Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.

You are not connected. Please login or register

New football regulator

6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1New football regulator Empty New football regulator Wed Mar 20 2024, 08:17


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Looks like this is coming so what do we think? Will it help clubs lower down the league and stop clubs going bust and stop people buying clubs like the Reading owner?

If it helps with issues like that and gets the Premiership to cough up a fair amount to help the football pyramid then i'm all for it.

I did see David Sullivan from West Ham moaning already saying it will diminish the Premier league which to me is just rubbish and the sort of comment you would expect from a Premiership chairman or owner. They couldn't care less about the likes of Bury and other clubs who went to the wall. I think they should be coughing up more cash to lower league clubs, there are 72 other professional clubs not just the elite clubs.

2New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed Mar 20 2024, 08:24


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

EFL chairman Rick Parry says regulator can be 'game-changer'

New football regulator 17878207

EFL chairman Rick Parry believes the introduction of an independent regulator to football could be a “game-changer” which attracts more credible owners to the game.

The long-awaited Football Governance Bill was introduced at parliament yesterday with hopes high that it will be passed as law by the time of a General Election.

In the shorter term, establishing a regulator could force through an improved funding deal from the Premier League to the EFL projected to be worth an extra £900million over six seasons.

But in the longer term, Parry believes that reducing the pressure on owner funding will also lead to a more stable and fairer environment for “good owners” including fan-run clubs.

The regulator will also be given added powers of authority to track club finances, with tests and measures currently applied only at the start of an individual’s tenure now able to be repeated periodically.

Parry said “bonds and guarantees” would also be required to ensure that owners cannot switch-off funding and that those in breach of regulations could be removed from power in the most extreme circumstances.

That, said the EFL chairman, could help guard against the sort of situation faced by Bolton Wanderers in the 2018/19 season when previous owner, Ken Anderson, failed to find a buyer for the club in the Championship, allowed the business to run up huge tax bills and failed to pay wages.

The league changed its own constitution, including the previous ‘fit and proper’ test applied to new owners after Bury’s demise in 2019 but recent examples like Wigan Athletic and Reading – whose owners had previously invested heavily but then cut off the funding – show a different approach is needed.

“The regulator is clearly going to have an input into owners and directors tests,” Parry told EFL reporters in a briefing yesterday. “We think our current tests are pretty robust, and have definitely improved it over the years.

“Regulators will have greater statutory powers, criminal prosecutions for people who make false declarations etc, so the test will be sharper.

“But the key thing is that we get a fairer redistribution of revenues. The government has talked about Bury and Macclesfield but we tend to talk just as much about Derby, Reading, Bolton, Wigan – the biggest inequities come in the Championship and they float from the need for clubs to try and compete with the parachute clubs.

“You have parachute clubs receiving £50-odd-million, wage bills of £60-80m, all the other clubs receiving £10m in central funding and losing £15m a year trying to compete with wage bills of £30m or less. It is no surprise that in each of the last six years that two of the three promoted sides have been parachute clubs. That is where the major tension arises.

“If you look at what happened at Wigan, Derby or Reading, it isn’t that the owners came in with bad intentions or they were bad owners. In each case lots of money went in chasing the dream but it gets to the point where either the owners cannot continue funding or they don’t want to. And it leaves the clubs high and dry.

“What the regulator will do – and we have never been able to do – is they are going to require guarantees, bonds and assurances that the funding will be in place, that they can’t just turn the tap off. The big issue for me is not the badges or the colours – as important as those things are – fans really want to know that their club is going to be sustainable and exist in the long-term, so that is where the big benefit comes.

“The regulator is not going to do one-off tests, but periodically, to make sure they are still fit and proper, making sure they are honouring their commitments and putting the funding in that they said they would put in. if they don’t, they have the ability to tell them to divest, to put in trustees to run the club in the meantime. They will have powers that we don’t currently possess.”

One of the biggest challenges faced by the EFL and any incoming regulator is to try and mend a disproportionate economy in the Championship, and one that Parry believes has contributed to “blips” in the last several years which have threatened the existence of clubs like Bolton, who have spent time in the Premier League.

“It is not a simplistic solution, and the regulator is not going to be able to wave a magic wand overnight,” he said. “The whole system has to change.

“One of the problems with Bolton, at least until Sharon (Brittan) and the new consortium came in, was that there wasn’t a queue of new owners wanting to jump in because of all the financial challenges in the Championship.

“When you are told after talking over a club that you must writing out cheques for £15m a year just to stand still and survive, there isn’t an enormous pool of people who are willing to do that.

“The redistribution and reducing the dependence on owner funding, going hand in hand with the owners and directors, becomes really important. One of the points we have made to government recently is that it is brilliant to have a new licensing system, brilliant to look at the solvency of clubs, but actually just losing £15m a year just because redistribution isn’t sorted all we are going to do is find out that half the clubs are insolvent, and what happens then? Does the regulator just not licence them? That can’t be the answer because it just puts them out of existence.

“Unless we get the redistribution right, hand in hand, you can’t have a partial solution. It is a total picture.

“You don’t want to stifle ambition, or investment, but at Championship level it is that catastrophic view that you have to be prepared to write out cheques of £15m a year just to stand still, let alone think in terms of competing with the parachute clubs.

“It is a big, big reset that is necessary, not a tinkering around the edges, “It really is a gamechanger.”

One of the arguments levied against the introduction of tighter regulations on ownership and the introduction of an independent regulator is that it could dissuade some from investing in football, knowing that there is scope for greater outside interference than before.

Some see it as a restriction on enterprise but Parry believes a more predictable economy outside the Premier League will help to bring more of the right people into the game.

“We have been asked whether it will stop good owners coming in – but why would it do that?” he said.

“It is a better environment with more certainty and clarity. It is fairer, so surely that will produce better long-term investors and, in reality, it will make fan ownership more viable if you don’t have to write out enormous cheques and run clubs on a break-even basis, you can spread the net more widely.”


3New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed Mar 20 2024, 08:52


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Motormouth Jordan has his opinion.

4New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed Mar 20 2024, 09:10



To be honest it is all beyond my understanding at the moment.

I guess the idea must be similar in a way to how other things are regulated like...

the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), Office of Communications (Ofcom), The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem), Water Services REgulation Authority (Ofwat), the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) and the Northern Ireland Authority for Utility Regulation (UREGNI)

The following being the Guidance details of the UK regulated professions and their regulators
(Updated 14 February 2024)

I can't say I've really had much if any involvement with existing regulators, so don't have enough understanding on what they do to be able to apply it to the world of football.

Football however is a different beast to all the other regulated trades and industries as it is basically a private members club, with each club having a vote on the running of football (at least at PL level and I assume the same applies at the EFL too?).

The powers the football regulator will have, will have to be given to him (or her) through an Act of Parliament and he/her can only regulate within those powers.

I can imagine that will cause a great many problems and the legal profession will be kept very busy in the courts.

I've no idea if Joe Public will be able to take their complaints to the regulator or if the regulator is solely concerned with how the game is run and the operations of the clubs and club ownerships.

I don't understand how the government can stop going bust if the owner of the club stops putting his hand in his pocket - which basically Eddie did.

It really wouldn't surprise me if Saudi Arabia sets up a rival European Super League sooner or later as they've already bought golf and pretty much Boxing already!

Sorry, not much help really, am I, on this!

5New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed Mar 20 2024, 09:24


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

And I'm no use. You might as well give a chimp a set of bagpipes.

6New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed Mar 20 2024, 10:29

Ten Bobsworth

Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

boltonbonce wrote:And I'm no use. You might as well give a chimp a set of bagpipes.
Another door opens for Placemen and Jobsworths. What's not to like?

The other day I happened upon Ian Bridge's submission, on behalf of BWFCST, to the Tracey Crouch gang. Against my better judgement I read it. Well not all of it tbh, just so much of it as one man could stand without weeping.

7New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Tue May 14 2024, 19:46



Regulator needed because of greedy clubs - Bolton chair

A football regulator is needed because Premier League clubs are "arrogant", says Bolton chair Sharon Brittan.

She was addressing a select committee on Parliament's Football Governance Bill on Tuesday.

The legislation would grant powers to a body, independent of government and football authorities, to oversee clubs in England's top five men's tiers.

Premier League chief executive Richard Masters said he was supportive of the bill's objectives but was concerned about "unintended consequences".

The phrase was also used in the Premier League's statement about the proposed bill in March.

When pressed for an example, Masters said financial controls for 116 clubs could stop investment and "slow down the development of English football".

Bolton's Brittan was asked about Masters' comments and criticised the top flight for its "greed".

"I think they have conducted themselves poorly - I don't think they have presented themselves in the right way," she said.

"I think they are arrogant, I think they think they are an island on their own and sailing off and forgetting 14 clubs in the Premier League have come from the English Football League (EFL).

"'Unintended consequences' - I'd love to sit down with Richard. They are just words, there are no arguments behind the words.

"In my opinion this is back to greed, envy, jealousy. I cannot comprehend how someone can view this through that lens when we are a football pyramid. What we do as custodians affects this country and beyond."

Bolton are in the play-offs after finishing third in League One and were last in the Premier League in the 2011-12 season.

The legislation has been developed after a fan-led review took place following issues with financial mismanagement and the proposal of the European Super League.

The review said a regulator would be needed to ensure the financial stability of the men's professional game.

It will have powers revolving around three core objectives: improving financial sustainability of clubs, ensuring financial resilience across the leagues and safeguarding English football's heritage.

The EFL has largely been in favour of the regulator and chairman Rick Parry underpinned his support during his hearing.

"We view it positively," Parry said. "It’s going to be a tougher environment - football needs a tougher environment. We’ve had 30 years to get this right and we’ve failed.”

Also speaking at the hearing was Steve Parish, co-owner and chair of Crystal Palace. He said: "If we could have a regulator that made all of the right decisions all of the time and wasn't lobbied by the big clubs more than the smaller clubs then, of course, it may be a benefit.

"But I am severely worried about the potential unintended consequences and the power of the big clubs to dominate the debate."

Brighton's chair and owner Tony Bloom added he too was concerned.

"The relationships between the Football League and the Premier League, I think, have got a lot worse since there was talk about regulating football," Bloom said.

"I think, overall, although there has been difficulties over the years I think it has worked well.

"But ever since the Football League have realised, if we can't get a deal they know there will be a regulator, things have not worked out.

"There [are] unintended consequences and I think it is much better for football - the Premier League, the Football League, the National League, the FA - to work things out themselves."

The bill was introduced in March but will need to go through parliamentary process before it is made law.

8New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Tue May 14 2024, 23:27


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

9New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed May 15 2024, 02:09



A few (Bolton) notes from Sharon's 30 minutes in front of the committee.

States a number of times that it will cost us £20m for one season in the Championship and that it is impossible to compete against teams who are receiving parachute payments from the Premier League.

She states there are 5 investors who are funding the club.

She infers that profit is not a motive for her and the investors but the balance / conflict she will have if we go up is asking the investors for more money knowing the club will not be competitive in that division.

Someone asked how did Ipswich manage to get two promotions straight to the PL - the answer was they are funded by a huge north American pension company - money equals league positions.

Evatt has refused thee managerial jobs in the Championship at triple his current wages.

My view of her from the video is that she seeks an ideal world to live in (so do I for that matter) and no matter how commendable and desirable that is the world is not like that and unfortunately these days money means more to most than morals and values.

It is worth a watch though - link below she starts at just past 2:30 on the video and speaks for 30 minutes (along with Cambridge United's Chairman)

10New football regulator Empty Re: New football regulator Wed May 15 2024, 08:12

Ten Bobsworth

Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington

Cambridge FC's Chairman is probably right in saying that real-time monitoring shouldn't be a problem in footie.

So why's it taken so long to get to grips with what's been going on in the Post Office for the last 25 years?

Maybe the simple answer is 'bad owners'?

Sponsored content

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum