Written by Shreyas
Introduction:
The parliament of the UK introduced the Football Governance Bill in March this year. This resulted from a series of events that exposed the flaws in the current way that English football is run, with the formation of the European Super League being one of the tipping points behind this bill. Football fans worldwide went into a fit of rage when they realized there was a proposal for a new league to be created only for the elite clubs, which sought to replace the Champions League, club football’s premier competition.
In the UK, this was followed by a fan-led review chaired by former Sports Minister Tracey Crouch, which demanded changes in English Football. One of the standout features of this bill was the establishment of an Independent Football Regulator (IFR), which would act as an independent body. This review wasn’t made overnight; it was the result of a six-month long project which heard more than 100 hours of evidence from fans representing more than 130 clubs, the FA, the Premier League, and the Professional Footballer’s Association.The function of the IFR is to act as a watchdog over all the clubs in the five leagues in English Football. This will be in the form of ensuring that new club owners are fit to run clubs, which will be backed by stringent tests, which could mean the end of the road for owners like the Glazers (a huge sigh of relief for fans of the Red Devils). One of the IFR’S main functions is to ensure the financial health of clubs in English football to allow them to continue to compete, and to try and prevent takeovers of clubs that could ruin them, or a Bury F.C. 2.0.
So, what exactly does the IFR do? Under Section 6 of the Bill, the Independent Football Regulator has three functions: to protect and promote the financial soundness of regulated clubs, to protect the financial resilience of English Football, and to safeguard the heritage of English football. While this seems too broad in its scope, the Bill also provides for specific functions of the IFR. Section 10 of the Bill states that the IFR must prepare something called a ‘state of the game report’. This report must be prepared every three years and should essentially give an idea as to the different challenges that English Football faces at the highest level. Although it doesn’t exactly specify how this report should be made, it should ideally take into consideration different factors such as the financial stability of the club, its year-on-year revenues, and whether the club’s spending is in line with the Premier League’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations. As this Bill also proposes to give fans more control of their favourite clubs, it should also devise a system of ownership that is used in German football, i.e., the 50+1 rule.
This ensures that fans, who are arguably the lifelines of the club they support, also have a say in how things are run. This has a lot of advantages to it as well. First, it could prevent people like Todd Boehly and the Glazer family, who despite their extravagant spending for the club continue to be on the bad side of fans. Another way in which this will help clubs is to ensure that players aren’t overpaid. We see players earning around £250,000 a week only to go on a goalless drought for five months. This clearly doesn’t sit well with fans, and a system where they also have a say in how things are run will definitely be in the long-term interest of the club, as opposed to the billionaire owners who go chasing profits. The IFR also has the power to issue licenses under Section 15, which will not allow a club to operate a relevant team unless it is granted a provisional operating license or a full operating license. In order for the IFR to grant an operating license under Section 15, it requires the concerned club to comply with namely four conditions:
a) A financial plans condition
b) A corporate governance statement condition
c) A fan consultation condition, and
d) An annual declaration condition
Each of these requirements target a different aspect of a club’s management, and it therefore tries to ensure that a license is being applied for in the best interests of the club by creating a comprehensive licensing regime.
Into the new decade: A series of breakouts:
The start of 2020 was completely unexpected. Everybody confined to the comfort (or so we thought) of their own homes, matches being played behind closed doors, and nobody knowing that the worst was yet to come. Yes, I am talking about COVID-19, but that isn’t the only thing. The big dogs in football, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and a few other clubs were busy cooking something. In 2021, they announced the formation of the European Super League (ESL), an elite football competition that would consist only of the top football clubs in the world. Right off the face of the bat, this seemed like a bad idea. Although it would mean non-stop entertainment for fans, who would always be watching the best of the best play much more frequently than before, it also meant that the game was now in the control of the hands of a few, going against everything that the game itself stood for. Had the Super League gone on to become a reality, things in world football would have been very different today. While the League did seem very lucrative from a financial standpoint, English Clubs such as Manchester United and Arsenal showed their support for competitions organised by UEFA, the governing body of European Football.
The Football Governance Bill also has provisions in place to prevent breakaway leagues like the European Super League from happening in the future. Section 45 of the Bill provides for measures against this very issue. Section 45(5) allows the IFR to classify a competition as a “prohibited competition” if:
(a) whether the competition—
(i) is, or would be, merit-based,
(ii) operates, or would operate, on the basis of fair and open
competition,
(iii) jeopardises, or would jeopardise, the sustainability of relevant
competitions,
(iv) jeopardises, or would jeopardise, the sustainability of clubs
operating teams in relation to relevant competitions, and
(v) harms, or would harm, the heritage of English football, and
(b) any other factors that the IFR specifies in rules.
It is safe to say that the European Super League checked all these boxes. The IFR has the responsibility of ensuring that clubs do not join other leagues such as the ESL in the future to preserve the integrity and the sanctity of the game.
The IFR: Truly independent or just a puppet of the government?
We have seen different bodies independent of the government to oversee and regulate sport. The most notable example of this is the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), which, contrary to popular belief does not come under the ambit of the definition of ‘State’ under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution. The BCCI is an independent body registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. However, it wouldn’t be correct to state that it is entirely devoid of any sort of governmental influence, considering that people holding respectable positions in the BCCI in the past have had ties to the government as well. The question that arises here is whether the Independent Football Regulator will be able to function as an independent body rather than being a mere mouthpiece for the government in power. The whole idea of setting up such a body is to ensure autonomy in its decision-making and policy framing with respect to the betterment of English football, and if it is going to be headed by people who have a political affiliation, then it is not going to serve the purpose that it was intended to.
UEFA has also warned the UK that passing this bill and establishing an Independent Football Regulator could ban England from the European Championship in 2028, which the UK is set to host.UEFA believes that the IFR would necessarily involve theinterference of the UK government in English football, which goes against its principles.
One problem with this Bill is that it does not specify the constitution of the IFR, leading people to infer that it could just be another arm of the government concerning English football. The IFR must have a body of members whose primary interest is in advancing English Football. Although it can be argued that the BCCI, despite its rather invisible political hand guiding it has taken Indian cricket to heights that at one point one couldn’t even dream of, doing the same with the IFR would defeat its very purpose of being set up, putting to waste the several hundreds of hours and fan-led reviews that made this bill a reality. Only time will tell whether things will work out for the better or not.
Of course, it is still only a bill at this stage, but just a little more than ten days after coming into power, the newly elected Labour government had already reintroduced the bill in the Parliament, and the bill is expected to be passed with an overwhelming majority. The passing of this bill could lead to a new era of English football where fans are assured power is not left in the hands of the few, and that they have a say in the manner their club is run as well. Football heritage in England goes way back, and with the advent of this bill, football could be restored to its former glory where the game is only about two things: football and the fans. It will be interesting to see how the IFR deals with current club owners.
One case that sparks a bit of interest is that of Newcastle United F.C. While they had secured a top four finish in the 2022/23 season after a fresh takeover by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, there have been questions as to whether this takeover would have been allowed if there was an IFR, considering that the UK government acted as an invisible hand to facilitate this deal. The passing of this bill will bring about a much-needed change in the way football clubs are owned and run, with the IFR acting as a neutral player, with a focus on trying to get the game back to the fans.
The Author is a legal Scholar from India
(The Image used here is for representative purposes only)
References:
English football “needs independent regulator to stop lurching from crisis to crisis,” BBC Sport (2021), https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/59406087
Football Governance Bill, 2024, cl. 6.
Football Governance Bill, 2024, cl. 10.
Football Governance Bill, 2024, cl. 15.
Football Governance Bill, 2024, Schedule 5
Football Governance Bill, 2024, cl. 45(5).
INDIAN CONST. art 12.
Roan, D. (2024, September 14). UEFA warns England could be banned from Euro 2028 over regulator concerns. BBC Sport. https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c9wkjnvpy2ko
Comments