The A-Leagues Final Series important status also a secret hinderance

Avatar

The Isuzu A-League finals series is a huge event in the footballing calendar, though its contribution to stagnant attendance numbers in the league is something to be said.

If the 2025/26 finals series follows similar patterns to those before it, it will gather huge traction and strong ticket sales.

It is the largest event for the domestic league, bringing in massive amounts of viewership through media and gate receipts.

Finals series from years past have shown this, with the 2024/25 final, a Melbourne derby, being sold out within 48 hours and gathering significant viewership online.

The idea of a finals series lies within the Australian sporting ethos; the other sporting codes have had this tradition for most of their existence, especially in recent history.

Football, though, is different from the rest of the sporting codes in Australia, unique even. This has historically contributed to its inability to integrate into the same supported status as other codes.

Many in the Australian footballing community, supporter groups, players, coaches, and even the new Director of Football Australia, have voiced concerns over fan numbers in the league competition.

It wouldn’t be absurd to say that maybe, though profitable now, the finals series is actually taking away from the league itself.

Consider the media image: the league winner is called the “minor premiership,” and ticket sales and viewership figures reveal a huge disparity between the two parts of the A-League.

It must be said that an alternative that could work in unison with the league and possibly increase viewership of the league itself would be a great advantage.

It would allow the league to gain more jeopardy and drama, which could build greater interest in attending league games.

One alternative is already here.

No other sporting code in Australia has both a league competition and a cup competition. Football in Australia does.

The Hahn’s Australia Cup is our equivalent to the FA Cup in England or the Copa del Rey in Spain.

These are competitions that offer a finals option in a different competition entirely. They generate huge traction while never diminishing the importance of the league and, therefore, its popularity.

These cup competitions cannot be discussed without acknowledging some obvious differences.

They don’t face the same popularity issues that football does in Australia. It’s obvious the Hahn’s Australia Cup doesn’t yet gain the traction that the finals series does.

However, for a healthy footballing environment with increasing fan numbers, it should.

The idea of elevating the Hahn’s Australia Cup and scaling back the finals series is a complex question, one that is treated like a “no-go zone” by many in the Australian footballing community, and that is understandable.

Though big changes like this might, in the end, be credible options for the future of the sport in this country.

Larger plans must be set in motion, strategies that can be worked towards and refined along the way. It is the process by which all large organisations, business models and even national governments build their strategies.

Such a shift will be scrutinised and pushed back against.

Though with further fine-tuning and smart investment in development, not to mention the introduction of promotion and relegation and the possibility of changing the footballing calendar.

It could replicate the success that these two-competition models already enjoy in other leagues.

The added importance that the premiership would gain, the reality that every game matters, could alongside other strategies entice fans to more games, increase viewership and ticket sales, and create more dedicated fan bases. It works in other nations, very well in fact.

The possibility of two teams lifting a trophy, rather than one single event defining it all, sounds like a strategy that could deliver more engagement over longer periods of time.

Maybe Australian football doesn’t need to answer this question just yet. It is complex, difficult and it would require a great deal of work, including significant investment into the game, which is another issue entirely.

Yet as low attendance numbers persist in the A-League, even alongside increased media viewership, something needs to change for football in Australia.

The rise in popularity of this game and its dedicated community deserves bold ideas and forward thinking.

Ideas like this could eventually begin to change the landscape of the beautiful game in Australia for the better.

Previous ArticleNext Article

Has football become too expensive for its own supporters?

Avatar

Football has never been more valuable.

Broadcast rights continue to generate billions of dollars, commercial partnerships are growing in scale, and clubs are investing heavily in new stadiums, technology and fan experiences. On the surface, the business of football appears to be in excellent health.

But there is a question worth asking.

As clubs continue searching for new revenue streams, are they making it harder for the very people who built the game to remain part of it?

The Rising Cost of Being a Football Fan

Over the past decade, supporting a football club has become increasingly expensive. Ticket prices have risen, particularly at Europe’s biggest clubs; for example, Manchester United have recently increased ticket prices for a fourth consecutive year.

The debate reached a global audience during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Ticket prices prompted widespread criticism from supporter groups, with concerns over dynamic pricing and the overall cost of attending matches.

For many travelling fans, the cost extended well beyond admission, with flights, accommodation and local transport adding to an already significant financial commitment.

Even national team kits surged in price: Nike’s replica kits for nations such as England, France and Brazil retailed for €110 ($178 AUD), while the official match versions blew out as far as €110 ($260 AUD)

FIFA defended its adoption of the United States’ dynamic pricing model, arguing low prices would lead to inflated secondary market prices, which meant less money going back into football.

Yet the backlash highlighted a growing tension between maximising commercial returns and preserving accessibility for the game’s loyal supporters. Football Supporters Europe released a statement following the release of tickets, describing the prices as a “monumental betrayal to the tradition of the World Cup.”

None of these decisions exist in isolation.

Football clubs face rising operating costs, increasing player wages and growing expectations around facilities, technology and supporter engagement.

Stadium redevelopments, academy investment and player recruitment all require significant financial investment. Finding new sources of revenue has become a commercial necessity rather than a luxury.

Football Clubs Are Becoming Entertainment Businesses

Modern football clubs are no longer operating solely as sporting organisations. Many have evolved into entertainment businesses, with stadiums hosting concerts, corporate events, hospitality experiences and conferences alongside football matches.

From Tottenham Hotspur Stadium to Real Madrid’s redeveloped Santiago Bernabéu, clubs are investing in assets designed to generate income every day of the year, not just on matchday. 

Since moving to Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, matchday revenue has more than doubled over the last ten years and commercial revenue has nearly tripled during that same period. 

That strategy makes practical business sense.

The concern is whether supporters are gradually becoming customers first and fans second.

Loyalty Isn’t Transactional

Sport has always been different from other forms of entertainment because loyalty is rarely transactional. Supporters do not simply choose another club if prices rise or performances decline.

Many inherit their club through generations, travelling thousands of kilometres and investing countless hours because of an emotional connection that cannot be measured on a balance sheet.

That relationship is one of football’s greatest commercial strengths, but it also creates a responsibility.

Every pricing decision, whether it involves tickets, memberships or merchandise, should consider not only the revenue it generates today but the supporters it may exclude tomorrow.

The Cost of Watching Football

The cost of supporting a club doesn’t end once the final whistle blows. For many supporters, following football now also means paying for access to the game itself.

In Australia, broadcast rights are spread across multiple platforms, meaning fans who want to watch the A-League, Premier League, UEFA competitions and other major European leagues need several subscriptions. 

Individually, each service may represent reasonable value, but collectively they have increased the cost of following football throughout an entire season.

Broadcast Deals Come With Benefits

There is, however, another side to the argument. Broadcast rights are one of football’s biggest revenue streams, funding everything from player wages and production quality to grassroots investment and the continued growth of women’s football.

Broadcasters are paying significant sums for exclusive rights because live sport remains one of the few forms of content capable of attracting large audiences in real time. Without those investments, many competitions would struggle to maintain their current standard both on and off the pitch.

The issue, then, isn’t that football is harder to watch. It’s that following it has become increasingly fragmented. With matches spread across different platforms and services, football may be more accessible than ever, yet actually keeping up with the game can feel more challenging than ever before. 

A supporter shouldn’t need multiple subscriptions simply to follow their club, their national team and Europe’s biggest competitions. As football’s media landscape becomes more complex, convenience risks becoming another cost borne by supporters.

The recent Australia Cup match between South Melbourne and Preston Lions offered a timely reminder of what football looks like when supporters feel connected to their clubs. An official crowd of 6,673 created a vibrant atmosphere that translated brilliantly on television, or free on Football Australia’s YouTube channel.

The spectacle wasn’t driven by premium hospitality or corporate experiences. It was driven by passionate fans filling the stands and creating a classic football environment.

Finding the Balance

The challenge for football is finding the balance between commercial success and supporter accessibility.

Clubs, leagues and governing bodies don’t necessarily need to lower every ticket’s price or abandon lucrative broadcast deals. But they should continue asking whether growth is making the game easier to experience or simply more expensive to follow.

That could mean preserving affordable ticket categories, simplifying access to live broadcasts, investing in community initiatives or ensuring stadiums remain places where families and lifelong supporters feel welcome. Commercial innovation and supporter accessibility do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Football’s commercial growth is essential. Without it, clubs cannot invest in players, facilities or community programmes.

But growth should never come at the expense of accessibility.

The most successful clubs of the future will not simply be those that generate the highest revenues. They will be the ones that continue to fill their stadiums with supporters who feel they belong.

After all, football’s greatest asset has never been its broadcast deals or sponsorship agreements.

It has always been the people in the stands.

Australia football needs to fix its football governance before it can fix its referees

Avatar
Image Credits: Football Australia

The clearest image yet of Australian football’s refereeing crisis arrived on Wednesday night as Sydney FC and Melbourne Victory met in an Australia Cup semi-final at Jubilee Stadium.

A first ever Big Blue in the competition – and towards it’s pointy end – should have been a showcase event for Australian football but instead, the referees were in the spotlight. Not because of the quality of their officiating, but because of the dire situation the game finds itself in and it’s present need to resort to international imports.

Four Singaporean referees were in charge of the fixture, which Victory won 2-0. Australian referees had refused appointments because of their ongoing dispute with Football Australia. The issue is no longer theoretical. Australian referees are not simply threatening industrial action – their absence has already changed how major matches are delivered. That is a governance failure on the part of Football Australia and the Australian Professional League.

What are the referees fighting for?

Around 90 elite Australian match officials are currently without contracts. That includes referees, assistant referees, fourth officials and video match officials working across the A-Leagues and Australia’s national competitions. The previous contracts expired last month. Some officials are also waiting for outstanding payments from A-League trial matches.

 The Professional Football Referees Association (PFRA) has set three main requirements:

  • It wants the existing contracts extended until June 30, 2027, or until a new agreement or independent refereeing structure is established. 
  • It wants all outstanding match fees and expenses paid.
  • It wants a professional refereeing structure that does not place elite officials directly under the APL, which is controlled by the clubs they officiate. A new central structure is what the referees are demanding and should get.

Evgeny Vizelman, chairman of the PFRA, believes that whilst the strike action is extreme, it is necessary to protect Australian referees.

“We do not take the decision to stop officiating matches lightly,” Vizelman told Sydney Morning Herald last week.

“Our referees are being asked to perform in one of the most scrutinised roles in Australian sport without basic certainty around their employment and, in some cases, without even being paid for work already completed. That is not acceptable.”

Football Australia and the APL have been working towards a new structure, but one in which the two organisations contract separately for Australia Cup and A-League matches. The referees believe that is the wrong model.

Their concern is simple: The APL is 67.7% owned by the A-League Club Unitholders. Essentially, the clubs are appointing their own referees. That creates a perceived conflict.

If the referees sit under Football Australia as a regulator, it ensures there is no conflict of interest and that A-League clubs have no opportunity to influence the referees they may be appointed to matches.

England shows another way

England has already built the structure Australia is struggling to create. Professional Game Referees, or Pro Ref, is the central body overseeing refereeing across the Premier League, EFL, WSL Football and FA competitions. It is funded by those aforementioned competitions.

The important distinction is those competitions do not each run their own separate professional refereeing workforce. Pro Ref manages the system. It oversees appointments, development, training and performance. For the 2026-27 season, its new Professional Referee Group will service the Premier League and EFL Championship.

Officials work within the same professional structure and can be selected across competitions. That centralisation brings consistency. It also allows referees to be treated as a professional group rather than a collection of officials contracted separately by different competitions.

Whilst it is centralised, the system is not perfect. England has also recognised the need for greater independence in assessing referee performances due to Pro Ref being owned and funded by leagues and, as a result, the clubs they represent. However, as the body is also owned in part by the English FA, the governing body can oversee practices.

Pro Ref has also implemented world-leading officiating practices. Its Key Match Incidents panel includes former players and coaches, alongside representatives from the Premier League and Pro Ref, and reviews major decisions independently each week.

Pro Ref now has dedicated development groups, specialist coaching, sports science, psychology and performance analysis. 37 Pro Ref officials are currently on the FIFA International List. That does not prove centralisation alone creates better referees. But it shows what happens when refereeing receives a professional structure, long-term investment and consistent management.

Australian football needs to collaborate

This is where the Australian dispute becomes bigger than referees. Football Australia and the APL have been unable to secure agreement over who funds the referees over a long period of time, leading to this standoff; it comes at the same time as the APL’s difficulty in negotiating a new CBA with the players’ union.

 Both organisations have a role in running their respective parts of the Australian game, but again an industrial dispute has the game appearing in shambles on the eve of another domestic season.

 The most frustrating part of this dispute is that everyone needs the same thing. Football Australia and the APL need referees; there is no doubt the refs deeply value their employment at the elite level. With due respect to Wednesday’s flow-in Singaporean officials – themselves from a valued partner member through our shared position in the AFC – nobody wants to see the circumstances under which they were required on Wednesday continue any longer.

The PFRA dispute should therefore be treated as more than an industrial disagreement. It is an opportunity to fix the structure. Australia should learn from the principle behind Pro Ref and the English system. Centralise, professionalise and protect the officials who manage the game.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend