Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

A league dissolved thread

libelous said:
Can you put a date on this as Football Australia have not been running the ALM since December 2020? You are possibly referring to Football Federation Australia.
Click to expand...
As was pointed out, FA and FFA are same thing, but yes, I am referring to pre 2020. The fact that the ALM is now run separately does not absolve the FA of its duty to uphold the standard of the game. If offers are being made, and they genuinely benefit the game, the FA/FFA should not be standing in the way, and if those running the A-League are doing so, then the FA needs to step in. This reflects on them too, not just the A-League.
 
zimbos05 said:
As was pointed out, FA and FFA are same thing, but yes, I am referring to pre 2020. The fact that the ALM is now run separately does not absolve the FA of its duty to uphold the standard of the game. If offers are being made, and they genuinely benefit the game, the FA/FFA should not be standing in the way, and if those running the A-League are doing so, then the FA needs to step in. This reflects on them too, not just the A-League.
Click to expand...
I get that you are biased against the FA but, as you stated, the Bakries felt that the offers were too low so nothing came of it, end of story. Your feeble attempt to lay blame on the administration is laughable.
 
libelous said:
I get that you are biased against the FA but, as you stated, the Bakries felt that the offers were too low so nothing came of it, end of story. Your feeble attempt to lay blame on the administration is laughable.
Click to expand...
Not sure why you are attacking me.

I'm not biased against the FA. I'm just being honest. The Roar had an opportunity to have some proper ownership and the Bakries refused what was a very good offer. I've seen the paperwork. The then FFA should have stepped in to get the sale through, but refused to do so. They previously tried to get the Roar owned by Clive Palmer when Gold Coast was folding, but that didn't eventuate due to Clive being Clive.

They rejected offers of $10m, $12m, $15m, $17m, $18m and then told the then FFA, "We will not invest another dollar into the club". This was as recent as 2019. It was when that happened that the FA should have stepped in, but instead gave in to the Bakries and bowed to their whim.

It's not a feeble attempt to lay blame. It's what happened, and if you have to resort to attacking me, I'll cop it.
 
libelous said:
I get that you are biased against the FA but, as you stated, the Bakries felt that the offers were too low so nothing came of it, end of story. Your feeble attempt to lay blame on the administration is laughable.
Click to expand...
Chill mate - ok zim mentioned things without facts but hear say and being in the know locally and long time support - some in background do hear bits what behind the scenes.
Sure bakeries didn’t accept but smartly the fa or FFA should have considered cutting their loss’s for the best and that’s what’s wrong.
No need to get high mighty we’re all amongst friends barring the few.
 
zimbos05 said:
Not sure why you are attacking me.

I'm not biased against the FA. I'm just being honest. The Roar had an opportunity to have some proper ownership and the Bakries refused what was a very good offer. I've seen the paperwork. The then FFA should have stepped in to get the sale through, but refused to do so. They previously tried to get the Roar owned by Clive Palmer when Gold Coast was folding, but that didn't eventuate due to Clive being Clive.

They rejected offers of $10m, $12m, $15m, $17m, $18m and then told the then FFA, "We will not invest another dollar into the club". This was as recent as 2019. It was when that happened that the FA should have stepped in, but instead gave in to the Bakries and bowed to their whim.

It's not a feeble attempt to lay blame. It's what happened, and if you have to resort to attacking me, I'll cop it.
Click to expand...
I’m not attacking you but you’re default position always seems to be to lay blame on the administration although you are not alone in that.
I accept what you say with regard to the offers made but I don’t believe FA or FFA are responsible for the state of affairs that Brisbane Roar find themselves in.
 
LFC said:
Chill mate - ok zim mentioned things without facts but hear say and being in the know locally and long time support - some in background do hear bits what behind the scenes.
Sure bakeries didn’t accept but smartly the fa or FFA should have considered cutting their loss’s for the best and that’s what’s wrong.
No need to get high mighty we’re all amongst friends barring the few.
Click to expand...
I am merely giving my opinion, nothing ‘high and mighty’ in that.
 
libelous said:
I’m not attacking you but you’re default position always seems to be to lay blame on the administration although you are not alone in that.
I accept what you say with regard to the offers made but I don’t believe FA or FFA are responsible for the state of affairs that Brisbane Roar find themselves in.
Click to expand...
It's not my default position. I never said the FA are fully responsible, but I do believe that they had a responsibility to step in, particularly when the offer of $18m came in. When you have owners that are saying, "we will no longer invest in this club, but we refuse to let others take over, so it will essentially be run into the ground", then as the governing body of the game, you should step in. Conversations with those in leadership positions at the Roar over the years have highlighted a lot of neglect on the part of the FA at various points. Certain people within the Roar approached the FA to help facilitate a sale with a very strong consortium, and the FA sent a response which said - I paraphrase - "It is not up to us to look after your club, get the state body to help you".


libelous said:
I am merely giving my opinion, nothing ‘high and mighty’ in that.
Click to expand...
Which you are entitled to do, but labelling me as "biased" and what I say as "feeble" isn't you being kind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LFC
zimbos05 said:
It's not my default position. I never said the FA are fully responsible, but I do believe that they had a responsibility to step in, particularly when the offer of $18m came in. When you have owners that are saying, "we will no longer invest in this club, but we refuse to let others take over, so it will essentially be run into the ground", then as the governing body of the game, you should step in. Conversations with those in leadership positions at the Roar over the years have highlighted a lot of neglect on the part of the FA at various points. Certain people within the Roar approached the FA to help facilitate a sale with a very strong consortium, and the FA sent a response which said - I paraphrase - "It is not up to us to look after your club, get the state body to help you".



Which you are entitled to do, but labelling me as "biased" and what I say as "feeble" isn't you being kind.
Click to expand...
Again it’s just my opinion.
You do not state when these offers for the Roar licence were made but if it was before August 2019 (when agreement was reached between FFA and the New Leagues Working Group) then FFA does bear some responsibility but I would imagine that not too many sympathies were shared then.
 
This is how my brain works:

Is there actually an option in the ownership contract that allows anyone to step in under the circumstances mentioned?

As I understand from things I've read over the years there is no one standard licence agreement since Roar have the 'no other team in Brisbane' clause.

Could there be no legal basis for the cancellation of the licence when it comes down to it?

It would be 'funny' if that was the case. We could not blame the Administration for not acting, but could then blame them for not having a good enough licence agreement in the first place.

Anyone got any idea about what it means for the ATO to wind up a Corporate Entity?

Do the Bakries still own a licence?
Do the football administration still have a licence for Brisbane Roar that they can sell to someone else?
Does the core identity of a 'plastic franchise' still exist as a football club or is the football club part of the Corporate Entity?
If you break wind in a soapy bath do the bubbles have a different chemical composition from normal soap bubbles?

I added the last one so there is a chance I will get an answer to at least one question...
 
libelous said:
I am merely giving my opinion, nothing ‘high and mighty’ in that.
Click to expand...
You do come across as such maybe I could describe it in another way.
Nothing wrong saying your opinion it’s how you express it just saying.
 
libelous said:
Again it’s just my opinion.
You do not state when these offers for the Roar licence were made but if it was before August 2019 (when agreement was reached between FFA and the New Leagues Working Group) then FFA does bear some responsibility but I would imagine that not too many sympathies were shared then.
Click to expand...
I already mentioned that these offers were from as recent as 2020, and before that. Majority were before August 2019.
 
Hearing 9 news had 4 min dedicated to A League flares and policing and then another 2 to the WU gambling.

Maybe we need a campaign saying 'most games really are that chill and even boring that you're more at risk by staying home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top