Exclusive

Nick Galatas: “XI Principles a step in the right direction to unify the game”

The Australian Association of Football Clubs (AAFC) has released a response to Football Federation Australia’s (FFA) XI Principles, supporting the call for a more inclusive governance strategy moving forward.

Speaking exclusively to Soccerscene, AAFC Chairman Nick Galatas believes the FFA’s new ‘living document’ is a step in the right direction to building a “vertical, democratic model” which will ultimately help to unify the game.

The XI Principles were publicly revealed on 2 July 2020 in release titled ‘XI Principles for the future of Australian football’. The discussion paper is intended to outline 11 key strategies to drive the growth of Australian football.

“The AAFC welcomes the FFA’s XI Principles. From our perspective it demonstrates a recognition that there are currently issues within football that need to be addressed, so we believe it is fantastic that they are inviting discussion and comment,” Galatas says.

“To the FFA’s credit, they have stated that it is a ‘living document’. This means they have opened the bidding to everyone involved in the game by encouraging them to participate and contribute.”

The AAFC represents National Premier League clubs from across Australia’s state federations and the ACT. The association advocates for the clubs and their more than 40,000 players around the country.

In its official response to the XI Principles discussion paper, the AAFC called on the need for a linked football hierarchy that will act as a fluid pyramid. This, according to Galatas would help to create a competitive system where ambition is rewarded, and clubs can earn progression based on merit.

“Unifying the game sends the message that people, and clubs are not categorised into positions. They should not be labelled and should not be given a function. Clubs should aspire to be the best that they can be and what the club’s members want them to be,” Galatas says.

The FFA’s new message under CEO James Johnson appears to be one of collaboration, an approach which differs to the previous strategy which inadvertently created a divide between the A-League and state-level clubs.

“We all want to see our top tier thrive. Unleashing the potential of our clubs, providing a linked structure, offers the best chance for our struggling A-League to be re-energised and become the top-tier we all want it to be, at the top of a linked, inclusive, fluid football pyramid,” Galatas said.

The idea of a linked system would likely lead to a stronger collective outcome from Australia’s football clubs, which would lay the foundations for a stronger national team.

One of the goals of the AAFC’s desire for a linked system would be the implementation of a national second division. He believes the creation of a competitive second division would reinvigorate the A-League and strengthen all levels of the game.

“Ultimately creating a linked system could lead to promotion and relegation. I say ultimately because we need to create that over time, but we want to see a real second tier that the strongest and most aspirational clubs can form,” he says.

“The remainder of NPL clubs can then form a tier below that. This would alleviate them from the burden currently imposed on them and make football more accessible for kids to participate at a junior level.”

In terms of governance, the seventh principle proposed by the FFA is to ‘Transition towards a modern, fit-for-purpose governance framework for football in Australia in line with global standards and best-practice sports governance in Australia.’

Although this model has not been clearly defined yet, Galatas says the ideal solution would be to implement a “vertical integrated democratic model” which clubs have direct representations in their federations.

“Clubs are members-based. They are run by the people who elect a committee to represent them. Since 2006 clubs are not members of the federation so we are aiming to achieve the implementation of a vertically integrated democratic model where there is linkage and representation from top to bottom,” Galatas says

This fits one of the AAFC’s key visions, to secure voting rights on FFA Congress. The body is already a congress member and considers it important to create a system that is not exclusive and involves those at the grassroots rather than isolates them.

The release of the XI Principles comes a little over a year since the FFA scrapped the controversial National Club Identity Policy (NCIP), a policy which Galatas believes alienated people, clubs and the link strong link between tradition, multiculturalism, and football.

“The NCIP was a slap in the face to the history of the game. Australia stands for inclusiveness and welcoming migrant culture and legacy. It smacked of a totalitarian approach. Abolishing the NCIP was the first step towards demonstrating inclusiveness,” Galatas says.

View a full list of the FFA’s XI Principles here.

Previous ArticleNext Article

Why Australia is unlikely to host a Men’s World Cup in the near future

Avatar
Image credit: Football Australia

In December of last year, Saudi Arabia was officially announced as the host nation for the 2034 FIFA World Cup.

This makes them the fourth country from the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) to host the tournament—following Japan and South Korea in 2002, and more recently, Qatar in 2022.

What stood out about Saudi Arabia’s selection, though, was the lack of competition—they ended up being the only country to submit a formal bid.

Australia, a fellow AFC member nation had initially expressed interest in hosting the 2034 World Cup, but with Saudi Arabia heavily investing in their bid and momentum clearly shifting in their favor, Australia chose to step back.

Instead, they redirected their focus toward hosting the 2026 AFC Women’s Asian Cup—an event they were awarded in 2024—and the 2029 Club World Cup.

This isn’t the first time Australia has tried to bring the World Cup Down Under. Back in 2010, they launched a bid to host the 2022 tournament.

However, it ended in disappointment—they received just one vote in the first round, while Qatar controversially secured hosting rights under what many described as “suspicious circumstances.”

Now, 15 years after that failed bid, and with Saudi Arabia next in line to host, it seems increasingly unlikely that Australia will get a World Cup anytime soon. And there are several reasons why that might be the case.

Cost Factor

One of the major reasons Australia may not host a men’s FIFA World Cup in the near future is due to the enormous cost involved in staging the tournament.

According to Statista, Qatar spent a staggering $220 billion USD ($342 billion AUD) to host the 2022 World Cup, making it the most expensive edition in the tournament’s history.

This was largely due to Qatar needing to build much of the necessary infrastructure from scratch.

Even so, previous World Cups have still come with hefty price tags.

Russia spent around $11.6 billion USD ($18 billion AUD) to host the 2018 tournament, while Brazil’s 2014 World Cup cost about $15 billion USD ($23 billion AUD).

In fact, the last men’s World Cup to cost under $1 billion USD ($1.56 billion AUD) was the 1994 tournament held in the United States.

In contrast, the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup—co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand—had a far more modest price tag.

According to FIFA’s bid evaluation report, the tournament was expected to cost around $150 million AUD, with just over $100 million AUD contributed by governments.

Not only does the Women’s World Cup cost significantly less to host, but many of the stadiums and infrastructure acceptable for the women’s tournament would fall short of FIFA’s stricter requirements for the men’s event.

To meet those higher standards, Australia would need to make substantial upgrades, adding further to the cost.

Beyond the economic risks, there’s also a broader question of national priorities.

Australia may ultimately decide that the billions required to secure and host a men’s World Cup could be better invested elsewhere—into areas that deliver more lasting and equitable benefits for the population.

For example, upgrading the nation’s public health system, affordable housing initiatives, education infrastructure, and climate resilience projects are all pressing needs that demand long-term funding and attention.

Investments in regional transport networks, Indigenous community support, and renewable energy development could arguably provide a stronger return on investment in terms of social and economic outcomes.

Given these competing priorities and the immense cost of hosting, Australia may find that the pursuit of a men’s FIFA World Cup is a luxury it simply can’t justify—at least not in the foreseeable future.

Rival Interest

Rival nations within the AFC (Asian Football Confederation) would play a major role in limiting Australia’s chances of hosting a Men’s FIFA World Cup.

The FIFA World Cup is the biggest sporting event in the world, and the competition to host it is incredibly fierce.

Countries go to great lengths to secure hosting rights, especially within the AFC, where Arab nations in particular have been extremely proactive.

One major factor is the concept of sportswashing—the practice of using sports to improve a country’s global image, often as a way to divert attention from human rights issues or political controversies.

This has become especially common in the Middle East over the past decade.

Between early 2021 and mid-2023, Saudi Arabia alone reportedly spent $6.3 billion on sportswashing efforts, including around 300 sponsorship deals.

Their investments span across numerous sports: boxing, motorsport, snooker, golf, ATP tennis, cricket, and even the America’s Cup sailing regatta.

However, football has been their biggest focus.

In recent years, Saudi Arabia’s top-tier football league—the Saudi Pro League (SPL)—has emerged as Asia’s most high-profile domestic competition.

This rise in prominence has largely been driven by the league signing world-famous players to extremely lucrative contracts.

The most notable example is Cristiano Ronaldo, arguably the most recognisable athlete on the planet, who joined Al Nassr on a deal reported to be worth around $207 million USD (approximately $322 million AUD) per season.

But Saudi influence in football isn’t limited to their domestic league. They’ve also hosted major international club competitions.

For instance, five of the last six editions of the Supercopa de España—a tournament featuring the top Spanish clubs—have been held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital.

Now it’s not just the World Cup, looking at the AFC Asian Cup, the premier men’s international football tournament in Asia, three of the last four editions were hosted by Arab nations.

Qatar alone hosted it twice during that period and Saudi Arabia is also set to host the 2027 edition.

So, Australia faces stiff competition within the AFC for the rights to host a World Cup—particularly from wealthy and politically influential Arab nations that have a proven track record of securing major football events.

The last FIFA World Cup (2022) was held in Qatar, and the next AFC host is Saudi Arabia and based on the current pattern, it wouldn’t be surprising if another Arab nation—such as the UAE—secured the next opportunity after that.

Location

One major factor that could affect Australia’s chances of hosting a men’s FIFA World Cup is its geographical location.

Because Australia is so far from Europe and the Americas—where most of the global football audience is—many matches would air at inconvenient times in those regions, potentially lowering TV viewership.

This issue was already evident during the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup, which was co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand.

According to FIFA, the final between Spain and England reached 222.02 million viewers.

That’s a noticeable drop compared to the 2019 final in France, where the USA faced the Netherlands and drew 263.62 million viewers.

A decline like this in viewership could make FIFA and its broadcasting partners think twice about holding a men’s World Cup in Australia.

Speaking of broadcasting, broadcast rights are another concern with time zone differences potentially reducing the value of international broadcast deals, since matches wouldn’t air during prime hours in key markets.

In fact, ahead of the 2023 Women’s World Cup, FIFA reportedly missed its target for selling broadcast rights by about $100 million USD ( $155 million AUD), according to the Wall Street Journal.

FIFA had hoped to bring in $300 million USD ($466 million AUD), but only managed around $200 million USD ($310 million AUD).

It even reached a point where FIFA president Gianni Infantino warned of a possible TV blackout across Europe unless broadcasters increased their offers.

All of this shows how Australia’s remote location could seriously impact global viewership and broadcasting revenue, making it a tougher sell as a host for a future men’s World Cup.

Conclusion

So, in light of these financial, geopolitical, and logistical challenges, it’s clear that the odds of Australia hosting a FIFA World Cup remain firmly stacked against them—making another failed bid not just possible, but increasingly probable.

Given the significant financial demands, complex geopolitical dynamics, and substantial logistical hurdles involved, it becomes increasingly evident that Australia faces an uphill battle in its pursuit of hosting a FIFA World Cup.

These compounding challenges not only diminish the likelihood of a successful bid in the near future, but also raise the probability that any renewed attempt could end in yet another disappointment.

Next CEO of Football Australia steps into the hot seat

Avatar
Whoever the new Football Australia CEO is. They will face tough challenges.
Image Credit: Pxhere

Last Thursday James Johnson announced his resignation as CEO of Football Australia (FA) after five and a half years at the helm.

James Johnson over his tenure has presented over much activity in Australian football.

He’s overseen Australia’s co-hosting the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup with New Zealand.

This event produced a record influx of girls and women to all levels of the game and highlighted that the current footballing system didn’t have the capabilities to sustain this increase.

He was partied to the A-Leagues break from the FA into the Australian Professional Leagues (APL) in 2020 in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis.

Only recently he was instrumental in the FA’s creation of the National Second Division (NSD) to develop the footballing pyramid.

Many of these initiatives had and continue to have a significant impact.

Yet the complexity and work for these undertakings continue.

Though who is going to be the successor?

Heather Garriock, ex Matilda, has been confirmed as Interim CEO.

She has had experience in this type of role serving as CEO of Australian Taekwondo and as a director on the FA Board since 2021.

Garriock currently serves on the Asian Football Confederation’s Technical Committee and is an exciting fit.

Other than Garriock’s appointment, very little has been spoken on the position.

State Federation CEOs such as Football NSW’s John Tsatsimas and Football Queensland’s Robert Cavallucci are well regarded in the industry.

Would taking them away from their state positions a wise plan or are they even keen to take this huge role anyway?

Maybe from outside the footballing space a CEO of business experience could be valuable.

That being said, caution of people with little ‘football knowledge’ should not be taken lightly.

Football fans know all too well the divisiveness of CEO’s who don’t understand the complexities of the game can be.

What challenges are ahead?

For whoever claims the top spot, they and the FA already face some important hurdles.

First and foremost, they will have to preside over the upcoming start of the NSD in October this year.

A huge occasion in the story of Australian Football and a competition that many clubs, fans and communities are banking on to be a success.

If successful, not only will it bring back into the limelight storied clubs, who’s history have woven the rich tapestry of Australian football, but it’ll open the pathway to a new and improved Australian footballing pyramid, giving clubs the following and support they need to grow and develop.

Things such as funding opportunities, more mainstream media audiences and the chance to stamp their mark into the footballing nucleus.

Though with great expectation comes more chance for disappointment.

The current system for the NSD can be argued to be sufficient, but like all great shifts in football it needs to grow, to expand and importantly to deliver on its goal of a more streamline pyramid.

This push will face funding and support challenges and the NSD, the clubs and the FA will struggle if this new chapter is stagnant.

Which brings us to the next challenge.

The A-League and APL

The A-league is producing an amazing new generation of players for Australia, with increased viewership, fan presence and transfer revenue from home grown talent its producing a record season.

However, under the surface the A-League has struggled since its break from the FA into the APL.

The funding and its recent overhaul paint a bleak picture for the clubs.

On top of this the prospect of future relegation would worry any figures of the clubs, from investors to the club’s lifeblood’s, the academies and fanbases.

Whoever takes up the new role must walk the uncomfortable tight rope of supporting the extensive and growing football scene while not ignoring our highest professional level.

The Women’s Game

The 2026 Women’s Asian Cup is just around the corner, providing an exciting opportunity to further elevate Australia’s women’s football journey and continue its impressive momentum.

On-field and tournament success are only the tip of the iceberg as the continuation of the game’s development is critical.

The positives of this progression far out way the negatives but the FA and its incoming CEO must make smart and well-constructed plans to keep the progress going.

Funding

James Johnson and the FA recently hatched together a plan for $3 Billion worth of Funding from the Government.

Funding through Government sporting grants is the backbone of football, especially the grassroots system, the highest participated sport community in Australia.

Before leaving James Johnson, the FA and the extensive member federations presented their Securing Footballing Future initiative before the 2025 Federal Election decided our new government.

This document 23 major points, spanning all levels of the game outlines where and how this funding should be allocated over 10 years.

Securing Footballing Future is bold and focuses on key aspects that have been present issues for football.

The new CEO should make sure that this initiative is a crucial deal to ratify with the government to stabilise funding for years to come.

The federal governments $200 million “Play Our Way” grants program in 2023 was created in the euphoria of the Women’s World Cup.

Though not centrally football focused and far smaller amount of funding, it’s proof that government funding can be acquired and allocated.

As the Sydney Morning Herald reported this week, the FA will record $8.3 million loss at the next general meeting on May 23, funding will become a fundamental issue.

Now more than ever the FA is calling for Garriock and its next potential CEO to be ambitious, show strong leadership and be open to taking calculated risks.

It’s a monumental task ahead, but for the passionate and invested football fans around Australia, they know that optimism for the future while simultaneously being grounded in the present is part of the beautiful game.

As the saying goes, ‘one game at a time’.

Whoever is appointed as Football Australia CEO, whether Garriock or another candidate, should seize the opportunity and lead with purpose.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend