The board of Football Federation Australia meets for the first time today since Australian football was plunged into crisis with the axing of Matildas coach Alen Stajcic...and almost a month later, key questions still remain unanswered over the shock decision.
According to Kamasz, a former general manager of the National Soccer League, Sydney FC general manager and interim chief executive with Football NSW, the FFA board needs to address key questions including:
• If there is indeed a supposed toxic culture involving other members of staff, why have there not been any other sackings?
• Has the Board seen the complete PFA Report including the number of participants and their status (eg current Matildas’, others, etc.)?
• Does the Board know exactly which players were targeted, the criteria for involvement and if they were the only people who were approached and responded?
• It has been suggested in the media that 32 players were approached. Is this correct? Were they all “eligible” to participate and did they all respond?
• Is the Board absolutely satisfied that the respondents were exactly who they were supposed to be?
• Was anyone outside the targeted Matildas’ group in the survey approached to participate, and if so, why?
• Who in FFA has been responsible for obtaining and dealing with the results of the survey?
• Can the Board be satisfied that the Report correctly reflects the responses provided?
• Was Alen Stajcic provided with a copy of the Report and was his input sought?
• The PFA has indicated that there was nothing in the Report to warrant a sacking. Is this correct?
• If this was not the case, why was the survey referenced publicly in Alen Stajic’s sacking?
• Was the Report actually a factor in the recommendation that Alen Stajcic be sacked?

Our Watch Report
• Why were Our Watch contacted by FFA?
• On who’s recommendation, and in what context, was their involvement requested?
• Which group of people (not names) were required to complete the survey (eg ex-Matildas, current Matildas, parents, coaching and ancillary staff etc.)?
• How many people were provided with surveys to complete?
• Were these surveys password protected or guaranteed to be secure?
• Who in FFA determined the number and which people should participate in the survey?
• It has been suggested in the media that some 280 surveys were issued and that 142 responses were received, with only 3 of these from Matildas and 1 from a Socceroo. Is this correct?
• Why weren’t all members of the Matildas’ staff involved in the survey?
• Who in FFA has been responsible for obtaining and dealing with the results of the survey?
• Has the Board seen a copy of the OW Report and is it satisfied the Report does represent the responses provided?
• OW has indicated that there was not a recommendation to sack the coach. Is this correct?
• If this is the case, why was the survey referenced publicly in Alen Stajic’s sacking?
• Was the OW survey actually a factor in the recommendation to sack Alen Stajcic?
Related Articles

'Timing not right': Montemurro's verdict on Matildas vacancy

Matildas: 'Fourth at the Olympics is honestly the worst place you could come'
.jpg&h=172&w=306&c=1&s=1)