Support grows for National Second Division ahead of AAFC meeting

The Australian Association of Football Clubs (AAFC) will take the next step towards its plans to have a national second division in place by 2022, holding a meeting this week with interested member federation clubs.

Over 50 clubs across Australia are set to be a part of the discussion on Tuesday, which will centre around the criteria of the proposed second division, with a working title of ‘The Championship’.

AAFC will provide a public statement on the progress made throughout the meeting the following day.

This is welcome news for football fans who have been pushing for a proper football system, with AAFC also providing possible timelines, something the game has been crying out for.

The organisation would have been heartened to hear of Melbourne Victory owner Joe Mirabella’s comments recently, who fully backed the implementation of a national second division.

He told The Age: “We need it (a second division) because it is a point of difference to our game and to other sports. We need competition in the A-League. We need our grassroots to eventually play into a B-League and then play towards winning a spot in the A-League.”

“I don’t care if it is Victory, Sydney FC or Melbourne City. It is about merit.”

Mirabella’s comments are not revolutionary, but are significant, because of who he is.

A Melbourne Victory owner publicly admitting the game needs promotion and relegation might go against his own interests, based on the current A-League model, however, he realises it is for the betterment of the sport in this country.

It will provide the game with more opportunities across the board and will embrace what makes football unique.

“I have discussed this with a lot of football people,” he continued.

“When you get journalists, commentators and fans of the game, ex-players who have played for the country and they are all in favour of the second division then you can see there is a groundswell of support going.

“My family is a football family. But when they are saying the A-League has become boring you have to do something.”

Ultimately, the decision to implement a connected football pyramid will come down to the FFA, who continue to be in discussions with AAFC.

The ‘XI Principles’ document which was released at the start of July, highlighted various agenda points in the game that the governing body would look to fix or improve.

Detail on the second division was light, with just one passage of the document stating “consider the development of a second-tier competition”.

In saying this however, the XI Principles is a living document, meaning amendments will be made to it in the future, as the FFA assesses the best way forward for the game in financially difficult times.

Following the results of a survey of the Australian football community based on the XI Principles paper, showing 99% of respondents insist the game undertakes a major overhaul, FFA CEO James Johnson spoke about the possibilities of a national second division.

“Could there be a second-tier competition, with 10 or 12 teams that play 20-odd rounds home and away or do we look at a second-tier competition with conferences based in different states around the country that play half the season at state level and then end up playing at national level in a group stage, similar to how the Brazilian league operates,” he told News Corp.

“There’s two parts to the season that starts at state level, then a qualification process that goes into a national level of competition.

“This is something we could look at because someone of our challenges in Australia are similar to Brazil – where you have competition that are strong at state level and you have a very big country geographically, so their solution was to use this sort of format.”

Whether you believe the Brazilian system is suitable for Australia or not, it is important for football fans to see those in charge of the game continue to debate the merits of various models, led by an administrator who is a football person.

With the greatest respect, what was the likelihood of former FFA CEO David Gallop speaking about the Japanese footballing model as opposed to the Brazilian model in the public eye?

The national second division is coming, in what form we are unsure, but the consensus seems to be when and how, not if.

Previous ArticleNext Article

Manchester City must pay the ultimate price for financial cheating

Manchester City’s financial scandal has reached boiling point. On the 29th of September, an independent commission found City guilty of all charges relating to serious breaches of the league’s financial rules across nine seasons, from 2009/10 to 2017/18. The commission also upheld three of four charges concerning the club’s failure to cooperate with the Premier League investigation.

The Premier League says City used sham commercial arrangements and disguised owner funding to inflate revenue and reduce costs by more than $1.7 billion (£900 million). Abu Dhabi United Group funded $1.58 billion (£830.69 million) that appeared in City’s accounts as sponsorship money from Abu Dhabi companies. The commission concluded that City’s accounts concealed the true financial position from auditors and regulators.

The 115 charges cover inaccurate financial information, player and manager payments, financial rules and the investigation itself. City has lodged its appeal against the guilty verdict, but for such a serious sporting scandal, attention has already turned to the potential punishments. In a Premier League era where foreign investment is king and revenues have skyrocketed, we should be asking questions. How did Manchester City get away with this for so long, and how can the punishment act as a deterrent to keep the reputation of football’s biggest league intact?

The hack that exposed the story

The most uncomfortable part of this saga is how the authorities discovered it and how most likely City never would have been exposed. In 2018, German publication Der Spiegel published leaked internal City emails and documents obtained through Football Leaks. Rui Pinto, the Portuguese hacker behind Football Leaks, supplied material that alleged City had disguised owner investment as sponsorship revenue and manipulated arrangements to satisfy financial regulations.

The Premier League investigation began in December 2018. City were formally charged in February 2023, after a four-year investigation, and the hearing finally began in September 2024. That timeline is nothing short of extraordinary; eight years between the leaks being exposed and charges being brought to Manchester City does significant sporting damage.

Man City won eight major titles during the alleged period, including three Premier League titles. Recalling titles in any sport leaves a sour taste in any sports fan’s mouth. The fans of opposing sides given titles feel robbed of the special moment, and Manchester City fans could feel rightfully deceived. But it goes beyond even this as we look at who Manchester City signed during those seasons. Players such as Ilkay Gundogan and Kevin De Bruyne played vital roles in City’s later titles beyond the 2017/2018 season. Would they have joined if this had been uncovered earlier? It’s impossible to say, but it shows how City’s early investment from 2009/10 still contributed to their titles in the 2020’s.

The Premier League’s credibility

That delay is not just embarrassing for City; it damages the Premier League. The league is the most competitive and commercially powerful domestic competition in football. Its rules are supposed to create a framework in which clubs compete on sporting merit while remaining financially sustainable. If a club can allegedly distort its accounts by hundreds of millions of dollars and the process takes years to reach a verdict, despite City’s potential obstruction, every other club has a reason to question whether the system works.

The irony is obvious: if Football Leaks hadn’t shared what they found on Manchester City through its hack, the scheme never would have been uncovered. If financial rules were designed to stop clubs gaining an unfair competitive advantage, then the Premier League may need to change how it investigates how its clubs’ finances are being managed. If anything should be gained from this, it may be that financial regulation needs to be improved as the Premier League and its clubs spend billions.

As for Manchester City, punishment cannot simply be a fine that becomes another operating cost.

Relegation is the only serious answer

If the verdict survives the appeal, Manchester City should be removed from the Premier League and those three aforementioned league titles removed. A fine would be inadequate and, depending on what points deduction City got, would punish the club in one season while leaving the historical record largely intact. Nottingham Forest received a four point deduction for a charge of Profitability and Sustainability rules in 2023-2024. City’s 114 charges will see much greater punishment then that.

Even if City are relegated they would almost be guranteed to be promoted the next season so even that feels like a slap on the wrist. Despite their investment during the nine seasons being questioned their five titles subsequent to that period will be expected to remain in their hands. My solution is to relegate City to the Championship without the potential of promotion for three seasons, one for each title won during that time.

City fans will call that harsh but their is strong reason to come down hard and that’s because this is bigger than Manchester City. Foreign ownership has brought huge investment into English football, but investment cannot mean exemption from the rules. Owners, executives and clubs must know that the Premier League’s financial regulations carry consequences that cannot be negotiated away.

The league has a choice. It can impose a manageable punishment and move on, or it can demonstrate that competitive integrity matters more than the commercial power of its biggest clubs. If City’s appeal fails, the answer should be clear: relegation, a reckoning over the titles and a message to every owner that the Premier League’s rules are not optional.

Australian referee strike ends ahead of new A-League season

Australia’s referee crisis is over as Football Australia (FA), the Australian Professional Leagues (APL) and the Professional Football Referees Association (PFRA) have reached an agreement ahead of the 2026/27 domestic season.

The deal ends industrial action that began on September 4th. Nearly 100 of Australia’s top referees had refused appointments during the dispute. The agreement provides immediate certainty for officials. It also clears the way for Australia’s top referees to return for the Australia Cup Final this week and the opening rounds of the A-League Men and Women competitions.

Under the new framework, referees will be contracted and employed exclusively by Football Australia. The APL will cover the cost of referees appointed to A-League matches. The arrangement runs through the end of the 2026/27 season. The three organisations will continue discussions on a longer-term structure for elite refereeing in Australia.

The agreement resolves the central dispute between the parties. Football Australia had proposed shifting responsibility for A-League referees to the APL. The referees opposed the move. They raised concerns about employment certainty. They also questioned the independence of referees working under a league controlled by the clubs they officiate.

The dispute had already disrupted Australian football. Singaporean officials were brought in for the Australia Cup semi-final between Sydney FC and Melbourne Victory. Rookie Australian officials also took charge of another Cup fixture during the strike. The crisis therefore moved beyond a contractual disagreement. It affected the delivery of major matches.

The A-League Men season begins on October 16 with the Sydney derby at Allianz Stadium and the A-League Women season will also begin in October. The agreement solves the immediate problem. It does not end the wider debate over refereeing in Australian football.

FA, the APL and the PFRA must now build a sustainable model for elite officials. The strike exposed uncertainty around contracts, funding and governance. Those issues cannot return every time a new season approaches. Australian football can moves forward, but this is an issue that should be reviewed for the sustainability of Australian referees.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend