $1 million a year to fund the running of the National League.

3. Competitition Length. The more international football we watch it become abundantly clear that we are short on technical ability. If we continue to treat the game as a winter sport or a National League of 14 games we will never compete on an international level.

Our season needs to also be 9 months. Clearly a National League of this length is unaffordable. The Regional Leagues leading in to the National League each year will give a 9 month season. The short coming of the old Super League was it was too short and the best players having been spread across 30 teams meant many did not play in the National Round.

Therefore after a 10 team (18 game Regional League) a 12 team one Round National League plus Chatham Cup in between Regional and National League would mean the season would pan out to 36 games. Our top two teams would also have O League. A Transfer window allowing for increasing squad size from 18 players + unlimited under 20 players to 23 players prior to National Round. This would mean up to 60 players could be picked up for the National Round.

It would require teams to compete on the park every year.    If you have to finish in the top 4 every year in your Regional League to play National League (and qualify for O League / FIFA Club World Cup) then you are going to have to raise and maintain standards. However, it does also allow for new comers to aspire to the top = if they are good enough.

For those clubs who are ultimately social or simply serving their communities by providing playing opportunities for the masses will find their level as well.

We are not far off this structure. The Central League exists. Putting the Northern League back in place is simple and if you leave the South Island league as Mainland and Southern with 2 National League places available to each will reduce travel costs even further.

Last year's National Round would have looked something like Caversham, Dunedin Tech, Ferrymead, Nelson, Miramar, Petone, Lower Hutt, Napier, Eastern Suburbs, Central United, East Coast Bays, Waitakere City.

The inclusion of a Phoenix Reserves would mean all teams have 6 home games and 6 away games.

A further $10,000 entry form added to the $300k collected at Regional level means there is at least $420K before adding Phoenix, CWC and sponsorship to run National League.

The cost to a National League participant is only $20k per year with nine months to raise it. Achieving National League status would not financially cripple a club as was often the case in the 1980's.

Putting ground criteria around entry would lift standards across the country and also identify those clubs truly committed to playing at the highest level. (A number currently pay lip service to it).

4. Age Group. If regional league squads are limited to 18 senior players and unlimited under 20's then clearly youth are going to play their part in the leagues. This will ensure a spread of player quality and put emphasis on coaching standards also. More youth involved at senior level will lead through to age group national sides.

5. Chatham Cup Integrity. As all players would be playing in the regional leagues then the best players would be playing in the Cup competition. This is not the case for the last 5 years where NZFC players have not all played winter football.

The cup could run on consecutive weekends between regional leagues and National League. This means for those teams who have not qualified for the National Round as soon as they are knocked out of the Cup their season ends. Their players would then be available to transfer to National League participants.

Sorry for the length of posting but the revamp of the league affects so many part of the game. All aspects need to be considered. Many posts sound good in isolation but the consequences are not always apparent.

My fear is we are asking a lot of non-football people to structure our competitions and it could end up like a camel designed by committee if you get my drift.

You are all welcome to pull it apart or ask for clarification on any point. I could go on.   

   

Craig... glad we got your sign-on working.

It needs more than couple of line response, but won't that just be played in front of 20 people and a dog ?  It's hardly going to engage youth or the general populace or by-pass the club loyalties that stopped many from watching the old league.

Also, while the entry costs are limited, are there really enough entities willing to spend the hundreds it will inevitably cost in player payments, travel and incidental expenses to play in front of 20 men and a dog ?

I get the impression that if the club system was re-introduced now there is a chance that no Wellington side would enter as they don't see any value in it.

That's the point. We need a National League but what ever structure we have the actual participants can't financially sustain their presence.

Because of where it ranks on the scale of world football it will always be played in front of 20 men and a dog. However, if we are to compete internationally - age group, O League, - or players being capable of stepping up to A League or elsewhere off shore, then a strong domestic competition is required.

The league is not for the benefit of the spectators - they will never sustain it financially - it is for the benefit of the game.

So the cost of the game needs to be spread wider. However, if you ask clubs to contribute you have to give them a chance at the top table.

As for the additional costs to clubs they are already incurring this with in the regional league they play. The intention is for the National Round to be prepaid.

The player payments are already a feature of the game and that is for "market forces" to determine the player value.

Clubs may well adopt different strategies. WDU put all their money in to a coach (Barrie Truman) andwon the NL with an entire New Zealand born squad in the 80's.

As for Wellington it would surprise me if Olympic, Miramar, Western Suburbs, Lower Hutt were not interested in having the opportunity to play at O League.

As with any competition there will still be the have and have nots. Waitakere and Central will most likely be involved every year as they are both well run and well structured clubs. Seniors through to juniors. However, they won't always get it right on the field. Waitakere finished 6th in the NZFC in the second season.

No club should have a guaranteed position in the game. That is why Newcastle are playing in the Championship and Burnley in the Premier League this year. It is all about how well you do it on the field.

Our current structure precludes clubs, coaches and players.

It was because we had a pathway to the top that the likes of Waitakere and Central are where they are now. Central started in Auckland local leagues in the mid 60's and for many years languished in Northern League 3.

As for the Wellington sides they wouldn't enter the league they would qualify from the Central League. If they finish top 4. If they passed on the NL round then Napier, Gisborne, Manawatu, might well be happy to fill the void.

Club budgets will vary but those clubs that go bankrupt, and that is their choice to do so by over spending their revenue, will have done so voluntarily as huge costs won't be placed on them to participate.

Waikato this year ran on a shoe string as Bruce has identified. If a team didn't run at the NL level at least we would have ready replacements. At the moment there is no immediately ready alternative to Canterbury.

Youth will be involved if you limit squad sizes. 18 senior players for an 18 game league plus Chatham Cup is pretty thin. If you have two keepers that is only 16 players for a 24 game season (if you make the final of CC).

The one thing NZFC did for Auckland football was to consolidate the playing strength of the city in to two teams. Previously players would endeavour to make the NL with their own club. When the door was closed to their club they were forced to join ACFC or WU. The outcome was at ACFC we had ex All Whites and Kingz players on our bench. The rest of the league had decent starting Xi but no back up.

The Auckllnd franchises have ridden that advantage for the past 5 years. Auckland teams may well continue to dominate any future National League as the player base is bigger. However, it might not always be the same clubs.

Thanks for that Craig,

Craig "The league is not for the benefit of the spectators - they will never sustain it financially - it is for the benefit of the game."

so you dont think it's beneficial to football to have people watching it?

?

Craig I think the argument that because the odd person misses out on national league football due to coach or board preference is just latching on to an exception to the rule. Sure there will be the odd person that misses out and there will be the odd person who is out of their depth but for the most part the best people are involved (especially players, coaching bedates will always rage). My main experience is in Canty but the same noises seem to be coming from the other regions.

Your counter argument should be that this didnt work at canty utd, However the general concensus amongst people I have spoken to is that despite some very tough times the Financial situation was not insurmountable and the system in place was best and had the best chance of working.

But maybe not irretrievable?

Smithy - thanks for taking the time to read rather lengthy posts and respond.

Thanks for that Craig.

how about posting that again into the below thread to be submitted for NZF review?


http://www.yellowfever.co.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9213

Bruce - I too was disappointed with the make up of the review committee. For my mind they have no ownership of the outcome. Ours is the global game. We don't need to re invent the wheel leagues the world over operate on a home and away fixture list with promotion relegation. There are exceptions and people will trot out MLS and A League.

Hard News2009-06-19 19:21:01

They have however developed a stack of talented young players, and when you are up against the huge financial advantages the top two have it's not the worst return. Hard News2009-06-19 20:08:32

Well the NZFC standard should be better than the national club standard. The talent catchment is focused in a NZFC whereas the talent is spread at club level and playing a lower playing standard. For a country of 4 million that it spread out geographically, we simply have dilute the overall playing levels across the board. NZFC is more regional based and includes the best players. The best players of the region that are loyal to their clubs may not play national club league but are in the level below it. That is something I have a problem with. We all want the best players to play at the highest level possible simply because we do not have the numbers and that the clubs are not professional but at least the NZFC would be semi-professional and includes the best playing standard that you can obtain.

I thought that O-league is something to play for and it gets some crowds through the gates at the later end of the season. Granted that there are no regulation-promotion stakes involved but really would it be much difference? To have a very competitive season requires the teams to be very even in league points and anyone can beat anyone. Which is the problem of having the two strong Auckland clubs sit on the "old firm" format. We need a draft system.

However getting players to uproot when they don't get into their prefer NZFC team is always a problem if they are non-professionals. Dropping jobs and moving family are a hassle. But it is something that needs to be addressed.