Socceroos and Matildas players take Football Australia to court over national team revenue sharing

The Socceroos and Matildas players are taking legal action against their own FA. Their players' union, Professional Footballers Australia, is representing them over how the national teams' revenue is shared. It has been seen that they are pursuing a seven-figure sum through proceedings in the New South Wales Supreme Court.

The union and players say the FA has not properly fulfilled its obligation to share revenue fairly under the current revenue-sharing agreement.

The current agreement, signed in 2023, gives both teams a share of relevant national team revenue, currently between 18% and 20%, from commercial arrangements connected to the national team, including ticket sales, broadcasting agreements, and sponsorship deals.

The teams themselves are reported to have contributed up to half of the FA total revenue. The agreement includes mechanisms intended to encourage players and the governing body to work together to secure stronger commercial deals so both sides can benefit from increased income. However, the players' legal action shows they believe the governing bodies involved have not upheld or applied these arrangements properly.

Football Australia confirmed it was aware of the PFA's legal action in the NSW Supreme Court. Still, it described the proceedings as relating to a third party connected to a separate matter before the National Dispute Resolution Chamber (NDRC).

An FA spokesperson stated that the Supreme Court's involvement was limited to the subpoena process and would end once that process was completed. The governing body declined to comment further because the NDRC matter remains ongoing and subject to confidentiality obligations.

The PFA also declined to comment publicly on the dispute.

This comes just months after the Socceroos took on the World Cup and less than a year out from the women's World Cup in 2027, but both teams are preparing for international fixtures this November as well. The contract they signed in 2023 will expire in September 2027, just months after the Matildas compete at the World Cup, and they have sold twice as much merchandise. The PFA and Football Australia have not discussed a replacement contract, and the negotiation's future implications could become more complicated.

Active players are currently staying silent on this matter due to strict confidentiality obligations; however, former stars have weighed in: former soccer captain and PFA trustee Craig Foster hit back at the criticism, calling the blame-shifting on players “ridiculous”. He argued that the players have continuously excelled, repeatedly qualifying for World Cups and making the national teams the most loved brands in the country. He noted that the sport's stalled growth is due to poor federation decisions, not the players, and said the union's stance is simply to ensure commercial revenue is handled properly.

Others, including former soccer star Robbie Slater, said the lawsuit is “morally wrong” and “a disgrace”, arguing that the money should go toward grassroots registration fees for kids rather than into senior players' pockets. A title legend, Lisa De Vanna, echoed the same message as her fellow Aussie footballers. She noted that they are already "one of the best-paid teams in the world" with elite perks like private chefs and business flights, stating: "Instead of knocking the game when it's at its lowest, maybe play for pride and not greed."