AS the champagne sprayed into every corner of the Socceroos dressing room on a June night just a few weeks ago, and the celebration of reaching another World Cup intensified, Frank Lowy looked on with a mix of wonderment and delight.

When it was pointed out to him that the positivity of the night was a long way from the travails of recent years, he told this columnist that the press had to tell the truth as they saw it. "You must always write what you believe," he said.

So Mr Lowy, we can only take you at your word, no matter how uncomfortable the issue to be raised.

For it feels an appropriate time to consider a question that the game has largely avoided until now.

It’s a question that goes to the heart of where football aims to be by the time of the World Cup in 2018, and how it intends to get there. And it’s a conversation that has to start now.

Because, Mr Lowy, the constitution of the Football Federation decrees that you – plus two of your closest allies in Brian Schwartz and Phil Wolanski – must stand aside in 2015. It’s a strange thought to entertain after so long, but the end of the Lowy era is getting closer.

In many ways it’s a disconcerting thought, for yours has been the incomparable political and economic ballast which allowed the game to climb off its knees and haul its way with increasing confidence into mainstream respectability. We shall not see your like again.

But in that very realisation comes the knowledge that a very different future awaits. And it’s why we need to have this conversation now, for there are big, even monumental decisions to be made about how this wonderful sport should be run, and by whom.

It will be a difficult conversation for you to have and be part of, for by dint of your very passion – and style of doing business – you have driven every major debate within the game for this past decade.

But ultimately the baton will have to be passed on, and there’s a powerful argument to make that football now has the confidence and stature to attract the top end of town in terms of potential leaders.

Where 10 years ago you had to cajole and plead with friends of heavyweight standing to join the FFA board, part of the success since is that there are highly credentialled businessmen and women for whom a seat at this table would be an attractive proposition.

The make-up of the board for the Asian Cup supports this argument in spades.

But equally it’s increasingly likely that the landscape in which football will operate under a new chairman (or woman) will differ markedly. Over 10 years your sheer clout and negotiating skills have wrought an extraordinary amount of money from the Federal government – and nor should football apologise for that when it encourages more people to go out and play than any other team sport.

But the game cannot assume that anything like as much government assistance will be made available going forward. Which is why the make-up of the board from 2015, the skills they possess, and above all who leads that board, becomes so damn important.

In the 21st century, candidates are needed with marketing prowess, financial expertise, a deep understanding of engaging with Asia. Somehow the voices of the grassroots must be heard and represented, and an answer found to the vexed question of whether the A-League clubs should get a seat at the table.

From those criteria, an individual has to be found to be a worthy successor as the head of the game.

There are smart, well-connected people out there with a respect for football. John Borghetti championed the sport while at Qantas, and now has transformed Virgin Blue. Michael Fraser, the MD at AGL, is widely seen as a seriously good operator. Investment banker Anton Tagliaferro attended the 2006 World Cup painted in green and gold.

Then there are the names who already have some experience of the game – John O’Neill, of course, the former Saatchi boss Ian Rowden, administrator turned consultant Eugenie Buckley.

The talent is out there. The delicate question will be how they should be chosen, and who should then head the board. A useful parallel is the English FA, where the former director general of the BBC, Greg Dyke, has just assumed the chairmanship.

A nominations committee of three members of the FA board sought out and interviewed a wide range of candidates for the top job. The result was Dyke, and a feeling that a robust process had produced the best man for the job.

There has to be a similar feeling left after your successors are chosen. At what will be the start of a new era for the game, and with the Australian Sports Commission pushing all sports hard to lift their corporate governance, there is such an opportunity to make this transparent.

For in addition to the names above, there is a common belief you would be keen to see one of your sons involved, given their record in business and love of football.

Whether they, or another figure, then emerged from such a process as the best candidate, they would carry the game’s support.

A leader with a genuine mandate is the most legitimate of all.

Originally published as End of Lowy era drawing near