While debate continues as to whether the local football competitions continue or not, and under what format they do, maybe it is time to look at the real issue in all of this, money.
Football West and a number of clubs are pushing for the season to go ahead. Other clubs are a little more reticent.
The NPL season was one game old when the curtain fell on all sport and people went into isolation to try and prevent the spread of Covid-19.
Football West had received the annual participation fee from all of the NPL clubs of $12,000 each. They had not yet received the registration fee for all the players, and once the league was put on hold understandably the clubs held onto that money.
If the League does not go ahead as planned will Football West return the $12,000 to each club? Or will they hold that over until next season, and the clubs be in credit?
The latter is the most likely option as that money has probably already been spent.
There are many NPL junior clubs who had already collected their player registration fees. Once again if the season does not go ahead are they in a position to return those fees to parents? Even if it is an abbreviated season are they in a position to return a percentage?
Then you have some clubs who have paid players a signing on fee. Money already given to the players concerned. They want those players playing, and know that the money is most likely gone and there is little or no chance of it being returned if no games are played.
Is the push to return to action really about wanting to play or is it about money?
Clubs understandably are concerned as at present they cannot open the bar area or their canteens, and even though crowds have been poor in recent years there are likely to be limits on attendance numbers. Add to that the fact that to play all changing rooms and common areas should be cleaned between games, along with balls and other equipment, there will be extra pressure on limited volunteers, or extra costs if outside contractors carry out this work.
Then there is the issue of midweek games in order to fulfil all the fixtures in the coming season. It is a well known fact that not all grounds are able to accommodate midweek games. Then there is the availability of players playing midweek, and the changing of the training nights if there is a midweek game, whether the venue is available and at what cost. These are all potentially additional expenses. More importantly additional costs in a smaller period of time.
Some players who are faced with a work or play scenario are going to be forced to chose work, as that is their main form of income. The other issue is playing three games a week will undoubtedly result in player fatigue and the possibility of more injuries.
At present there are some councils not allowing organised training. There are some clubs allegedly flouting the number restrictions at training. Which means that there is no even playing field, and yet the push is for the season to start in just over a month.
Is that really feasible?
Even though some of the clubs have been their own worst enemies in recent years when it comes to operating in a financially responsible manner, they cannot be expected to carry the burden of all of this just so that the game’s administrators receive much needed funds. They too need revenue, especially as cleaning costs will increase in order to be a compliant venue. They will also be expected to pay players but will have no income.
There are many of us who are missing our sport, but is everyone in too big a hurry to return to playing? Surely it would be best to make sure that everything was in place for everyone and that the integrity of the competition and the safety of all, players, physios, coaching staff and officials was guaranteed?
Sadly when money is part of the equation common-sense goes out of the window.
In 2020 it should be a matter of choice. If clubs wish to play, and more importantly can afford to play, then let them. However if any club chooses not to in 2020, and any player opts to let this season pass until their health is guaranteed, they should be allowed to without any penalty. After all sport is meant to be enjoyable. The current push to continue is according to those involved becoming stressful.
As suggested in 2020 Resumption of Sport Opens up Opportunities this year is the chance to try something new, attract new sponsors and reset the game. The fear is that pushing ahead with the same format purely due to the financial implications will in fact end up causing, the clubs and possibly the game more harm than good. Is this a case of short term gain for long term pain?
