A-League promotion-relegation???

 

Am interested how they propose to introduce this, and what ramifications it would have on the Nix?

 

Is there really enough depth in Australia to consider this, and why is it even a criteria for how well a league is rated??

 

I think it can only be BAD for the game.

 

btw: No ramifications for the nix as we won't finish last.

 

Everyone seems to miss this point .............. it is the structure that is wanted ..............

So when at 14 or 12 teams maybe 16 teams, is when P & R starts. The conditions of entry for each team at the second level ?? capital, ??? access to a ??? capicity ground, ???? membership base, ???? near population, ???? number of local players. FFA will issue guidelines the same as the A-League now.

When 8 teams (or what ever the agreed figure is) meet the requirements of second level, P & R starts ............... so something to build to with no shocks to anybody with an acceptable structure in place for P & R in the meantime for any FIFA official looking at Australia from the outside.

<!-- controls -->

 

To me,if they do this itd be a huge over reaction to that asian report into the a league in the other thread

 

A-League and NZFC are seperate competitions, in seperate countries, on seperate continents (ny FIFA boundaries). There's no connection whatsoever. Logistically, it can't happen. Logically, it shouldn't happen.

 

The only way A-League clubs could be relegated to a different league would be if it were an Australian league - and considering the FFA's goal to keep ethnic tensions out of sports, it'd have to be a B-League rather than VPL, NSW etc...

However that's 10 franchises for 5 spots - 3 for Melbourne, 2 each for West Sydney, Townsville and Gold Coast (of course that's only 1 now), and 1 for Wollongong. So the FFA would need to find five other franchise locations, not just franchise owners.

 

 

...nitpicking aside, I agree with ya

Enjoyed this post on this topic from another forum ......... share with YF

Chris GS said | Yesterday | Report comment

Hmmm, wouldn�t be surprised if the 2 teams debuting next year are Gold Coast and one of the western Sydney bids. A smoky would be a team from Wollongong. From what I�ve seen, FFA�s criteria for inclusion are:

1) Loads of money to sink into the start-up, by a genuinely rich person or group. Not some nouveau-riche chancer who got lucky on the stock market, property speculation, or government-derived social engineering programs,

2) A large and untapped market, preferably where only zero or one of the winter ball codes have established a presence,

3) A good stadium deal. If not, then refer to criterion 1.

These are the reasons why Clive Palmer was allowed to sail over the head of the Taplin group, and also why I think a new team from Townsville will be told to wait until the 2010-11 season, given that the feuding FNQ bids seem to have been mounted by opportunists or well-meaning small fry. Sorry folks - you�ve got to stand on your own two feet if you want to play in Frank�s sand pit!

In fact, if it wasn�t for Townsville fulfilling condition 2 they would have been told to wait until the A2-League started, IMO. Melbourne 2 will also wait until 2010-11 or even longer. This is due partly to the 5-year exclusivity deal but also because I perceive that the NRL is more vulnerable and the A-League sees better potential for new teams to quickly settle in NSW. The AFL is rampant in Melbourne, and a 2nd Victorian team would require very careful positioning in order to be successful without just cannibalizing support from Victory. The same holds to true for SA. If Perth Glory were successful then this argument would also apply, but don�t get me started on them.

By contrast, a Westie A-League team with its head screwed on properly would have no trouble consistently drawing 20,000+ crowds a la Melbourne Victory and can choose from a number of rectangular fields already built for League teams, many of who are becoming desperate to survive in a competitive market, and are receptive to an A-League team chasing the cobwebs away from their grounds over the off season (e.g. Penrith). A second Sydney team would have the added benefit of giving Sydney FC a motivational poke in the backside. One team one city is a sound model, but Sydney appears large enough to comprise 3 or 4 cities nowadays.

At the moment it seems that most of the existing A-League teams are not really thriving financially in their own right, and by adding more teams you are going to dilute the Foxtel rights money thereby putting everybody in danger. Don�t forget that FFA are embarking on an ambitious expansion with a women�s A-League and the Youth League (both of which will be never be profit makers in their own right), so they are too stretched to really want to be bothered nursing the runt of the litter. That�s why I think a Wollongong team backed by Gordon (forget his first name, but I think he owns WIN television and is seriously rich like Palmer) could be a surprise addition in 2010-11.

This will raise questions of what sort of A-League the average soccer fan wants - a bunch of impersonal franchises run by oligarchs, concerned only with trophies, financial return and indifferent to bonding with the local grass roots? (Comparisons with Sydney FC are entirely unintentional heh heh).

This is where 2013 becomes interesting: a new TV rights deal that will be considerably larger than current, and involve FTA TV stations. Around this time the mooted A2-League may or may not begin, and it will become possible to accommodate and subsidise A-League teams in smaller or experimental markets (e.g. Sydney 3, Melbourne 3, country Vic, northern NSW, Tas, South Island NZ and/or Pacific Islands, NT, WA 2, SA 2, Bali, PNG?). This is where the Mariners have been so good for the A-League, by proving a smaller team in an unproven market can capture the public�s imagination if they are well run. Exciting times � but progress is not risk-free!