Post history

History for djtim3000

FFA Governance

Back to topic

Current version

Posted July 01, 2019 01:43 · last edited July 01, 2019 01:43

valeo wrote:

As a nix fan, this makes me nervous;

FFA to hold “Good of the Australian Game” rights and governance representation.

FFA removes Phoenix to give Canberra the license in a move that they believe is for the good of the Australian game...etc.

I read it as the FFA only has veto rights, so they can't propose a motion such as the example you mentioned. What is more is likely is if there is a solid expansion bid from say Auckland FC, and a less than solid but existing bid from Canberra and the APFCA approve of Auckland. Then FFA could veto the Auckland FC expansion team in support of Canberra as being good for the Australian game.

Previous versions

1 version
Unknown editor edited July 01, 2019 01:43
valeo wrote:

As a nix fan, this makes me nervous;

FFA to hold “Good of the Australian Game” rights and governance representation.

FFA removes Phoenix to give Canberra the license in a move that they believe is for the good of the Australian game...etc.

I read it as the FFA only has veto rights, so they can't proposal a motion such as the example you mentioned. What is more is likely is if there is a solid expansion bid from say Auckland FC, and a less than solid but existing bid from Canberra and the APFCA approve of Auckland. Then FFA could veto the Auckland FC expansion team in support of Canberra as being good for the Australian game.