Promoting better transparency, pathways, standards and opportunities for football and emerging footballers of Australia.
Victoria, Australia
Joined July 2010
- Tweets6.4K
- Following2.4K
- Followers524
- Likes109
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
1 of the best-paid teams in the world,w best elite environments:40 personal staff,business flights,5 ⭐️hotels, private chefs N baristas n still not happy.
4 a nation that isn’t even in the top 10.
Instead of knocking game when it’s at its lowest, maybe play for pride n not greed
BREAKING: Socceroos and Matildas stars have sued Football Australia as part of a multi-million dollar dispute between the governing body and its national team players.
Full story via AAP: tinyurl.com/fmhvrukh
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
🌍 Piccolo atlante tascabile delle multiproprietà nel calcio mondiale.
Naturale sviluppo del modello di business o forma speculativa contro gli interessi dei tifosi, sopratutto dei club “minori”?
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
The headline news from today's Independent Football Regulator press conference in Manchester was that the chair, David Kogan, said he "would resign" if there was any political interference from No 10 in his role. Kogan emphasises that he would not be paying any attention to any UK trading relations in deciding whether a club owner was a fit and proper person to own a football club.
There was inevitable focus on the Manchester City story and nation states owning English clubs but, more broadly, the IFR focused on the number of English clubs on the precipice in the publication of its long-awaited "State of the Game" report. The game's in a bit of a state. Of the 116 clubs in the top five tiers of English football, “32 would not survive 30 days without owner funding. 73 would not survive 90 days”, according to the IFR.
94% of clubs made losses in 25/26. 60% of EFL and National League clubs are “technically insolvent”. 17 clubs (11 EFL, 6 NL) would be loss-making even if the players played for free. “This is an alarm call for English men’s professional football that must precipitate real and lasting change,” says the Football Supporters’ Association’s chair Tom Greatrex.
“The State of the Game report clearly highlights the unsustainable, broken model of football’s finances. How is our national game, which generates billions in revenue every year, in such a perilous condition with so many clubs living hand-to-mouth and reliant on regular handouts from owners?”
The IFR chief exec Richard Monks emphasises that “we are not saying football is about to collapse like a pack of cards. We are saying financial risk increases and action needs to be taken.” Main points from today’s press conference with Monks and Kogan at the National Football Museum…
On wages. Between 21/22 and 25/26, average player wages cost grew by 33% in the PL, 32% in Championship, 71% in League One and 63% in League Two. Salary cap? Would require Government legislation. Kogan: “We have no statutory authority whatsoever (to tell) a club how to spend its money on players or not to spend it on players.”
On growing divide between the divisions. PL revenues have grown 33 times since 1992. L2 revenues grown only 7 times. IFR: “The pyramid is being stretched between the top and the bottom. It has cliff edges.”
On the “New Deal” of redistribution of broadcast money between PL and EFL. Talks continue this week. IFR “been facilitating those conversations for the last four or five months. We have a pretty confident feel about this.” If PL and EFL don’t reach agreement, IFR “will not hesitate to use all the powers at our disposal to bring about lasting change”. ie the back-stop to force a deal through. On parachute payments. Kogan: “Our report concludes clearly that parachutes are necessary.”
On the changing nature and identity of owners. Kogan: “The type of owners has changed." Less collective. "Individual owners now trying to fight individual corners. Not on the pitch but through lawyers.”
On Manchester City situation (found guilty of financial breaches, vigorously denied, currently appealing) and whether its UAE owners are fit and proper. Kogan straight bat: “There is an appeal process going on. We don’t know the outcome of that judgement. So we can’t make any specific judgement. City will argue they have clearly right on their side, as they have argued all the way through, and that will be tested (looked at) by the new independent commission.” Before IFR can make any call.
On nation states like UAE with City and Saudi Arabia with Newcastle United owning PL clubs. Kogan: “We are governed by legislation that does not preclude state ownership of football clubs.” So the horse has bolted? Interestingly....“You never know because others in Government may now be looking at the legislation as it was originally written. We may enter a discussion in the fullness of time regarding whether our powers need to be changed in any sort of way.”
On those geo-politics, strong UK trading links with UAE and the IFR’s independence. Kogan: “The original legislation (for the Football Governance Bill) by the Conservative Government had in it a reference to ‘we have to take regard for some British trade relationships’ - that was removed from the legislation. Our independence is absolute. My independence personally is absolute. I made it very clear last year in a piece in The Times that any form of political interference on the way we operate would result in my resigning this role. I stand by that. I want to make it crystal clear that we come under absolutely no political pressure on this (City) or any other topic. And I don’t expect to in the future.”
IFR can force owners to sell if found to be unfit owners. “We have powers within the legislation that allows us to review not only owners, directors and senior executives, but also whether those owners are fit and proper people to run clubs going forward. That process is reliant on us having very detailed information that would require us to have investigation and then we would make a judgement on legal advice that we receive.” IFR can appoint a third party to sell any club.
Club licensing. From November, every club needs to go for a provisional licence issued by IFR.
Cost of Agents. “A significant and increasing cost to football clubs”. IFR working with clubs, leagues and Government to address “concerns” about agents’ fees.
Positives? Ish. Confirmation that the IFR was needed. Kogan found that when talking to club execs and owners “they all repeatedly say ‘we want regulation’. They think that at some point they are going to get into trouble. Stability is what the pyramid needs.”
Monks adds, “English football is a massive success story. We should not lose sight of the success story now worth £9 billion in terms of revenue. Most popular league in the world. Deepest pyramid in the world.” But at risk. Handle with care. That’s why the IFR, the fans’ friend, was brought in. The State of the Game report concludes... the game's in a bit of a state.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
⚽ En el fútbol moderno conviven distintos modelos de propiedad. Entenderlos evita confusiones. 🧵
👥 1. Tradicional (Club Social)
El club pertenece a sus socios, que votan al presidente y al consejo directivo.
Ej: River, Flamengo, Palmeiras, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Boca.
🏢 2. SAD Deportiva
El fútbol se separa en una Sociedad Anónima.
🔒 Privada — el control está en accionistas privados y no cotiza. Ej: PSV, Villarreal, Atalanta.
📈 Pública — cotiza en bolsa / capital abierto. Ej: Ajax, Porto, Benfica, Sporting, Galatasaray.
🏭 3. Empresa privada
El club es propiedad de una empresa o grupo empresario. Puede cotizar una parte en bolsa pública.
Juventus → familia Agnelli (Exor)
RB Leipzig / Salzburg → Red Bull
Tottenham → familia Lewis (ENIC).
America (Mex) → Cotiza en bolsa como Ollamani.
💰 4. Vehículo de inversión
Fondos o capital soberano que compran el club como activo financiero.
Manchester City → 🇦🇪 Abu Dhabi (City Football Group)
PSG → 🇶🇦 Qatar (Qatar Sports Investments)
Atlético de Madrid → Ares Management + Quantum (Idan Ofer)
Millonarios → Amber Capital (fondo con sede en Londres)
🇩🇪 El modelo alemán del 50+1 es distinto. Merece un post aparte.
Como venimos indicando: la figura jurídica importa.
Pero importa más entender quién controla, con qué proyecto y con qué reglas.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
People always mention Japan when talking about building the Australian football pyramid... but what can we actually learn from the J.League? 🤔🇦🇺🇯🇵
It isn't so much about promotion and relegation.
It's how they got there and why they had to evolve in the first place.
FULL STORY: tinyurl.com/mj3akzcu
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
I’ll say it again for the umpteenth time… only Pro/Rel in a united ecosystem can ignite Australian football… uniting, inclusive & aspirational… the pathway is a national 2nd division in winter comprised of established clubs… it just needs @FootballAUS to step up. Will it?
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
With the recent focus on shocking football governance - FIFA, FA finances and AGM, WU debacle at AL level and in FV comps, - it's relevant to revisit FV's and FA's incompetent governance of our women's game 10 or so years ago.
In 2016, the Vic NPL Women kicked off. At the end of this post I've included our current table with all 14 teams now and a FV extract about the 8 or 9 teams, (can't remember), which started. In 2016, the comp was comprised of conjured teams Southern Utd, Geelong Galaxy, Calder, which took over from Keilor Park, Alamein from Ashburton and a Bayside new concoction from the area.
Add the National Training Centre (NTC) and only 3 existing clubs (!), close it off - no pro/rel - and hey presto, real comp erased and a silly, ideological concept was commenced. A bureaucratic nightmare, borne of some fashionable stupid idea to 'make' Matildas and ALW players, and to eliminate clubs, was launched with a whimper.
Despite being Champions in 2015 and one of the Australia's strongest clubs, SMFC was excluded, along with Lakeside stadium and its support.
Apparently its written application wasn't up to scratch! True. Let that sink in.
SMFC took legal action against FV, settled and got in a year or so later. Booroondara, the other finalist in 2015, was also left out. Why include the best teams in the top competition when you have an agenda and an ideology?
Since then, the ridiculous, damaging idea of the NTC has finally been scrapped. Galaxy and Southern disappeared into the ⚽️ wilderness they never came from and have been resuscitated into the VPL. Bayside has joined Bentleigh Men's and is a good club now. Having basically taken over from Keilor Park, Calder was successful, but was sacrificed to give the ridiculous concept which was WU a ready ALW team. Now WU has been hibernated to death, we're back to KP. A proper club.
The competition is populated by the strongest clubs and, egregiously, by AL teams while none of the clubs can play AL. But at least we have pro/rel and the strongest clubs on merit.
Allow competition and the best rise. The ill-advised confection foisted on Vic women's football in 2016 has effectively been erased but the damage it caused to clubs and players over almost a decade cannot be overstated. Driven by our thrall to 'making' Matildas and ALW players, while eliminating the role of our strongest clubs, this numnut ideology has passed. But I'm not confident it's been buried. None of the clueless administrators responsible have been held accountable. They've all gone while the clubs they tried to kill battle on. They are the central platform for our game and should be celebrated, promoted and helped. Governing bodies should resist any idea which reduces or restricts their role.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
The debate over youth development in the United States is woefully incomplete without confronting the crisis facing our professional clubs.
How can professional clubs invest in the long-term development of players when 73% of U.S. pro clubs launched since 1992 have failed?
Without promotion and relegation, player development solidarity payments, and club survival stability, there is no structural incentive for teams to orient themselves around long-term player development goals rather than short-term survival. An improperly structured pyramid devolves into a short-term cash grab rather than a system designed to prioritize player development and club sustainability.
Long-term, our national teams suffer. The Title IX advantages on the women’s side are being eroded as other countries adopt properly structured pyramids that give professional clubs real long-term incentives to invest in development and stability, rather than short-term results.
Has anyone heard U.S. Soccer leadership address this? Do they care about building sustainable clubs, or only protecting MLS and the closed system? Are they not even curious about what is going on? Why is the rest of the world so much more stable than the American system?
We've been experimenting with closed soccer for over 100 years, and the failures are staggering. Why don't we try the system that's proven to work in 100+ countries where soccer is #1, instead of a system that hasn't worked to build the sport in any of them?
It is time to fully embrace the principles that made soccer the world’s number-one sport, not force the game into a cookie-cutter version of the closed American sports model that has failed our sport for a century.
@jtbatson, @cone_cindy, @thesoccerdon, @ussoccer
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
U.S. Soccer’s job is to protect and grow the entire American soccer ecosystem: professional clubs at every level, amateur teams, independent academies, youth organizations, players, coaches, referees, supporters and communities across the country.
MLS is just a small part of that system.
@ussoccer must govern for the whole sport, not function as the political shield or commercial partner of one league. Its duty is to strengthen open competition, protect the U.S. Open Cup, support lower divisions and create opportunities for clubs and players across the country.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
I summarized Spain’s style to four things:
1) Constant support around the ball
2) Individual ability to escape pressure
3) Recognition and execution of ‘Speed Up’ moments
4) Final third quality to combine, Futbol de Plaza
In a future tweet I will outline how this is developed.
After the Spain and France game, I tweeted this: “Collective quality outperformed individual quality.”
This was just a sense. It was a feeling after the game that I quickly put into words, but I didn’t have any evidence for it. I didn’t have anything other than the feeling that I got from watching the game. So I decided to go into FIFA’s Training Centre and look up the match reports to see if I could find anything that would lead to the conclusion I had: that Spain were collectively better than France.
At a glance, the answer was no. Other than expected goals, pretty much everything was around the same: complete passes, pass completion, possession percentage and ball progressions. If you look at the line breaks, you’ll see that France were actually a little bit higher, which makes sense because France typically like to play a little bit more vertically.
However, there is one statistic that does show what I felt: offering to receive.
France had 329 total offers made, distributed fairly evenly throughout the field, and 114 total offers received. Spain, on the other hand, had 438 total offers made. They made 236 offers in the middle third and 275 offers inside the shape. That is where the numbers really begin to differ.
As FIFA defines it, an offer to receive is an off-ball movement that shows intent to support the player on the ball, either to maintain possession or progress the ball. Spain were constantly providing their teammates, through proximity, through closeness, and through angles and lines of support, an option to continue playing.
That shows that, in moments when Spain have the ball, there are constantly three, four or five players moving and providing an option to continue to maintain possession. Spain play together. The player on the ball is rarely left alone to solve the moment through their individual quality while everyone else watches. There is an option, an exit plan, some way out in case they need it.
Secondly, when we think about this Spanish style, we often think about one touch, two touch, pass, pass, pass. What we often fail to realize is that these players have so much ability on the ball. Even a right back has the quality to beat a player, get out of a press and continue the attack. Playing collectively does not mean removing individual quality. Their individual quality allows the collective to continue playing.
Then there are the speed-up moments. Spain can maintain possession, move France, slow the game down and continue offering support, but when the moment to go forward appears, it is time to go forward. They recognize that moment of verticality and they accelerate. Then, if the possibility disappears, they slow down again and continue playing.
There is another element of Spain. Once they have moved France back into their final third, they create these structures where they basically suffocate you. Any time the ball pops out, there are players ready to defend and ready to win the next ball in order to keep it going. The structure, the organization and the roles allow them to stay pressing, keep playing together and keep having the ball.
Lastly, there is this type of football that I call football from the plaza, fútbol de plaza, where you learn to attack, dribble, pass and play in tight spaces. You learn these interactions and these one-two combinations, but you don’t learn them through the repetition of patterns. You learn them through doing it for your entire childhood in these tight areas. It is play, pass and go, play and go, constantly finding the next interaction and then finding that moment of verticality.
That whole sequence shows exactly why Spain are Spain.
To summarize, they are constantly offering their teammates support. My initial feeling that collective quality outperformed individual quality came from watching Spain play together, always offering options to the player on the ball rather than watching the player on the ball do something with their individual quality. They offer an option, an exit plan, some way out in case it is needed.
The players are also able to escape individually when the collective solution is not immediately available. They recognize the speed-up moments and, when they find themselves in moments where they can go forward, they go vertical. Then they suffocate you through the structure and organization that allow them to win the ball again and keep playing together.
And that last piece—the forward pass, play and go—is the kind of thing you get a lot from 3v3, 4v4 and 2v2 games.
All in all, fantastic. So much fun to watch the Spanish team and so much fun to see all of their style essentially culminate into one match and, in this case, into one goal.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
This World Cup has shown how Argentinian players are just built different, and it was interesting because, in the press conferences, both managers addressed this.
First, Tuchel talks about the Argentinian value of the ball and how they protect the ball at all costs, how they manage those small spaces, and how they learn this from a young age. He references culture, and this is exactly it. A child playing in a certain environment leads to that. Not every Argentinian child is on the national team, but it raises the ceiling. It creates a certain type of style and a certain type of player.
Then Scaloni also references his culture. He sees them play without fear of losing. It comes from playing in an environment where you are constantly faced with the potential of losing and being able to play with that pressure, right? They don’t fight against it. They play with it. They use it.
And I think this is where youth football coaches should really take note. This does not mean we should copy and paste Argentinian culture into every training environment, because culture cannot just be copied. But the values within that culture can be inculcated in every training environment. The value of the ball. The courage to receive it in small spaces. The ability to protect it under pressure. The confidence to keep playing after a mistake. The willingness to play with the possibility of losing rather than constantly trying to avoid it.
Those values can become part of the environment we create every day. They can be present in the games we design, in what we praise, in what we allow players to struggle with, and in how we respond when they lose the ball. If every mistake leads to the coach stopping the session, giving the answer, or taking the pressure away, then players never learn to play with that pressure. They learn to wait for the coach.
It was cool to see how two managers, at such a big stage, reference culture and the environments that kids play in when they’re young. Because the players we see on the biggest stage were not only created by tactics or coaching information. They were created by environments that taught them what to value, how to relate to the ball, and how to play when there was something to lose.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
Steve Nash explains what it really means to have a process over outcome mindset.
Everyone wants to win. That's not the problem.
The problem is that most people think about winning at exactly the wrong moment.
"Is winning easy? No. Don't get fooled. Winning is not easy. Expect the unexpected. Expect something you don't expect right around the corner."
📌Nash isn't talking about talent. He's talking about attention. Because the moment you start thinking about the scoreboard - you stop doing the things that put you on it.
"Process over outcome. Do not worry about the outcome. The outcome is winning. Do not worry about winning. Winning takes care of itself."
Read that again slowly.
Winning takes care of itself.
The best performers in the world have figured out that outcomes are lagging indicators. They show up after the work - not during it.
"The process is what wins. The process is what wins."
He said it twice on purpose.
"You're feeling a little bit of pressure - how do we stay winning? Throw all that away. What do I have to do right now, today? How am I gonna give it the best day I can give it?"
📌The outcome is a destination. The process is the vehicle. Most teams lose focus chasing what they want. The great ones stay locked in on what they can control - the next rep, the next possession, the next decision.
(🎥 @ASUFootball)
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
Full disclosure: I'm doing this for myself. My wife and I are comparing Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal for a European base. Everyone I talk to wants the same thing now, a base, not a holiday, judged on what actually decides a life: real estate, geography, culture and tax. After rural Italy, this is Greece's turn, the islands first.
Starlink killed the bandwidth problem here in 2023. The island that ran on a trickle now runs on 150+ Mbps, so for the first time you can earn a mainland salary from a rock in the Aegean.
The tax helps too. Greece's 7% flat tax for foreign pensioners has no town cap and no island cap. Live on Crete or on an island of 8,000 people, the rate is the same: 7% on all foreign income for fifteen years. Italy caps its version at small southern towns. Greece lets you live anywhere.
But here is where the dream dies. People pick the island in August and pay for it in February: the ferry in a gale, the clinic that calls itself a hospital, the village that empties on October 15.
So I screened for winter, not summer.
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
メッシ、走行距離は618人中618位。得点は618人中1位。
この極端すぎるデータの正体がポジショニング。
90分を60秒に圧縮してみた。
ロナウドはスペースを埋め、メッシはスペースを作る。
ロナウドはゴール前の、最も決められる位置に居続ける。だがそこに居座ることでDFも固定され、味方の飛び込むスペースが消える。
メッシは走らない。歩いて、ペナ外の一見怖くない位置に降り続けるだけ。それでも世界一マークを外してはいけない選手だから、DFは付いていくしかない。結果、ゴール前が空き、味方が生きる。そして90分のどこかで必ずマークが剥がれ、その瞬間に仕留める。
ロナウドからマークは剥がれない。
メッシからは勝手に剥がれていく。
チームプレーを覚えたスーパースターは、最も脅威。
#Messi #Ronaldo #WorldCup2026
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
SCENES AT FED SQUARE AS SOCCEROOS EQUALISE ⚽️🔥
Egypt's own goal off an Australian set piece has sent Melbourne's Fed Square and Aussie fans into raptures.
For more Socceroos news, click here: 10.com.au/news/national/can-…
FOOTBALLFIRST retweeted
Ice cream is actually one of the healthiest foods in existence, judging by a multitude of recent research articles.
There was a very highly publicized article that came out in 2018 out of Harvard.
It was for a student's dissertation, he found that ice cream was inversely associated with heart disease.
The nutrition department and the student himself tried repeatedly to "make the association go away" with different analysis, and checking his work.
But it didn't.
Not only was ice cream reported as beneficial,
it was actually one of the most beneficial dairy products analyzed.
With up to a 12% reduction in heart disease risk for having >2 servings of ice cream per week.
This wasn't the first study to find benefits of ice cream, and it also wasn't the last.
In a 2013 meta analysis of studies, they also found a protective effect of ice cream on diabetes.
You can see the bias against ice cream, as they don't even mention it in the main page.
That's despite ice cream showing one of the BEST results of any food studied for diabetes risk.
Another study from 2014 showed the same thing.
Again, this is a meta analysis, not just one study. They are pooling together all of the studies on ice cream and diabetes and still finding this.
The best result of any dairy food studied - here with a 32% reduction in diabetes risk.
The bias against ice cream is very strong in these studies.
A 2016 study once again showing the same benefit of ice cream for diabetes risk.
They say that the study above (Chen et al) showed "attenuated association" once diet collection information was stopped after hypertension or high cholesterol diagnosis.
They argue that this means that the association is invalid.
But not only did they not try to dismiss any other food studied like this, but this is just objectively not true (see above - there still was an association).
They also buried their results on ice cream in the supplementary tables so it didn't even make the paper.
That's probably because they didn't like the fact that once again, ice cream intake was inversely and strongly associated with diabetes risk.
So you really can't argue that there was some kind of agenda in favor of ice cream here.
More recent studies show the same thing.
A 2019 paper again showed a lower risk of diabetes with increased ice cream consumption.
And again, they put this information at the very end in the supplementary tables to try to hide it.
Finally, the most recent study in 2024 showed the STRONGEST association for ice cream's protective effect on diabetes.
There was a linear dose response.
That means more ice cream = less diabetes, straight up.
In fact, there was a 50% reduction in risk for having one serving per day.
Which, as you could guess by this point, was the greatest risk reduction of any dairy food studied.
Why would ice cream actually be good for you?
My main guess is the unique protective fats in dairy, that are abundant in ice cream.
◇ C15
◇ C17
◇ CLA
◇ TVA
◇ TPA
are fats almost exclusively in dairy fat, and all have unique effects.
◇ Mitochondrial enhancing
◇ Anti-inflammatory
◇ Anti-thrombotic
◇ Lipid lowering
◇ Fat burning
◇ Cancer preventing
I've covered these all at length in other content.
Of course, this is all observational.
This is simply seeing what people eat and then seeing what happens to them. It's not an experiment. That is definitely a limitation.
However, when you see the same association, consistently, across decades, regardless of analysis and confounding adjustment, you probably have something real.
This is not to say everyone should go and immediately pound gallons of ice cream for invincibility.
But... it does mean having reasonable amounts of ice cream is likely good for you.
