A-League Expansion


$1m payout to the right place ensure a deal goes through. I wonder where they got that idea. Sounds like NSW politics.

I also wonder if there is more being splashed around to others on the quiet.
Surely not, that would be too much like FIFA.


TOM SMITHIES and EMMA KEMP, The Daily TelegraphNovember 29, 2018 8:13pmSubscriber only

IT’S the unintended consequence of expansion that is causing A-League bosses a serious headache – how many rounds to play when two new teams are added, probably next season.

Assuming expansion goes ahead, Confidential can reveal that Fox Sports will inform Football Federation Australia their preference is to broadcast a 22-round regular season, with every club playing each other home and away, followed by the finals series.

That equates to almost exactly the same number of games being broadcast – 137 in a 22-round competition plus finals, as opposed to 140 this year with 10 teams - but it will mean between two and three fewer home games for each club in terms of revenue.
Some had assumed the league would expand to 33 rounds, but at roughly $80,000 production costs per game, that would cost Fox an extra $2.5m – money the broadcaster has made clear it cannot afford.

However, a 22-round league puts FFA on a collision course with the Asian Football Confederation, whose rules around which countries can take part in the Asian Champions League state a minimum of 27 games for the top division.

That can include cup games and finals, but A-League teams would only be guaranteed a minimum of 23.

No wonder FFA CEO David Gallop and his staff are scratching their heads. “We haven’t fully determined the number of rounds in a 12-team competition but obviously we would not want to see our clubs and players playing any less football,” Gallop told Confidential. “We are already playing less than the international benchmarks.

“However we intend to talk to our media partners who do a great job of juggling the period when all codes are operating. The current three round structure is not ideal and the matter gets a lot easier when we have 14 teams.”

Thankfully a 22-round season also rules out the prospect of an AFL-style fixture list, with select games such as derbies and the Big Blue played for a third time at the whim of the competition’s schedulers.



Bite the bullet and do an uneven 26,27 or 28 rounds for when we go to 12 teams… Get it back to 26 the year or two later when 2 more teams join the fold.

One thing I don’t want to see is to go to 33 games for a season or 2 and then back to 26…

It’s definitely very messy and complicated.


I’ve seen this suggested a few times but why would we assume we would have 14 teams three or four years from now? It’s taken for fucking ever to get to 12 and we would end up saddled with an inequitable system that I’m certain no one would be happy with.


How about 33 and some games not broadcast by Fox?


That’s what I was thinking. Might be interesting to see whether it drives up attendance at some games.
I can see Fox being against that if those non-televised games are at the same time as televised ones, and say 10K people who like and watch A-League aren’t watching it on Fox because they are at a ground somewhere.


How eminently sensible.

So no chance.


I would consider being able to watch all of your teams’ games as being a 100% non-negotiable requirement of any broadcast arrangement.


We really shouldn’t be bringing in 2 teams at the same time, the quality isn’t there.

1 team next year, 1 more a year or two later. 30 rounds one year, then 33. Fox don’t want 33because they know the quality isn’t there to make a profit




Exactly right,the old admin should have introduced 1 team in the past and now be at 14.There isnt A league standard players in OZ for 2 teams at a time(but thats only my opinion).
Considering 4 teams miss out on finals now,12 teams with 8 qualifying for 2 separate round/robin pools would UP the game quota for Champions league requirements.Then a 1v2 knockout series to decide the champion???


Reply went to wrong comment,sorry.




I’d rather 33 rounds with no finals but I think the finals are probably a good money spinner for the FFA & Fox


Can you imagine how bad viewing would have beenast year if there was no finals and we’d won it very early? Especially with a twelve team comp that’s an crazy amount of dead games


Or how bad it’s going to be this season given that MV have already won it?


Interesting bit says could go 3 new teams (surely SWS, Team 11 and Canberra). But all this are we going 2,3 or 4? and next season or the season after? uncertainty is far too much confusion.


I’m interested to know what concessions the FFA will afford the new clubs. Obviously WSW were given an extra visa spot in the first one or two years due to the lack of quality local talent to dip into, and to give them a chance to be competitive in the first year.

An interesting idea - if you gave all 12 or 13 clubs an additional visa spot for the next two years, that would help ease the obvious issue with needing 40-52 players (or 60-78 for 3 additional teams) in one hit. It won’t give the new teams a competitive advantage, but by allowing the existing 10 teams a visa spot, you’re potentially freeing up 10 proven A League players back into the market.


I think it’d be interesting to see how many ex HAL players are still running around at NPL level.
I don’t think it’d be mission impossible for 2 new clubs coming in and putting together competitive squads.
The key appointment is the right manager.


It’ll definitely have a hit on quality at least initially. Youre going to see a fair few A-League squaddies (think the Calvers etc) move to these new sides to become regulars. Players like Carney or Beauchamp probably get another run and maybe some fringe overseas aussies come back (i.e Meredith?). Hopefully that also comes with some NPL talent getting a run.

I think like any roster the visa players will make the difference. I cant see the whole league getting an extra spot though. Maybe the expansion sides do for a season or two but thats about it.