Football Governance Bill (Independent Regulator) introduced today

terraloon said:
Based on what is out there I don’t think the owners of Bury would have failed any enhanced fit and proper test but almost certainty would have failed to be granted a licence to play on. What would have happened to them. ?
Click to expand...
That's exactly what happened to Bury, they had their licence removed, it was the rules working to protect other clubs in the league, it was just handled very badly. I think you're always going to get dodgy owners who think they can use a vulnerable club in some get rich quick scheme that goes wrong. What I hope, is that an independant regulator can challenge football authories when they don't apply the rules fairly.
 
Fuck me on ITV now they are saying we are state owned, saying we don’t want a state owning a newspaper group but the same people own Manchester City, watch the cunts jump on that now.
 
terraloon said:
Can’t believe it but I actually agree with Sullivan.

None of the issues that seem to currently wind up supporters of City, Forest , Everton and yes indeed Chelsea will be any different under a regulator.

FFP or PSR will still be there, VAR won’t change, PGMOL will still be in charge indeed the regulator will have really narrow areas of responsibility

The PL will have to shell out more money to the EFL and no matter how you try and control it all that will happen is that these clubs almost without exception will spend more on wages. EFL clubs are basket cases financially they are chasing the dream getting more from the PL really won’t change things. The regulator will have responsibility down to NFL ( National) that’s what 120 ish clubs what about the hundreds below that level? They are being in effect told they are meaningless these clubs get nothing from the Pl/EFL and anyone who supports a non league club shares the same passion, the highs, the lows , ambitions and fears .

When they talk about heritage these mainly smaller clubs are just important to their communities and no one seems to blink an eye when they are picked off many by individuals who will pass any fit and proper test that will be applied yet the aim of these owners isn’t promotion it’s land ownership. Look no further that Torquay.

Ironically the really big PL clubs will still generate the biggest commercial deals , the biggest sponsorship and more often than not the highest gate receipts. Clubs lower down the PL will loose their competitiveness . The divide in the PL will widen.

Oh I know what let’s apply stricter guidelines when it comes to owners. Ok on the face of it seems a plan but what happens when a club is faced with the dilemma where that stricter test sifts out the only person that has the funds and desire to take in an ailing club. How will that have changed things at Bury, Macclesfield and indeed Reading ?

When it comes to a super league despite what some think it is inevitable be it under the control of UEFA or a stand alone.

People have good reason to question the competence of Masters but at least he has some sort of check mechanism in place a regulator simply will play to the crowds .

Keep saying it but people should be careful what they wish for.
Click to expand...

You lost me at "Masters ... has some sort of check mechanism in place".

The good thing out of all this is that there will be some accountability in place, in public I imagine. That can only be a good thing. The PL is too opaque.

Get him to explain why investment in the game is bad. Get him to explain why the current rules ring fence five or six big clubs. Get him to explain how his successor will be picked. How he was chosen. Get him to explain why refereeing is so opaque. The regulator won't be making many decisions, I imagine, but if it just imposes a degree of accountability and transparency then that is better then we have now. Remove the secrecy.

Getting a sports-experienced KC to head it is a good start. Not holding my breath, but hopeful. If the legacy clubs (and I use that word in a derogatory sense, like "legacy fan") don't like it, it's fine with me.
 
Premier League in "we won't be able to give Red Tops clubs an advantage over everyone else anymore" shocker.

I always find it interesting to see who bites back at these announcements, makes it easier to see who we're fighting against.
 
halfcenturyup said:
You lost me at "Masters ... has some sort of check mechanism in place".

The good thing out of all this is that there will be some accountability in place, in public I imagine. That can only be a good thing. The PL is too opaque.

Get him to explain why investment in the game is bad. Get him to explain why the current rules ring fence five or six big clubs. Get him to explain how his successor will be picked. How he was chosen. Get him to explain why refereeing is so opaque. The regulator won't be making many decisions, I imagine, but if it just imposes a degree of accountability and transparency then that is better then we have now. Remove the secrecy.

Getting a sports-experienced KC to head it is a good start. Not holding my breath, but hopeful. If the legacy clubs (and I use that word in a derogatory sense, like "legacy fan") don't like it, it's fine with me.
Click to expand...
Masters is the PL CEO but he has fellow board members and the shareholders namely the clubs vote on changes and imposition of rules.As I say some sort of check mechanism
UEFa dictated the introduction of FFP the National Leagues had no choice but to introduce similar rules.
The regulator will do absolutely nothing re investment, re appointing a PL CEO,the PGMOL.
As for transparency in what area are you expecting for more to be put in the public domain ?
 
terraloon said:
Masters is the PL CEO but he has fellow board members and the shareholders namely the clubs vote on changes and imposition of rules.As I say some sort of check mechanism
UEFa dictated the introduction of FFP the National Leagues had no choice but to introduce similar rules.
The regulator will do absolutely nothing re investment, re appointing a PL CEO,the PGMOL.
As for transparency in what area are you expecting for more to be put in the public domain ?
Click to expand...

You can't seriously be thinking the 20 clubs have been making decisions that have benefitted the sport as a whole? Or that Masters or any of his fellow board members hold any sort of power over the clubs (and when I say clubs, I mean the usual suspects). They could, but they are weak. We have seen time and again the PL decides what is in the best interest of those few (pretty much, two) clubs. Imposing accountability isn't at all a bad move.

I thought I gave some examples of more public accountability?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.