Victorian A-League clubs can benefit from unique home grounds, this is how.

AAMI Park in Melbourne

What makes a sporting venue unique?

Is it A). the respective fanbases that cheer for what seems an eternity in the hope their team will win?

Is it B). the overall quality and look of the venue, on the field and in the stands?

Or, is it C). the location of the venue that gives the team and its fans a sense of identity?

If you answered with C, congratulations. You won the jackpot. Go off and celebrate with Jamal Malik. Or Charles Van Doren, it doesn’t really matter.

Whilst there are cases that can be made for A and B, having a venue located appropriately for both the club and its supporters goes a long way to creating the most unique sporting venues across the planet.

European teams all have their own venues, which they have used for years to great effect, giving their sides genuine home ground advantages.

For example, FC Barcelona, arguably the biggest club in the world, uses the Nou Camp for home fixtures.

Any rival team would be rightly justified in being slightly overwhelmed at the prospect of playing against not only a world class team, but in front of nearly 100,000 Catalans.

There’s no one else, but you and your 10 teammates. If that can’t be classified as daunting, then nothing can.

But when we compare the European leagues to that of our own A-League, the differences are night and day.

For years, we’ve become accustomed to clubs playing at venues which are either shared with another club or simply not suitable for their supporters.

Melbourne Victory and Melbourne City often share AAMI Park for league fixtures. Sydney FC and Western Sydney have sometimes shared ANZ Stadium for larger fixtures.

By doing this, the local and state governments are ignoring the possibilities that come with individual home grounds.

It has worked for European teams and for a long time, it even worked in the Australian Football League. North Melbourne would play at Arden Street, Hawthorn in Waverley, Collingwood at Victoria Park, Carlton at Princes Park and so on.

By having unique venues, clubs would not only give back to the community, but they would attain a unique and distinguishable identity.

Picture this.

We are used to seeing London-based sides playing at their own locations. Crystal Palace have Selhurst Park, Arsenal have the Emirates, Chelsea have Stamford Bridge, Tottenham have their new Tottenham Stadium. The list could go on forever.

Now, take away all those stadiums, Every single one of them. Except for Wembley Stadium.

Now imagine all fixtures for London-based Premier League sides being hosted at Wembley and Wembley only.

It seems an incredibly stupid concept, doesn’t it?

That’s how it feels when both Melbourne sides are forced to share AAMI Park.

Sure, Wembley is a great stadium but soon, teams would slowly start losing their congruity and relationship with their fans. By having grounds in relevant and discernable locations, fans feel like they’re at home.

It’s not a club, it’s a large family.

That’s what having unique stadiums/locations for each side can do. It makes them feel at home, because in a way, they are.

Melbourne Victory could achieve something like this, should they invest in their Epping facilities. It is currently used for their NPL2 West fixtures, but it could be so much more.

Yes, it’s a downgrade from AAMI Park in terms of capacity and probably quality, but over time, fans will associate themselves with the ground and it can become a genuine home ground.

Sydney FC used Jubilee Oval in the city’s south to great effect in recent times, making it a tough ground to win at.

But also, it is located in the suburbs. With the people. With those who are the only reason the club is around today.

Now, Western Sydney will have the Bankwest Stadium as their unique home ground, starting next season. It will work as they are, once again, catering to their fanbase and community.

The Melbourne-based sides should take notes from this.

In Football Victoria’s strategic plan laid out earlier this year, FV said they would be look to be “expanding and improving all facilities and providing infrastructure to increase access, utilisation and sustainability”, by “building strong relationships with Local, State & Federal Governments.”

Creating a A-League quality stadium in Epping could go a long way to achieving this.

Clubs know that the fans are the most important stakeholders and that by adhering to them, they will become an infinitely better club.

History suggests that when clubs have their own distinctive venues, they perform better both on and off the field.

With time and money, more clubs across Australia can turn the A-League into a league on par with the MLS.

And yes, money can be a significant factor when it comes to this issue. Understandably, the governing bodies will not be wanting to make a move on this without money-back guarantees.

No one would agree to any sort of deal without guarantees that in time, their investments would be worthwhile. But the proof is in the pudding. It’s been done elsewhere, it can be done here. If the Sydney-based clubs can make it work, there’s no reason that other states can too.

Should this become a reality, more marquee players will want to play here, more youngsters will want to play the sport and overall, the sport of soccer in this country will thrive.

And who knows? With the right management and oversight, we could dare to dream even bigger…

 

Previous ArticleNext Article

More Than One in Five Football Australia Staff to Lose Jobs Amid Growing Financial Losses

Avatar
Image Credit: ESPN

Australian football finds itself in a curious position.

From the outside, the game appears to be riding a wave of momentum. Attendances, visibility and public interest have all experienced significant uplift in recent years, while major international tournaments and growing discussion around football’s future continue to place the sport firmly within the national conversation.

Yet behind that momentum, Football Australia is now confronting a far more challenging internal reality.

 

A compounding deficit

Chief Executive Martin Kugeler has reportedly indicated the governing body’s projected financial losses for 2025 are expected to exceed the organisation’s reported $8.5 million deficit from the previous year. Accompanying the financial outlook are substantial organisational changes, with reporting from Tracey Holmes indicating more than one in five Football Australia employees are expected to lose their positions through restructuring measures.

The figures represent more than a difficult balance sheet. They point toward a significant period of recalibration inside the organisation responsible for overseeing the sport nationally.

 

Losing the wisdom of existing staff members

For governing bodies, restructures are often framed as strategic necessities for future sustainability. However, workforce changes on this scale also raise broader questions around the challenges of such a transition.

People are often the carriers of knowledge, relationships and long-term strategic understanding. When organisations undergo significant structural change, the effects can extend beyond immediate financial outcomes.

 

Contradicting timing

The timing is what makes the developments particularly notable.

Football in Australia has spent recent years discussing expansion, growth and long-term opportunity. The conversation surrounding the game has increasingly centred on future potential. Often headlining stronger pathways, larger audiences, infrastructure development and greater visibility.

Against that backdrop, news of deep financial losses and substantial staffing reductions creates a different conversation: one focused not on where the game wants to go, but on what may be required to sustain that journey. Therefore, this announcement points toward stagnancy, rather than growth.

Further detail surrounding Football Australia’s strategy and long-term direction will likely emerge over coming months. For now, the developments serve as a reminder that growth stories are rarely straightforward.

Often, the periods that appear strongest from the outside can also be the moments organisations face their most significant internal tests.

What does the Federal Budget mean for the Future of Football?

Avatar
What does the Federal Budget mean for the Future of Football? Image Credit: Shutterstock

While Canberra spent Budget night arguing about negative gearing, capital gains tax and the politics of broken promises, Australian football was left reading between the lines.

Since ‘Sport’ falls under the jurisdiction of the State level, there was no headline “football package” in Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ 2026–27 Federal Budget, but the Federal budget marks a significant shift in the nation’s economic directive. No billion-dollar infrastructure splash for the world game. No new national facilities program. But for football clubs, players and families, the Budget may still shape the sport more than many realise.

From housing affordability to NDIS reform, fuel prices and women’s participation, football’s ecosystem sits directly in the path of the Government’s economic agenda.

The dominant story of the Budget has been Labor’s overhaul of negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions: reforms that immediately triggered political backlash and dominated national coverage.

Yet beneath the noise, football communities are likely asking a simpler question: what does all this mean for the people who actually play the game?

The answer starts with cost-of-living pressure.

The Budget forecasts inflation hitting five per cent in 2026, largely driven by global fuel shocks linked to conflict in the Middle East. Fuel prices matter enormously to grassroots football, particularly in suburban and regional Australia where families often drive multiple nights a week for training and matches.

The Government’s temporary fuel excise cut which reduced petrol prices by roughly 32 cents per litre may offer short-term relief for clubs travelling long distances and parents already struggling with registration fees.

But the broader economic outlook remains difficult. Slower growth, persistent inflation and rising household pressure could threaten participation rates, especially among lower-income families.

Football Australia and state federations have spent years warning that the game’s biggest barrier is affordability. Boots, rego fees, transport and facility access continue to price players out. A tougher economy only sharpens that problem.

Housing reform may indirectly affect the football workforce too.

The Government argues its negative gearing changes are designed to help younger Australians into home ownership, with Treasury estimating an additional 75,000 first-home buyers over a decade.

That matters in football because the sport’s backbone like coaches, referees, volunteers and young families, is overwhelmingly younger and suburban. If housing affordability improves even marginally, it could stabilise participation in growth corridors where football demand already outstrips infrastructure.

But there are also risks. Critics argue the reforms could reduce investment and tighten rental supply. For many semi-professional players, academy coaches and casual sports workers already locked out of ownership, rising rents would further squeeze disposable income available for sport.

The outlook for differently-abled football

The Budget’s NDIS savings measures may prove even more consequential for football.

The Government says it is “returning the NDIS to its original intent” as part of $63.8 billion in savings and reprioritisations. Disability advocates have already raised concerns about access and participation impacts across community activities.

That includes sport.

Across Australia, football programs have increasingly become entry points for social inclusion and disability participation, from all-abilities leagues to multicultural community initiatives. Any tightening of disability support funding risks flowing directly into reduced participation opportunities for players requiring support workers, transport assistance or specialised programs.

There were, however, some quieter positives for the game.

The Budget continues significant investment into women’s economic participation, childcare and workplace reform. That matters for football at a time when women’s and girls’ participation is booming following the legacy of the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup.

Expanded childcare access, stronger paid parental leave and support for women in the workforce may all help sustain female coaching, volunteering and administration pathways that football has historically struggled to retain.

Still, the clearest takeaway for football may be what the Budget did not contain.

Despite football being Australia’s largest participation sport, there was little direct mention of community football infrastructure or long-term sporting investment beyond broader transport and productivity measures.

For a sport preparing for the AFC Women’s Asian Cup 2026 and pushing for future global tournaments, that silence was notable.

Everyone else may be talking about negative gearing. In football circles, the bigger concern is whether families can still afford Saturday mornings at all.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend