- Thread Author
- #1
Thinking about South Melbourne Hellas being talked about for inclusion in the aleagues I had an idle thought.
At the time of the NSL, the game of soccer was viewed largely as 'wogball' and an ethnic sport by many - despite it actually being such a popular sport in the country.
On the face of it it seemed to be a competition that pitted Italy against Greece against Croatia against the Dutch and so on with a few skips thrown in. I know that was not the case, and it was a representation of pride, belonging and community for each of those teams and their supporters - but I also know that the mainstream Australian view was that the clubs represented each individual country and not 'just' its community.
I think that mainstream view of football has changed with the aleague, the Socceroos in the World Cups, and the Tillies getting the exposure and following they now have. The 'wogball' view is more now a considered insult by those who harbour a hatred or ignorance of the game rather than a description of the game itself. I would not be surprised if young people asked why the game was even called wogball.
Is it possible that the break up of the NSL on nationality grounds was necessary and beneficial in the long run to football's growth and acceptance here and we can put that behind us now and move on?
Migrant clubs were the strength and foundation of the sport in this country. The aleague excluded that at the national level and enabled/allowed the growth of artificial Australian clubs in its place. Those clubs, or their vanilla equivalents, may never have seen the light of day or broken through the perceived multinational barriers of the existing NSL competition to gain visibility on the big stage.
Without any actual evidence or numbers to support my view, the crowds who come to games now are not just tied to the ethnicity of the original migrant clubs that forged the sport here. It is largely considered a normal sport now and even as entertainment in its own right by some who might be planning a night out.
Maybe it did not have to be 20 years of aleague, but did that enforced block and plastic franchise system actually allow more of mainstream Australia to view the sport on its merits - to the extent that today we could find a way to open the doors to any club, with its pride and supporters, and not feel like we were seeing just an ethnic game.
I think Australia has changed enough in its multinational view to now have an open football competition with both aleagues teams and everyone else - and I am not sure that could have happened without first ostracising the 'migrant' part of the sport in order to create, at least artificially, a level playing field for the vanilla side of Australia to feel a part of it.
As the Australia Cup proves more and more popular each year I like to think we are seeing a clear and obvious weakening of resistance to the game in general and it stepping closer to its World Game label in our country.
Could we be here without having passed through fire?
At the time of the NSL, the game of soccer was viewed largely as 'wogball' and an ethnic sport by many - despite it actually being such a popular sport in the country.
On the face of it it seemed to be a competition that pitted Italy against Greece against Croatia against the Dutch and so on with a few skips thrown in. I know that was not the case, and it was a representation of pride, belonging and community for each of those teams and their supporters - but I also know that the mainstream Australian view was that the clubs represented each individual country and not 'just' its community.
I think that mainstream view of football has changed with the aleague, the Socceroos in the World Cups, and the Tillies getting the exposure and following they now have. The 'wogball' view is more now a considered insult by those who harbour a hatred or ignorance of the game rather than a description of the game itself. I would not be surprised if young people asked why the game was even called wogball.
Is it possible that the break up of the NSL on nationality grounds was necessary and beneficial in the long run to football's growth and acceptance here and we can put that behind us now and move on?
Migrant clubs were the strength and foundation of the sport in this country. The aleague excluded that at the national level and enabled/allowed the growth of artificial Australian clubs in its place. Those clubs, or their vanilla equivalents, may never have seen the light of day or broken through the perceived multinational barriers of the existing NSL competition to gain visibility on the big stage.
Without any actual evidence or numbers to support my view, the crowds who come to games now are not just tied to the ethnicity of the original migrant clubs that forged the sport here. It is largely considered a normal sport now and even as entertainment in its own right by some who might be planning a night out.
Maybe it did not have to be 20 years of aleague, but did that enforced block and plastic franchise system actually allow more of mainstream Australia to view the sport on its merits - to the extent that today we could find a way to open the doors to any club, with its pride and supporters, and not feel like we were seeing just an ethnic game.
I think Australia has changed enough in its multinational view to now have an open football competition with both aleagues teams and everyone else - and I am not sure that could have happened without first ostracising the 'migrant' part of the sport in order to create, at least artificially, a level playing field for the vanilla side of Australia to feel a part of it.
As the Australia Cup proves more and more popular each year I like to think we are seeing a clear and obvious weakening of resistance to the game in general and it stepping closer to its World Game label in our country.
Could we be here without having passed through fire?
️-disinterested demographics in this country who do like the game will always be outnumbered by those who don’t 1000 - let’s say maybe 500 if I’m being super generous - to one. And those haters will always shift the argument goalposts no matter what; if they can’t exploit the ‘wogball’ angle like they used to, they’ll use something else instead.
‘ to 
