Football tells MPs to reform

halfcenturyup

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Oct 2009
Messages
9,370
Oh no, sorry .... still interesting though:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21238173

English football has been told it must introduce reforms within a year or the government may impose changes.

The ultimatum appears in a new report from the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

The MPs' report outlines concerns about financial management, the balance of power between the Premier League and the Football Association and the impact of significant risk-taking by owners.

Sports minister Hugh Robertson MP said: "We welcome the report."

“Much greater reform in football is needed to make the game inclusive, sustainable and driven from the grass roots, where it should be”

Robertson, who once described football as "the worst-governed sport in Britain", added: "The report from the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport committee (CMS) shows the will there is across Parliament for football to modernise and change for the better.

"We have been clear that we want the football authorities to carry out the reforms they promised by the start of the 2013-14 season - most notably around improved governance and diverse representation at the FA, the development of a licensing system and greater financial transparency.

"If football does not deliver then we will look at bringing forward legislation."

The FA, Premier League and Football League responded in a statement: "Significant headway has already been made on many of these proposed reforms, not least on sustainability and transparency.

"The remaining reform proposals are the subject of consultation within the game and we are confident that the necessary progress will be made."

“There is a worrying trend as financial interests take hold that the game is becoming remote from the communities from which the clubs originated”

The CMS committee issued its first report in July 2011. The government then responded, identifying three "immediate priorities" for action by football's power-brokers: a complete restructuring of the FA board, the implementation of an FA-administered licensing system for the professional game and significant changes to the make-up and processes of "football's parliament", the FA Council.

"While some progress has been achieved, much greater reform in football is needed to make the game inclusive, sustainable and driven from the grassroots, where it should be," said John Whittingdale MP, chairman of the committee.

"The proposals for reform so far simply don't address the fundamental problems: the licensing model, the way supporters are engaged at club level and the membership of the main board, which is not fully representative or able to balance interests adequately."

Some changes have been introduced, notably through Heather Rabbatts and Roger Devlin joining the FA board as non-executive independent members.

But a series of proposed reforms - billed as "extremely radical" and "progressive" - were rejected by the FA Council last October.

That followed more than a year of negotiations between the FA, the Premier League and the Football League to reach agreement on a joint proposal.

The reforms are believed to have faltered over fears they handed increased powers to the professional game and the FA executive.

The council also rejected a request to allow FA chairman David Bernstein to stay on in office past the automatic retirement age of 70, a decision that Mr Robertson has since described as "crazy."

Bernstein, appointed three years ago, has been praised for his leadership and his efforts to repair international relations following the fallout from England's failed bid to host the 2018 World Cup.

The FA has also, under his tenure, looked to tackle the recurring issue of racism by releasing a discrimination and inclusion action plan.

Today's report reinforces how the FA must now, in the midst of celebrations for its 150th anniversary, appoint a new leader and negotiate with football's stakeholders to introduce the necessary reforms that will ward off government intervention.

Many supporters' groups are also critical that governance of the professional game - and the requirements of any club licence system - would be administered by the FA but with the rules, crucially, left to the leagues to determine.

Establishing a policy on ticket prices, an issue highlighted recently by Manchester City returning 912 tickets to Arsenal after their fans baulked at paying £62 to attend, is just one area over which the FA would cede control under the current proposals.

Greater representation for supporters and tackling issues that concern them such as ownership and effective financial regulation is an issue critics hope can now be tackled.

"The involvement of fans is essential for the future vitality of the game and there is a worrying trend as financial interests take hold that the game is becoming remote from the communities from which the clubs originated," said Labour's shadow minister for sport, Clive Efford MP.

With many clubs facing perilous financial predicaments in recent years the committee also says measures to safeguard their future have not gone far enough.

"The financial proposals were hugely disappointing: the financial risk-taking by clubs is a threat to the sustainability of football as a family and community orientated game, which it should be," said Whittingdale.
 
Isn't this what FIFA places bans on countries for? Government intervention in how national football is run...
 
Why do I feel that any introduction to the rules is going to bend more in favour of the Rags/Ars, after all they are the cash cow for Sky/media etc?

With regards to the government getting involved, well, I would have thought they have far greater problems to attend in their own back yard. I think the truth of the matter is that there are around 8-9 clubs in financial trouble but no one is saying who they are, perhaps the rags can help out once they get into their financial details in the Cayman’s!!
 
David Davies was on talksport today talking about the conflict of interest which still exists today (Noel White / Peter Swales ahem)regarding David Gill (he did not mention his name but it was obvious who he meant) and said The FA have been told to address this apparent never ending recurring theme on many occasions over his generation.

Private members club the FA

Will never change
 
None of the three main political parties are going to vote for anything which will substantially reduce investment in this country, which is something our owners have done conspicuously since 2008. The Premier League is a major success story for UK PLC.

Political intervention doesn't have to be a bad thing for City imo.
 
Two points to make.

Firstly, it's an international sport and not a British one and therefore we may have to compete with the game played in other countries where regulation is different than the one that is 'correct' as perceived by our rulers. If our clubs are to be hamstrung by domestic regulation, British football will be finished forever on the global stage.

Secondly, and this is important, following the tragedies of Hillsborough and Bradford, football in this country was ordered to put it's own house in order. Grounds were deemed unsafe and each club had to engage in huge rebuilding projects to ensure safety and to do it with the introduction of all-seater stadiums. This came about through Government legislation and clubs had to dig deep into their own pockets to carry out these improvements WITHOUT any help from the Government of the day. If the present Government wishes to muscle it's way into the game again, the FA should press seriously for State funded assistance to bring through what is perceived as desirable. I won't be holding my breath on that one though.
 

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.