In the quiet arithmetic that governs how sport pays those who play it, the union representing Australia's men's and women's national team players has turned to the courts. The Professional Footballers Australia has taken Football Australia to the New South Wales Supreme Court, seeking a seven-figure sum over whether the revenue share agreed in their 2023 collective bargaining deal is truly reaching the players who generate it. It arrives at a delicate moment, months before the Socceroos travel into a tense region and as a deal that has bound the two sides together nears its expiry.
Socceroos and Matildas Players' Union Sues Football Australia Over Multimillion-Dollar Revenue Share
Mark
So what exactly are the players saying went wrong?
Mimi
That the revenue share in the 2023 agreement isn't being serviced properly. Players are meant to get 18 to 20 per cent of relevant commercial income from the national teams.
Mark
Relevant meaning what?
Mimi
Ticketing, broadcast and sponsorship tied to the Socceroos and Matildas. Junior registration fees and junior program sponsors are excluded.
Luke
Careful here, though. The reporting says the union is expected to argue this and that the issue is believed to be about commercial deals. That's AAP's understanding, not a filed claim we've seen.
Mark
And the seven-figure sum?
Luke
Same caveat. It's reported as what the union is pursuing, but we don't have a precise amount or a breakdown.
Mimi
What is solid is the venue, the NSW Supreme Court, and that the union is acting for the players.
Mark
Why does the timing matter?
Mimi
The Socceroos play Qatar in Doha and Jordan in Amman this month, the Asian Cup starts in January, and the Matildas have the World Cup next year. The agreement also expires in September.
Luke
And nobody has commented. The PFA declined and Football Australia didn't respond, so we have no account of the other side yet.
El Pulso
- Players' union PFA has sued Football Australia in NSW Supreme Court for a seven-figure sum, cutting straight into the governing body's finances.
- At stake is whether the 18 to 20 per cent share of national team commercial revenue agreed in 2023 is actually being paid out in full.
- Both sides have gone quiet: the PFA declined to comment and Football Australia has not responded, leaving the dispute to unfold through the courts.
- The Socceroos face a sensitive Middle East trip amid heightened regional tensions, while the 2023 agreement lapses next September with new talks yet to begin.
In the quiet arithmetic that governs how sport pays those who play it, the union representing Australia's men's and women's national team players has turned to the courts. The Professional Footballers Australia has taken Football Australia to the New South Wales Supreme Court, seeking a seven-figure sum over whether the revenue share agreed in their 2023 collective bargaining deal is truly reaching the players who generate it. It arrives at a delicate moment, months before the Socceroos travel into a tense region and as a deal that has bound the two sides together nears its expiry.
The Professional Footballers Australia union, which represents the Socceroos and Matildas, has taken Football Australia to the NSW Supreme Court. It is seeking a seven-figure sum on behalf of national team players, according to AAP's understanding of the case, and the action lands only months before both teams compete in major tournaments.
At the heart of the dispute is the revenue share written into the collective bargaining agreement signed in 2023. Players are entitled to a portion of what Football Australia earns from the national teams, which can account for up to half of the governing body's revenues. The players, however, believe they are not receiving their fair share, and the central question appears to be whether the commercial deals being struck are returning what the agreement promises.
The timing is awkward. The Socceroos travel to Qatar and Jordan in the November window amid expected regional tension, and the Asian Cup follows in January. The Matildas prepare for next year's World Cup in Brazil. Meanwhile the current agreement is nearing its end in September next year, and talks on its replacement have not yet started. Neither party has offered public comment, so the case will unfold alongside preparations for the tournaments and the negotiations ahead.
Professional Footballers Australia, the union that represents the Socceroos and Matildas, has taken Football Australia to the NSW Supreme Court. It is pursuing the governing body for a seven-figure sum on behalf of the national team players, according to AAP's understanding of the case. The action comes just months before both teams play in major tournaments.
The dispute centres on the revenue share written into the collective bargaining agreement the two sides signed in 2023. Under that deal, players take a portion of what Football Australia earns from the national teams. The union is expected to argue that the agreement is not being serviced properly, and the central question is believed to be whether Football Australia's commercial deals are returning a fair share to the players.
The agreement draws a clear line around what counts. Registration fees and sponsorship tied to junior participation programs are off limits to the senior national team players. Anything relating to the Socceroos and Matildas, including ticketing, broadcast and sponsorship, feeds back to the players. The national teams contribute up to half of Football Australia's revenues, and players receive 18 to 20 per cent of all relevant commercial arrangements. The agreement also contains mechanisms meant to encourage both sides to work together and push for stronger deals, so that they share the gains.
The players, though, feel they are not getting their fair share, and that belief is what led the PFA to launch legal action. The PFA declined to comment, and Football Australia did not respond to requests for comment. The reporting relies on what AAP understands and what is believed about the case, rather than on filed details or statements from either party.
This is not the first legal fight to land on Football Australia. It settled out of court with Macarthur FC over claims that the club was misled by the governing body in the lead-up to its A-League entry in 2020. It also recently settled an unfair dismissal case brought by its former chief football officer, Ernie Merrick.
The timing is awkward. The Socceroos head to the Middle East in the November window, where tensions are expected to be heightened by the regional conflict. Coach Tony Popovic is expected to name his squad later this week to travel to Doha to face Qatar, then to Amman to play Jordan, with security concerns higher than usual. The AFC Asian Cup is due to begin in Saudi Arabia in January. The Matildas, with their focus on next year's FIFA Women's World Cup in Brazil, will host Colombia in a two-friendly series in Canberra and Geelong later this month.
The current agreement is also nearing its end. It is due to lapse in September next year, and talks on new terms have not yet begun. That follows an impasse earlier this year between the PFA and the A-Leagues over a pay deal. The court case will now run alongside the build-up to the tournaments and the negotiations that must eventually replace the 2023 deal.
Quieres la nota completa?
Lee el original en 7NEWS Australia ↗
Politics & Governance