Independent Regulator Imminent?

[WalworthOwl]

I find the conversation between @HarrowbyOwl and the cynics depressing.

 

@HarrowbyOwl has explained how people who care about football and try to make society work better have come together to attempt to improve the organisation of football. The cynics say that everything is always a bit sh!t and this will be the same.

 

The thing is, whatever the new regulator achieves the cynics will believe they were right, because the regulator will never do enough for them.

 

Today football is driven by money, it's a massive example of hyper-capitalism. Football clubs are businesses which exist in a capitalist system, they're subject to the same market forces and the same law of the land as other businesses. Yet football is also part of local history and culture, with huge importance in the community.

 

The regulator will have to find a middle way between everything being decided by the market, and everything being decided by the fan base. If they totally prioritise the fan base English football will become more like German football – is that what we want?

 

Because you can argue that in England market-driven football is doing pretty well. The Premier League is more competitive and unpredictable than the other top European leagues, more top class players play in England than anywhere else (I remember when Italy and then Spain had the most), there's some terrific football in the Championship and attendances there are close to attendances in La Liga and Serie A. The UK makes a lot of money from global broadcast sales, and no English club has gone bankrupt since the P&S regulations came in.

 

I get the impression that the cynics want all the best aspects of the free market and all the best aspects of community control, which is impossible of course, so they sit on the sidelines expressing their cynicism instead of getting involved and trying to work out what a good regulatory system would look like.

[HarrowbyOwl]

1 hour ago, F. Spiksley said:

 

Not really.

 

Not one "cynical" leaning comment has the poster crowing about how clever they are.

 

There's a few posts implying that the cynics are not well read or versed in the developments, great stuff and well done for engaging.

 

Obviously cynics clearly don't know a single thing.

 

IMHO the regulator will be toothless,

Its not a matter of opinion. When the bill is published shortly we will know if its toothless or not

 

it will grind a political axe,

I don't get that. What 'axe' ? The regulator has wide cross-party support, from the current government, a prospective labour government and all fans organisations. Its not a political issue.

 

it will not treat each club in the same way,

The 'bespoke' model is by design. A one-size-fits-all approach wouldn't be appropriate when you are talking about 116 clubs in 5 leagues - from Prem to National. It needs to be proportionate.

Also, some clubs are well-run and some are basket cases, like our own, so you'd expect the regulator to concentrate its's resources on where they are most needed.

 

it will fudge approaches towards inspection and review,

We simply don't know if it will or it won't. It will be reposnsible for carrying out the will of Parliament and discharge the powers given to it by statute. 

 

it will discriminate based on applying "light touch" and "special measures",

Let's hope so. Concentrate on the bad eggs and rotten apples. I don't see that as discrimination.

 

it will antagonise potential investment in the game, certainly it will deter investment in lower league clubs,

The bill is designed to make sure the game attracts the right kind of owners and investors

 

it won't legally be in a position to tell the Premier League what to do with its income, especially how to filter some if it down to lower league clubs.

There will be endless appeals and litigation concerning decisions and sanctions made after reviews.

If the Football Regulation Act gives it those powers then yes it will. Legal challenges will  indeed be possible.

The Mail has reported this week that some clubs are already planning a legal challenge to a regulator imposed 'New Deal'. Would they succeed? Let's see.

 

It won't perform well or have the resources to fully implement the regulations.

It will be funded from the license fees levied on the clubs it regulates, so no reason to be underresourced.

 

It will be a bureaucratic nightmare.

No regulator can be without its bureaucracy. That it will be a nightmare is just your cynicism getting the better of you!

 

The regulator won't have a magic want that will solve all the complex issues facing football and no doubt the Football Regulation Act will be amended and evolve over time.

Our very own Nick De Marco KC, one of the country's top sports lawyers (and QPR fan), has a very good, ballanced overview here:

https://www.blackstonechambers.com/documents/The_New_Football_Regulator_by_Nick_De_Marco_KC.pdf

 

The only missing part of De Marco's article is mention of the Football Club Corporate Governance Code, which will be mandatory and has huge (positive IMO) implications for SWFC

 

 

 

 

 

[akbuk]

On 11/03/2024 at 20:01, Hoofit said:

Getting more likely that regulation is the only route to a fairer deal between EPL and EFL. Wonder what DC’s stance is on this - more money from EPL likely but with regulatory strings attached….bit of a dilemma for him?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68537402  

 

 

Not you are correct the bill hasn't been through Parliament yet and time hasn't been made for it

[F. Spiksley]

29 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

 

 

 

All good points, even me as a cynic understand them, and am aware of them. 

 

I still am of the opinion that it will be fudged, have a lengthy implementation phase fraught with legal challenges and further reviews, and that certain clubs will heavily influence any agenda. I also think it could lead to significant changes in the structuring of leagues, so that you may well end up with healthier regulation over club financial performance and sustainability but you will have the likelihood of a closed top tier and limited access to European competition, possibly an ambition killer for sone clubs and a deterrent in further investment from owners (current and potential). I can’t comment on media input as I’m sure it is being monitored by that sector as there is undoubtedly going to be some impact on how media money is to be distributed amongst league members as the structure currently stands. Also irrespective of cross party input (at this particular stage) I still believe it will be politicised.

 

I could be wrong though. I broadly support independent regulation due to the lack of good governance within the game by clubs collectively.

 

I’d support any measures that actually delivered on this issue.

[HarrowbyOwl]

28 minutes ago, F. Spiksley said:

All good points, even me as a cynic understand them, and am aware of them. 

 

I still am of the opinion that it will be fudged, have a lengthy implementation phase fraught with legal challenges and further reviews, and that certain clubs will heavily influence any agenda. I also think it could lead to significant changes in the structuring of leagues, so that you may well end up with healthier regulation over club financial performance and sustainability but you will have the likelihood of a closed top tier and limited access to European competition, possibly an ambition killer for sone clubs and a deterrent in further investment from owners (current and potential). I can’t comment on media input as I’m sure it is being monitored by that sector as there is undoubtedly going to be some impact on how media money is to be distributed amongst league members as the structure currently stands. Also irrespective of cross party input (at this particular stage) I still believe it will be politicised.

 

I could be wrong though. I broadly support independent regulation due to the lack of good governance within the game by clubs collectively.

 

I’d support any measures that actually delivered on this issue.

I have to confess to a selfish interest.
Whether or not regulation really can re-set the whole of the English football system - a huge ask - is secondary for me.
I'm actually more interested in what it means for SWFC. In that sense there are aspects of the Football Regulation Bill (from what we know from the White Paper and consultation reponse) that are key. To name just a few:

• The enhanced Owners and Directors test, which will be an ongoing assessment of whether an owner is fit and proper, adequacy and sources of owner funding, a viable business plan
• Imposition of the Football Club Corporate Government Code, requiring clubs to demonstrate they have a well-qualified Board of Directors with independent (strictly defined)  non-executive directors, elected Chairman, regular board meetings with published minutes, separation of powers between owner and CEO etc., etc. Lots of good stuff.
• Minimum standards of fan engagement that gives fans a say in 'key decisions' of the club, instead of being fobbed off with the toothless 'engagement' we have now

Edited March 14 by HarrowbyOwl

[F. Spiksley]

4 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

I have to confess to a selfish interest.
Whether or not regulation really can re-set the whole of the English football system - a huge ask - is secondary for me.
I'm actually more interested in what it means for SWFC. In that sense there are aspects of the Football Regulation Bill (from what we know from the White Paper and consultation reponse) that are key. To name just a few:

• The enhanced Owners and Directors test, which will be an ongoing assessment of whether an owner is fit and proper, adequacy and sources of owner funding, a viable business plan
• Imposition of the Football Club Corporate Government Code, requiring clubs to demonstrate they have a well-qualified Board of Directors with independent (strictly defined)  non-executive directors, elected Chairman, regular board meetings with published minutes, separation of powers between owner and CEO etc., etc. Lots of good stuff.
• Minimum standards of fan engagement that gives fans a say in 'key decisions' of the club, instead of being fobbed off with the toothless 'engagement' we have now

I think all your points have been solid and rational.

 

I just fear regulatory bodies if they are poorly implemented!

 

I hope something actually works especially to stop crappie owners destroying clubs. 

 

Measures proposed  would certainly put the spotlight on our club, which wouldn't be a bad thing, you're right!

[@owlstalk]

 

 

We need help as fans to stop these things happening to our clubs 

 

[nile]

On 11/03/2024 at 21:31, HarrowbyOwl said:

There are over 90 regulatory bodies in the Uk. The problem is that when regulation works well it goes unnoticed. When it fails it is high profile. You wouldn’t take out a big loan or make an investment in an organisation that wasn’t regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority or the Prudential Regulation Authority would you? Or feel comfortably flying without the Civil Aviation Authority. Or trust shopping for food if we didn’t have the Food Standards Agency, etc, etc, etc

Stop being so defeatist. The truth is the Football Regulator will work as well as we fans make it work

I completely agree with the above.

 

Regulation will work if it has the legislation to back it up, if it is to only to regulate industry best practice it will then get manipulated.’

[Hoofit]

2 hours ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

I have to confess to a selfish interest.
Whether or not regulation really can re-set the whole of the English football system - a huge ask - is secondary for me.
I'm actually more interested in what it means for SWFC. In that sense there are aspects of the Football Regulation Bill (from what we know from the White Paper and consultation reponse) that are key. To name just a few:

• The enhanced Owners and Directors test, which will be an ongoing assessment of whether an owner is fit and proper, adequacy and sources of owner funding, a viable business plan
• Imposition of the Football Club Corporate Government Code, requiring clubs to demonstrate they have a well-qualified Board of Directors with independent (strictly defined)  non-executive directors, elected Chairman, regular board meetings with published minutes, separation of powers between owner and CEO etc., etc. Lots of good stuff.
• Minimum standards of fan engagement that gives fans a say in 'key decisions' of the club, instead of being fobbed off with the toothless 'engagement' we have now

Me too.

Plus what regulation & code of governance give us is the ability to challenge owners like DC & hold them to account against a national standard of conduct, which blows away any suggestion that we’re protesting just because we ‘dislike’ DC ie that ir’s a vendetta, its personal. It isn’t - it’s purely & simply because we want Wednesday to be a well run club right now & in future too under any subsequent owner or chairman.

UTO!

[HarrowbyOwl]

1 hour ago, nile said:

I completely agree with the above.

 

Regulation will work if it has the legislation to back it up, if it is to only to regulate industry best practice it will then get manipulated.’

Well we should be finally able to see the legislation soon - if it gets its first reading in parliament before the Easter recess as now expected.

[WalworthOwl]

My number one wish in football is that SWFC is run better and the team performs better. My number two wish is that movement throughout the football pyramid remains possible. I wish I thought otherwise, but in my view the regulator should focus more on the second than the first.

 

I see Chansiri as a well-meaning businessman who's made several mistakes and who's unable to forge a connection with the fan base. I don't think that will be bad enough for the regulator to remove him, and I'm not sure how much difference it will make if he had to consult more. It will need some great drafting in parliament to get a code that really enforces consultation.

 

Where I think the regulator should focus is on keeping fluidity throughout the pyramid. There's a threat that a European Superleague or expanded “Champions” League will cut itself off from the rest of Premier League, and there's a threat that the Premier League will cut itself off from the EFL. They don't need to stop promotion and relegation, but if in a few years the same clubs always go up and then straight back down that will seem the natural thing to do.

 

I wish I could get my number one wish, but I think the regulator should be worthwhile at least for number two.

[F. Spiksley]

I like @HarrowbyOwl’s way of articulating. It all makes sense, is well founded and a refreshing knockabout of views. I just struggle with not being a cynic. So I’m not convinced by measures in their current form and my suspicion of politicians weighs heavily! Like everyone I’d love to see change. 

[HarrowbyOwl]

1 hour ago, WalworthOwl said:

My number one wish in football is that SWFC is run better and the team performs better. My number two wish is that movement throughout the football pyramid remains possible. I wish I thought otherwise, but in my view the regulator should focus more on the second than the first.

 

I see Chansiri as a well-meaning businessman who's made several mistakes and who's unable to forge a connection with the fan base.

Except his businesses have never been identified!

I don't think that will be bad enough for the regulator to remove him,

But the regulator will have the power, ultimately, to refuse to issue him a license to operate. More likely in my opinion is that Mr C will see regulation as unwaranted inteference and sell rather than comply.

and I'm not sure how much difference it will make if he had to consult more. It will need some great drafting in parliament to get a code that really enforces consultation.

There's 2 things there. The regulator will set minimum standards for fan engagement and will they will be enshrined in the EFL rules. The EPL has already published its Fan Engagement Standard in anticipation of the regulator setting stricter standards. The EFL is working on a version of their own that promises to go further.

The governance code will be written by the regulator (not parliament), drawing on well-established existing codes - Sport England Code for Sports Governance, UK Corporate Governance Code, The Wates Corporate Governance Principles for Large Private Companies- and the Fair Game draft code.

 

Where I think the regulator should focus is on keeping fluidity throughout the pyramid. There's a threat that a European Superleague or expanded “Champions” League will cut itself off from the rest of Premier League, and there's a threat that the Premier League will cut itself off from the EFL. They don't need to stop promotion and relegation, but if in a few years the same clubs always go up and then straight back down that will seem the natural thing to do.

Joining breakaway leagues will certainly be outlawed. Financial redistribution to close the gulf between the EPL and EFL was something the leagues were supposed to sort out between themselves. The regulator was only meant to have 'back stop' powers to intervene. But with the failure of the New Deal negotiations it looks like it will become front and centre

 

I wish I could get my number one wish, but I think the regulator should be worthwhile at least for number two.

 

Edited March 14 by HarrowbyOwl

[HarrowbyOwl]

17 minutes ago, F. Spiksley said:

I like @HarrowbyOwl’s way of articulating. It all makes sense, is well founded and a refreshing knockabout of views. I just struggle with not being a cynic. So I’m not convinced by measures in their current form and my suspicion of politicians weighs heavily! Like everyone I’d love to see change. 

Try scepticism, its much healthier!

"Modern cynicism is a distrust toward professed ethical and social values, especially when there are high expectations concerning society, institutions, and authorities that are unfulfilled. It can manifest itself as a result of frustration, disillusionment, and distrust perceived as owing to organizations, authorities, and other aspects of society.

Cynicism is often confused with pessimism or nihilism, perhaps due to their shared association with a lack of faith in humanity. The differences among the three is that cynicism is a distrust by prudence; while due to a sense of defeatism, pessimism is the distrust of potential success. Nihilism on its part is the general distrust cast upon the belief that anything in life (including life itself) has any valuable meaning." (courtesy of Wikipedia)

[Hoofit]

See from @HarrowbyOwl’s latest post on another related thread that the EFL are sceptical about the EPL’s intentions rather than independent regulation, which they back. 

[Utah Owl]

The Government announced yesterday that foreign ownership of UK media organisations will be banned. Let's hope they take a similar approach to Football.

 

All clubs should be domestically owned and controlled, not just at the whim of someone who has no real interest in the game chasing the opportunity of Premier League riches.

[HarrowbyOwl]

23 hours ago, Utah Owl said:

The Government announced yesterday that foreign ownership of UK media organisations will be banned. Let's hope they take a similar approach to Football.

 

All clubs should be domestically owned and controlled, not just at the whim of someone who has no real interest in the game chasing the opportunity of Premier League riches.

You'll be disappointed mate. The government didn't ban foreign ownership of British newspapers, only foreign government ownership (via sovereign wealth funds).

Unfortunately they have said that the regulator won't have the powers to prevent sovereign wealth funds buying English football clubs -  an outragous decision

The reason they gave was that it 'impinges on foreign policy'. So they seem fully signed up to the sportwashing agenda of the Saudis.

I wonder in a democratic poll how many fans think having foreign governments owning football clubs is healthy for the game?

[Utah Owl]

6 hours ago, HarrowbyOwl said:

You'll be disappointed mate. The government didn't ban foreign ownership of British newspapers, only foreign government ownership (via sovereign wealth funds).

Unfortunately they have said that the regulator won't have the powers to prevent sovereign wealth funds buying English football clubs -  an outragous decision

The reason they gave was that it 'impinges on foreign policy'. So they seem fully signed up to the sportwashing agenda of the Saudis.

I wonder in a democratic poll how many fans think having foreign governments owning football clubs is healthy for the game?

Pity, ultimately the game needs to move to the German model of ownership.

[Inspector Lestrade]

Have to give it a chance first, football is a very powerful force for good in the community but so much more could be done.

 

 

[Umeeksk]

On 14/03/2024 at 23:00, Utah Owl said:

The Government announced yesterday that foreign ownership of UK media organisations will be banned. Let's hope they take a similar approach to Football.

 

All clubs should be domestically owned and controlled, not just at the whim of someone who has no real interest in the game chasing the opportunity of Premier League riches.

 

I certainly agree that foreign governments shouldn't be allowed to buy British sports teams. I think the Government has been utterly asleep at the wheel when it comes to that trend and its implications.

 

Actually - I'd like us to go even further and adopt the Bundesliga's 50+1 rule that says football clubs have to be majority owned and controlled by their fans.

 

Edited March 16 by Umeeksk