AAFC’s main focus since it formed 12 months ago centred on being included in the discussions around the composition of the FFA Congress as well as the implementation of a national second division.

But the AAFC, which boasts the support of over 120 NPL clubs, also wants to lower the costs for children to play football. 

It’s hard not see why when compared to codes like AFL ($195) and Rugby League ($235), with football’s average upfront registration cost of $415, while some Football NSW youth programs charge fees of up to $2400 a year.

Next month representatives of the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) will be in Australia with the aim of resolving the on-going congress issue and the cost of football would also be discussed, Krayem said.

“The AFC is also very much focused on how to reduce the cost of kids to play in the NPL,” he said.

“The NPL clubs nationally continue to push for a second-tier competition.

“Our discussions with FFA have been very fruitful in relation to the second tier and we’ve also talked to them about the NPL cost structure.

“But, the second-tier competition and the cost of playing NPL for the kids come hand in hand because the cost of playing is a big issue for clubs across the country.”

Over the years Australia’s talent identification system has been in the firing line, as some feel the current system has been pricing many of the country’s best young talents out of playing the beautiful game.

But when it comes to the NPL’s pay to play system, Football Federation Victoria head Kimon Taliadoros said high club fees are inescapable.

“The costs of operating clubs are unavoidable,” he told FourFourTwo. “As a result of that, the funding required to keep those clubs solvent is also unavoidable. 

“At this point in time, until we are able to generate funds, resources or revenues that can subsidise that, the onus falls on the participants. “

But while Krayem agrees with Taliadoros he feels the NPL cost structure must be changed. 

“No doubt the Kimon is quote is quite right,” he said. “There are a lot of cost structures which are unavoidable. The question is do we have to have that cost structure in the NPL?

“You’ve got certain costs that are being passed on. There are certain things in the NPL that every club’s licence has to produce.

“Each state is different, and they agree on a fee structure to participate, so, you’re bound.

“There are 140 NPL clubs nationally who are all trying to compete and have similar licences, whether they are big ones or little ones.

“So, the idea is to say, should a club in regional Queensland who have a different demographic need to be burdened with the same structure as a big club?”

With A-League clubs now having their own youth structures, Krayem feels the football landscape has changed and is another reason why the NPL cost structure must be looked at.

“When the NPL came in five years ago it was designed to a be a second-tier competition under the A-League,” he said.

“But you can’t have 140 clubs feeding into it. And five years ago the A-League clubs didn’t have academies competing in the NPL like they do today.

“What we are saying is as part of having a truly national second tier competition what does it do for the cost structure for the NPL underneath it.

“Even though the game has changed, and the NPL has changed, the modelling of the costing hasn’t changed.”

“Ultimately, we have got to generate more revenue into the game, there is no doubt about that, but we also must ask if we need to have the cost structure in the NPL as it is today?”