How Melbourne Victory can restore their brand

Melbourne Victory fell to their 14th loss of the season on Sunday in Perth, losing to the Glory 2-1.

It’s a new low for the club which has, for the lifespan of the A-League, been the benchmark off the field and sit just behind Sydney FC on it.

The club regularly tops the charts in attendances and memberships each season, with crowds at some points surpassing 40,000 for regular season matches throughout their history.

This season however, tells a different story.

Victory currently average 5,860 people a game, the lowest figure in their history by some margin. They sit sixth in average attendance this season, behind crosstown rivals Melbourne City.

Whilst the effect of a global pandemic has affected numbers all around the A-League alongside other factors, here are some of problems the head honchos at Melbourne Victory must specifically address to regain their prominence in the competitive Melburnian sporting market.

Revamp the current squad

It’s hard to argue that this isn’t the worst Melbourne Victory team ever assembled. The Victory currently sit second last on the table and their goal difference of -29 is unheard of for a club who’s usually vying for the top position in the league. With Tony Popovic set to coach the team next season, his number one priority will be to clear the deadwood at the Victory and bring in some fresh faces to rebuild the club’s winning mentality.

Address the Marvel Stadium situation

Victory have played at the Docklands venue since its second season due to a financially favourable stadium deal, but the overall experience at the ground is not ideal for football fans. The club plays five games a season at Marvel Stadium, however due to declining levels of active support and a poor viewing experience, games at the stadium are becoming a chore to attend.

At a minimum, if games are to continue at the stadium seats on the first level should be pushed in to increase atmospheric levels and active support should be further encouraged, not continuously stifled.

More energy should definitely be put into filling the 30,000 capacity of a premier footballing venue in AAMI Park every gameday.

Develop an academy site – connect better with the community

After 16 years of being in the A-League, Melbourne Victory are yet to have a facility constructed for its academy setup that befits their size as a club. Their proposed academy base at Footscray Park, which also would have been a home for the club’s W-League side, fell through due to push back from locals in the council area.

Local rivals Melbourne City had a state-of-the-art City Football Academy based in Bundoora for a number of years, before switching their academy site in recent months to Casey Fields, to further connect with the South-East Melbourne football community.

With other Melburnian franchise Western United set to develop their own stadium and training facility in the Western Melbourne suburb of Tarneit, Victory is quickly falling behind the other two teams in their state when it comes to ownership of facilities and connecting with strong segments of the Victorian football community.

Remove the ‘Pay as You Go’ ticketing model

Introduced in response to the uncertain nature of a covid effected season, Melbourne Victory’s current membership model is impacting on its current gameday attendance. This season, fans who purchased a season ticket paid a discounted base fee for the year.

However, this was because each matchday these supporters would have to pay to lock in a seat at half the regular price of a normal match ticket, each time they wanted to attend a game.

The new process is more of a hassle and not as accessible as, for example, bringing in your general admission card, scanning in at the gate and picking your own seat on the day.

Re-build the active support in the north and south ends

It’s been touched on before, but the atmosphere at Melbourne Victory home games were once unrivalled in all of Australian sport.

Whilst the loyal folks are still there and making great noise, there is a lot of work to do by the club to encourage those who have been disenchanted with the club and the professional game in general, to come back to the terraces at the north and south ends.

 

Previous ArticleNext Article

Europe Is Packing Out Stadiums – Is Australia Missing the Bigger Picture?

More than 60 million fans attended matches across Europe’s five major domestic leagues during the 2025/26 season, with average attendances rising 2.4 per cent to 34,402 spectators per game.

On the surface, the figures paint a picture of a healthy ecosystem. Stadiums are fuller than ever, supporters continue to attend in large numbers and live football remains one of the most compelling entertainment products in the world.

But headline crowd figures only tell part of the story.

The more revealing measure is stadium utilisation how much of a venue’s capacity is actually being filled and the structural factors influencing those numbers.

For clubs, higher attendances don’t simply mean more ticket sales. Every additional supporter creates revenue opportunities across hospitality, food and beverage, merchandise and memberships. Modern stadiums are increasingly designed to maximise revenue per visitor, making infrastructure investment as much a commercial decision as a football one.

Attendance growth needs context

In Germany, the Bundesliga reclaimed its position as Europe’s best-attended league, averaging more than 42,300 spectators per match following a 9.4 per cent increase on last year’s figures.

However, much of that growth was driven by the return of traditional powerhouses Hamburger SV and 1. FC Köln. Both clubs continued to attract crowds of more than 50,000 despite spending recent seasons in the second division.

Their promotion didn’t suddenly create new supporters.

It returned two of German football’s biggest fan bases to the top flight, demonstrating how promotion and relegation can significantly influence league-wide attendance trends.

Everton shows how new stadiums can unlock demand

While the Premier League recorded another increase in average attendance, much of that growth can be traced to Everton’s move into the new Hill Dickinson Stadium. The larger venue added almost 13,000 spectators per home match compared with Goodison Park, accounting for more than half of the league’s overall attendance growth during the season.

Rather than generating new demand, the project unlocked demand that already existed.

That distinction matters.

Attendance should be viewed alongside stadium utilisation because many clubs have effectively reached capacity.

A stadium averaging 98 per cent capacity tells a very different story to one averaging 60 per cent, even if the latter attracts more spectators overall.

High utilisation suggests strong demand, pricing power and a compelling matchday experience, while lower utilisation can indicate untapped potential or a venue unfit for its market.

Capacity is becoming a strategic issue

In competitions where grounds are regularly close to full, future growth will depend less on attracting new supporters and more on expanding or redeveloping stadiums.

Elsewhere, the opportunity lies in making better use of existing capacity.

Spain illustrates how infrastructure can also temporarily suppress attendances. Barcelona’s continued absence from the Spotify Camp Nou during its redevelopment has limited crowd numbers despite strong demand.

Real Madrid’s renovated Santiago Bernabéu, meanwhile, demonstrates how modern stadium investment can increase not only capacity but also commercial revenue through premium hospitality.

League structures also shape attendance trends

Ligue 1’s growth over recent seasons has coincided with its reduction from 20 clubs to 18, concentrating a greater number of well-supported clubs within the competition and lifting average attendances as a result.

Stadium investment, league composition, promotion and relegation, and long-term supporter culture all play a role.

Taken together, the figures suggest that attendance growth is rarely driven by a single factor.

The lesson for Australian football

Crowd figures are often viewed as the primary indicator of a league’s health, but European football demonstrates that context matters just as much as the headline number.

The recent Australia Cup fixture between South Melbourne and Preston Lions provides a good local example. While the official attendance was 6,673, the packed grandstands, active supporter groups and television presentation created an atmosphere that felt far larger than the raw figure suggested.

It was a reminder that fan engagement, venue utilisation and matchday experience can often say more about the health of a competition than attendance alone.

A sold-out 15,000-seat stadium may indicate stronger demand than a half-full 30,000-seat venue, while investment in infrastructure can unlock thousands of additional supporters without changing underlying interest in the game itself.

As clubs continue to invest in new stadiums and redevelop existing venues, attendance should increasingly be measured not simply by how many people are watching, but by how effectively football is meeting supporter demand.

The crowds may be rising, but the real story is why.

Who Coaches the Coaches? Gary Cole on the Gaps in Australian Football’s Development System

Australian football has long placed player development at the centre of discussions about the game’s future. But former Socceroo, coach and football administrator Gary Cole believes another question deserves greater attention: who is developing the coaches responsible for developing those players?

Following Soccerscene’s recent analysis of the challenges facing Australia’s coaching system, Cole spoke about his experience of coach education, the National Football Curriculum, pathways into professional coaching and the growing number of Australian players pursuing opportunities overseas.

His assessment points to a broader issue. Australia does have a formal pathway for aspiring coaches, but qualifications alone do not necessarily create better coaches or provide a pathway into professional employment.

For Cole, the missing link is what happens between completing a coaching course and becoming capable of consistently improving players on the pitch.

 

From coach education to coaching

Cole’s introduction to coaching stretches back to the early development of formal coach education in Australia during the 1970s.

He recalls being encouraged into coaching by Dr Ron Smith while studying to become a primary school teacher, before later working under influential figures including Eric Worthington.

One experience with Worthington as a young player fundamentally changed Cole’s understanding of what coaching could achieve.

Worthington worked with Cole and his fellow forwards on their movement and ability to create space for one another. Rather than simply organising a training exercise, the coach was deliberately changing individual and collective behaviours that could then influence what happened in a match.

“It was a light bulb moment for me,” Cole said.

“What he was doing was changing my and the team’s behaviours in training, where that could impact the way we played together on the field.”

That distinction remains central to how Cole views coach education today.

 

Does the current coach education system adequately prepare Australian coaches?

“I think it prepares some of your coaches some of the time, but not all of the coaches all of the time,” Cole said.

His concern is that Australian coach education has, at times, moved too far away from the practical environment in which coaching actually occurs.

“In my opinion, and from the feedback that we’ve gotten at Football Coaches Australia over the journey, coach education lost its way a little bit for a period of time,” he said.

“Some of it became academic. It was more about PowerPoint presentations, more about talking about coaching than it was about coaching.

“The magic of coaching happens between human beings on grass. That’s where the success happens.”

Cole does not dismiss the importance of theory, tactical discussion or other off-field preparation. Instead, his argument is that these elements ultimately need to translate into a coach’s ability to influence player behaviour.

As coaches progress further into performance environments, he believes that ability becomes increasingly important.

“The reality in coaching, as you go up through the performance pathways, is it becomes more and more about helping people to get the right behaviours individually and collectively on the pitch on the weekend,” he said.

“And that requires you to do that on the pitch during the week.”

 

Is the National Football Curriculum still fit for purpose?

Australia’s National Football Curriculum has played an important role in creating a common framework for player and coach development.

But with the current curriculum dating back more than a decade, Cole believes a review is overdue.

“There was a lot of good stuff in there,” he said.

“There was a bunch of stuff that wasn’t in there. There’s nothing about tackling or heading the ball, which is quite bizarre given these are two parts of the game.

“Does it need reviewing? Yes, absolutely.”

The need for a review is not simply about individual football skills.

The environment surrounding coaching has changed significantly, from data and performance analysis to artificial intelligence and the increasingly diverse backgrounds of players entering Australian football.

“The game does change and evolve,” Cole said.

Perhaps more importantly, Cole cautions against assuming there is only one correct way to coach.

He admits that earlier in his career he was something of a “coaching snob”, believing successful coaches needed to approach the game in a similar way to those he had learned from.

Experience changed that perspective.

“There’s never just one way of doing it,” he said.

“People can be successful doing things differently.”

For Australian coach development, that raises an important question: should a national curriculum prescribe how coaches should think, or give them the foundations from which they can develop their own approach?

 

Australia has a coaching pathway – but where does it lead?

Cole is clear that there is a formal route available to aspiring Australian coaches.

Coaches can progress through the licence system from the C and B Licences towards the A and ultimately Pro Licence.

But accessing qualifications and building a professional coaching career are two different challenges.

“Having the licence is one thing that gives you access to the road,” Cole said.

“But to become the driver, you need to get on the road, make some mistakes – preferably don’t kill you – and do all those things.

“Go and get yourself a job at whatever level that you can and you’re comfortable at and develop as a coach.”

Experience, he argues, cannot be replaced by certification.

“The best coaches are the ones that have had hundreds and thousands of hours working with football and on the park, because that’s where they develop.”

Cole points to Joe Montemurro as an example of that evolution.

Early in his coaching career, Montemurro told Cole he would observe other coaches and borrow training exercises that looked effective. Over time, however, he developed a clearer understanding of who he was as a coach, how he wanted his teams to play and which exercises actually served that philosophy.

“The best coaches have the capacity to make the complex simple,” Cole said.

The missing bridge into professional coaching

The greater structural problem emerges when coaches attempt to turn that development into a career.

Cole points to Heidelberg United coach John Anastasiadis as an example of the type of progression that should theoretically exist: achieve success in the NPL, earn an opportunity within an A-League environment and potentially progress towards becoming a professional head coach.

In practice, Cole believes that transition remains rare.

“The number of NPL coaches that get spotted and targeted by A-League coaches is almost non-existent,” he said.

“If they’re lucky, they can get a job, and that’s great because it’s the door towards being a professional coach.”

Cole believes Australian coaches with established professional records are highly regarded. However, when clubs look beyond that group, overseas experience can often be prioritised ahead of coaches working within Australia’s NPL competitions.

“We rarely then look down into the NPL competitions in all of the states to find the next batch of elite coaches,” he said.

It creates a difficult contradiction within the Australian pathway.

Coaches are encouraged to obtain qualifications, accumulate experience and prove themselves within the domestic system, yet success at NPL level does not necessarily provide a clear bridge into the professional game.

Are overseas pathways a failure of Australian development?

The same pathway debate applies to players.

The United States college system has become an increasingly visible option for Australian footballers, offering an established sporting and educational environment alongside opportunities to progress into professional competition.

Cole, however, cautions against treating every player who leaves Australia as evidence that the domestic system has failed.

“Development of players is not linear,” he said.

“You like to put things in boxes, but the reality of player development is it can go ahead in leaps and bounds, and then it doesn’t move for a while.”

His advice to parents of talented young players is therefore relatively simple.

“Take them to somewhere where they want your child to be a part of it, you’ve got a good coach and they’re going to play.”

That final point is particularly important.

Australian players have increasingly secured opportunities in Europe and other overseas markets, but Cole argues the prestige of signing abroad matters less if the player is not receiving meaningful playing time.

“We’ve seen a whole bunch of young Australian players in the last 10 years go off into Europe, get a contract in Europe, not play in Europe, get some time in the reserves, and then come back and play more regularly in the A-League,” he said.

“And that’s okay as well.”

For Cole, development should ultimately be judged by whether an environment gives a player the coaching and competitive minutes required to improve.

“Who coaches the coaches?”

It was Cole’s final observation that perhaps best encapsulates the challenge facing Australian football.

When formal coach education was first established, he recalls technical directors carrying responsibility for both player development and coach development.

He believes that role has changed significantly.

At NPL level in particular, technical directors can now spend substantial amounts of time dealing with parents and concerns surrounding selection, playing time and the significant fees families pay for junior football.

“The technical director role is more like a customer service officer because they’re dealing with parents who are paying an awful lot of money for their kids to play,” Cole said.

“If the kids don’t play, they don’t get enough game time or they don’t start enough, they want to know why, and that role falls back on the TD.”

The consequence is potentially significant.

If technical directors become consumed by administration and parent management, responsibility for actively developing coaches can become secondary.

“Within the club system, someone needs to be responsible for player and coach development,” Cole said.

“Because if we’re going to help our players and coaches develop, we need to be thinking about what goes on.

“And who coaches the coaches?

“Coaches can learn without being coached, but coaches benefit from being coached as well.”

That may ultimately be the distinction Australian football needs to address.

Creating more qualified coaches is measurable. Creating environments in which those coaches receive mentorship, accumulate meaningful experience, develop their own football philosophies and can progress towards professional employment is considerably more difficult.

If Australia wants to improve the players emerging from its development system, strengthening the people responsible for developing them may be one of the most important places to start.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend