Fears of a backlash should they vote down sweeping changes, and put Australia at risk of being suspended from world football by FIFA, are beginning to crystalise ahead of a crucial extraordinary general meeting sometime in September to ratify, or otherwise, the proposals of the FIFA-instructed Congress Review Working Group (CRWG).

An influential source close the board of Capital Football, and by inference its chairman Mark O’Neill, admits the dissident states - ACT, Northern NSW, Northern Territory and Tasmania - face the prospect of being “slaughtered, isolated and friendless” should they defy the will of the vast majority of football’s disparate stakeholders.

Should they remain unyielding the result would likely be FIFA immediately suspending Australia or imposing a normalisation committee to run the sport.

Canberra boss O’Neill, who has been a staunch supporter of outgoing FFA chairman Steven Lowy in his crusade to derail reform, is the spokesman for the four rebels states, two of whom would need to break ranks and vote for the implementation of the CRWG report for it to be successfully enacted.

At this point, Tasmania and Northern NSW are thought to be wavering, though the word from Capital Football is that the four remain staunchly opposed to the reform package, which includes an independent A-League.

The ACT source, who asked not to be identified, admitted there are growing reservations at Capital Football boardroom level in being “on the wrong side of history” and becoming a virtual pariah state as the board digs in over issues regarding the number of votes allotted to the PFA in the proposed new Congress model and the resources available to grassroots football.

In an insight into the intransigence of the states, characterised by O’Neill’s leadership, the source said: “What really challenges me in this is the possibility of us being marginalised by not really reaching out and looking for compromise, by digging trenches on every single point.

“There’s a danger of us becoming irrelevant. We need to find consensus over things that really don’t matter that much (going into the September meeting).

“The last thing anybody wants to see is Australia suspended or normalisation. We’d be slaughtered, isolated and friendless, if that were to occur.

“The ramifications of being booted out are huge, particularly in terms of women’s football and the Matildas’ participation in the 2019 World Cup and Australia’s bid to host the women’s World Cup in 2023.

“And when it comes to carving up funds from a new A-League model, nobody would be on there making a case for the ACT because we’d be have very little good will in our favour.”

The source said part of the opposition to the proposed new Congress model from the gang of four - who only represent 18 percent of registered players - already included a component of being stripped of influence.

“There’s a fear moving forward that access to resources and infrastructure wont be as accessible as in the past,” the source added.

But he insisted there is still hope of a peaceful resolution.

“No recommendations of the working group have not been rejected, not one. It’s normal for organizations with different views to have discussions on how they think those views should be played out.”

In reference to a purported move from disgruntled ACT clubs to challenge O’Neill’s mandate, the source added: “He has the support of the board and his members within Capital Football.”

FIFA has reached out to the rebels states in a last-ditch bid at consensus, and a CF board meeting next Wednesday will discuss whether to open direct dialogue with Zurich.

O’Neill, and has acolytes, have been portrayed as “Lowy’s lackeys” but the source refuted that assertion, and insisted it had only solidified his support base and hardened existing views.

“The four states have acted independently and there are differences between them and Lowy,“ the source stated. “For example, those states comfortable with women having 10 percent of the new Congress vote while Lowy is not.

“In regards to grassroots football, it’s not a matter of being worse off under recommendations .. it’s a matter of getting the best possible outcome for participatants moving forward, and that means everybody in football.

“Hopefully there’s still time to talk and relationships aren’t so acrimonious that agreement can’t still be reached between all the stakeholders (at the September EGM).”