Nick Bendel
Phoenix falling?
November 18th 2008 07:16
“Australia is engaging a non-Australian team in its league,” he explained, despite the AFC’s wish for “the A-League to have only Australian clubs. The A-League has permission from FIFA to do so but only till 2011. Our Pro-League committee has approved this situation but after 2011 all clubs have to be Australian.”
Wellington reacted calmly to this dramatic news. “We believe we form an integral part of the A-League, FIFA have endorsed us and the FFA are happy with us,” chief executive Tony Pignata argued. For its part, the FFA, which was apparently taken by surprise, offered no real comment at all. “The FFA is aware,” CEO Ben Buckley declared, “that the AFC has raised concerns about teams participating in national domestic league competitions that are not from the country of the competition”.
While he was busy dropping bombshells about the A-League, Bin Hammam took the opportunity to voice an opinion that was already well-known: he expects the national competition to introduce a system of promotion and relegation.
The Qatari’s intervention into Australian affairs raises two important questions. Firstly, does he know what he’s talking about? And, secondly, will he be able to get his way?
On the balance of probabilities, Bin Hammam will- and probably expects to- get his way. One should not be fooled by his placid demeanour: FIFA plays its politics in the most ruthless fashion, which means that nobody rises to the level of confederation president unless they know a thing or two about doing deals and kicking heads in. As the godfather of Asian football, Bin Hammam wields considerable power, not only regionally, but globally.
That said, he does not possess dictatorial power. Like all of FIFA’s senior office bearers, Bin Hammam has been voted into his position, which means that he can be voted out of it. Confederation presidents may, by nature, be ruthless, but they are pragmatists as well, with a keen eye for counting the numbers and observing which way the wind is blowing.
No better example of this could there be than the decision, in 2002, to award Oceania direct entry into the World Cup. This was done at the behest of none other than Sepp Blatter, the FIFA president, who thought it wrong that the OFC should be the only confederation denied a guaranteed place at the sport’s gala event. However, following a revolt by the influential South Americans, Blatter allowed the reform to be reversed the year after. It was thanks to such clever politicking that despite his many enemies, the controversial Swiss was re-elected unopposed in 2007. So, while Bin Hammam may be used to getting his way, the possibility of him backing down in the face of concerted opposition exists.
This, then, leads to the other question: should Bin Hammam’s plans be opposed? There are many Australians who would be pleased at the thought of Wellington being kicked out of their national league. From the moment the Auckland Football Kingz joined the former NSL, to the admission of the New Zealand Knights as a founding member of the A-League, and more recently to their replacement by the Phoenix, a large number of parochial voices have decried the supposed charity shown to our neighbours across the Tasman. Not only are we assisting a country that might prevent us from qualifying for the World Cup, they argue, we are awarding these foreigners representation at the expense of cities such as Canberra and Wollongong. In any case, they conclude, the whole exercise is a waste of time, because neither the Kingz, nor the Knights, nor the Phoenix have ever made the finals.
There is some merit to all three arguments. Yes, the presence of the Phoenix helps to boost the standard and profile of football in New Zealand, at a time when the All Whites might soon be playing off against the Socceroos for a place at South Africa 2010 (as the winner of Oceania’s qualification series, which was New Zealand, will be pitted against the nation that finishes fifth in Asia, which might be Australia). Yes, it seems strange that the Australian league should include a representative from another country’s capital but not its own. And, yes, the Kiwi clubs have provided audiences with more lowlights than highlights over the years.
However, there is greater merit in the counter-arguments. Instead of focussing on keeping the New Zealand game down, we should be concentrating on lifting ours up. Sport is cyclical, so while the Phoenix have struggled to win matches during their brief existence, history suggests that if they can manage their affairs with competence, success will eventually come. And when that happens, Australia will be no less of a winner than New Zealand. Spirited trans-Tasman clashes will capture the attention of fans and media in both countries. Furthermore, they will help to consolidate a market that would otherwise be unavailable to the FFA. After all, if not for the Phoenix, how many of New Zealand’s four million people would be interested in attending an A-League game, buying an A-League shirt, or watching an A-League fixture on television? On balance, the participation of a New Zealand franchise in the Australian competition serves the interests of both parties.
But what of Bin Hammam’s other proposal, that the A-League should consist of two divisions? This is an idea that is good in theory but unviable in reality. Although relegation battles can be dramatic affairs, which both excite neutrals and provide supporters with an incentive to keep backing struggling teams, the promotion-relegation system is a luxury that the FFA cannot afford. The Australian sporting marketplace is too competitive, and the A-League too immature, to sustain the minimum of 20 professional clubs that would presumably be needed to make such a scheme work. Given that the league’s eight current members are struggling to stay afloat, how could they be expected to turn a profit if they were dumped to the second division and forced to play against the likes of the Blacktown City Demons and Altona Magic? Even the most loyal supporter would struggle for motivation to attend such matches when football finals and international cricket would be happening at the same time.
For all Mohamed Bin Hammam's intelligence and experience, he is wrong about the Wellington Phoenix and he is wrong about promotion-relegation. Expelling one and introducing the other would be retrogressive steps, which would only weaken the A-League, and therefore Asian football. The Qatari needs to be enlightened about Australian conditions, and told in the nicest possible way to back down. At the same time, the FFA needs to lobby other AFC nations- some of which must be in similar predicaments- to support its cause. If Bin Hammam places a higher value on his job than his big ideas, then all hope is not lost.
| 55 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
