[Football] Football Governance Bill / Independent Football Regulator

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

They were his words until he realised the negative reactions perhaps? "Out of context" is an extremely useful phrase in this... errr... context

It's a shame PBOBE came out with that crass comment about the academy and the womens team, either in or out of context, because he also came out with this praiseworthy comment:

'We are aware of our responsibilities to the [football] pyramid because not many of us view ourselves as permanent citizens in the Premier League. We are working bloody hard to stay where we are but we also know at some point in the future we could be back in the Championship or worse.'

 

[American Seagle]

With all respect, are you familiar with the history of our football club?

Of course. Not sure what that has to do with it though.

 

[jackalbion]

Of course. Not sure what that has to do with it though.

Because if this sort of thing is implemented it won't be a small percentage of people who complain. If they move games to America it won't be a 'small percentage' only have to look at what happened when they tried to start a super league. People in English football don't just sit there and complain we actually do something about it.

 

[PeterOut]

I am no expert on football governance nor on Parliamentary procedure, but I found this article interesting - who exactly is behind these clearly engineered attempts to kill / massively weaken the proposed plans? Why is the Premier League sending out instructions to clubs to engage with the media in order to stop / weaken the proposals? Why are Brighton (and many others, it seems) complying with these instructions?
See https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ance-as-lords-tie-up-football-governance-bill

 

[ROSM]

I am no expert on football governance nor on Parliamentary procedure, but I found this article interesting - who exactly is behind these clearly engineered attempts to kill / massively weaken the proposed plans? Why is the Premier League sending out instructions to clubs to engage with the media in order to stop / weaken the proposals? Why are Brighton (and many others, it seems) complying with these instructions?
See https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ance-as-lords-tie-up-football-governance-bill

Well we had the Rod Liddle article flagging off the bill and lord bassam. We have had the martin samuels article ostensibly about brighton slagging off lord bassam and the IFR. Then we had the times article quoting brady and barber (the latter now claims he was misquoted) against the ifr

Sorry but if baroness brady and rod liddle are in one camp, I'm pretty sure I would want ro be in the other!

 

[dazzer6666]

I am no expert on football governance nor on Parliamentary procedure, but I found this article interesting - who exactly is behind these clearly engineered attempts to kill / massively weaken the proposed plans? Why is the Premier League sending out instructions to clubs to engage with the media in order to stop / weaken the proposals? Why are Brighton (and many others, it seems) complying with these instructions?
See https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ance-as-lords-tie-up-football-governance-bill

Your last question is very easy to answer. The club don’t want a regulator.

 

[ROSM]

Your last question is very easy to answer. The club don’t want a regulator.

Is the right answer. It's very interesting that most industries who don't want regulation try and prove it's not needed. Usually by behaving well and conducting themselves in an uber nice way. The arrogance of football has been to try and use Executive and legal power to stop it.

Just for example if the epl had offered a better cascade payment approach. Actively engaged with fan advisory boards and made real changes based on that consultation. Perhaps didn't ignore the finding of the fan ombudsman etc etc

 

[American Seagle]

Because if this sort of thing is implemented it won't be a small percentage of people who complain. If they move games to America it won't be a 'small percentage' only have to look at what happened when they tried to start a super league. People in English football don't just sit there and complain we actually do something about it.

I think you missed my point. If people turn up to the games and buy the media and pay for the streaming rights etc and they make money from it, then it will be a small percentage that complain by definition.

IF they are trying to make it a global brand blah blah then everyone in the UK could complain and it will be a small percentage.
But, fans still have a choice: we can ALL boycott it.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I am no expert on football governance nor on Parliamentary procedure, but I found this article interesting - who exactly is behind these clearly engineered attempts to kill / massively weaken the proposed plans? Why is the Premier League sending out instructions to clubs to engage with the media in order to stop / weaken the proposals? Why are Brighton (and many others, it seems) complying with these instructions?
See https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ance-as-lords-tie-up-football-governance-bill

Makes you wonder what they’ve got to hide.

 

[rippleman]

Your last question is very easy to answer. The club don’t want a regulator.

But why not? If we are fully compliant and doing everything by the book - and I would be amazed and astonished if we weren't - what is it the club objects to? If you are doing nothing wrong, there is nothing to be scared of.

Many sectors are heavily regulated now. You have planning / building control in construction, environmental health, HMRC, the FCA, Solicitors Regulatory Authority.and I could go on.....and on.......

Sunday reinforced for me the need for a Regulator when Tamworth were screwed out of around a million quid as a result of being denied a replay at Spurs. This was effecively a result of the PL bullying the FA into doing away with replays. Apparently this is because PL players are"playing too much football". And I'll believe that when clubs stop doing pre-season tours to the other side of the world with the sole purpose of generating money.

 

[dazzer6666]

But why not? If we are fully compliant and doing everything by the book - and I would be amazed and astonished if we weren't - what is it the club objects to? If you are doing nothing wrong, there is nothing to be scared of.

Many sectors are heavily regulated now. You have planning / building control in construction, environmental health, HMRC, the FCA, Solicitors Regulatory Authority.and I could go on.....and on.......

Sunday reinforced for me the need for a Regulator when Tamworth were screwed out of around a million quid as a result of being denied a replay at Spurs. This was effecively a result of the PL bullying the FA into doing away with replays. Apparently this is because PL players are"playing too much football". And I'll believe that when clubs stop doing pre-season tours to the other side of the world with the sole purpose of generating money.

Cost and aggravation.

 

[Bozza]

Minister for Sport Stephanie Peacock has hit back, quite directly too...

"Suggestions made in the media recently around the impact of the Bill and Regulator simply don't add up.'Tenuous claims that the cost of regulation will impact things like a club's academy development, and by default its long-term success, are simply wrong and offensive."​

Mail, sorry >>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...s-promoting-untruths-preserve-status-quo.html

 

[Black Rod]

But why not? If we are fully compliant and doing everything by the book - and I would be amazed and astonished if we weren't - what is it the club objects to? If you are doing nothing wrong, there is nothing to be scared of.

Many sectors are heavily regulated now. You have planning / building control in construction, environmental health, HMRC, the FCA, Solicitors Regulatory Authority.and I could go on.....and on.......

Sunday reinforced for me the need for a Regulator when Tamworth were screwed out of around a million quid as a result of being denied a replay at Spurs. This was effecively a result of the PL bullying the FA into doing away with replays. Apparently this is because PL players are"playing too much football". And I'll believe that when clubs stop doing pre-season tours to the other side of the world with the sole purpose of generating money.

If there is one thing Tony Bloom and Paul Barber OBE can't stand, it is being told their football club has done something wrong. We've seen that in the way the club ignore any rulings which criticise them from the Independent Football Ombudsman, even going so far on occasions as to release their own statements explaining why the IFO have got their findings wrong. This is an independent body with no axe to grind whose purpose is to help protect fans.

Luckily for the club, the IFO has no actual powers. An independent football regulator on the other hand with actual powers who the club can't just ignore? They probably find the idea terrifying

 

[Guinness Boy]

Minister for Sport Stephanie Peacock has hit back, quite directly too...

"Suggestions made in the media recently around the impact of the Bill and Regulator simply don't add up.'Tenuous claims that the cost of regulation will impact things like a club's academy development, and by default its long-term success, are simply wrong and offensive."​

Mail, sorry >>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...s-promoting-untruths-preserve-status-quo.html

I don't blame her. PB's arguments on the Roar were mainly straw man and 'what if'. Meanwhile it looks like Brady and a couple of others are using delay tactics in the Lords rather than doubling down. It would seem the Premier League are REALLY against this which makes me REALLY for it.

 

[Bozza]

Meanwhile it looks like Brady and a couple of others are using delay tactics in the Lords

Peacock covers that too, if you scroll down to her full statement. Here's that snippet:

"I know that the sight of unelected Tory Peers lining up to oppose a Bill that puts fans back at the heart of the game will sicken many supporters."​

 

[studio150]

But why not? If we are fully compliant and doing everything by the book - and I would be amazed and astonished if we weren't - what is it the club objects to? If you are doing nothing wrong, there is nothing to be scared of.

Many sectors are heavily regulated now. You have planning / building control in construction, environmental health, HMRC, the FCA, Solicitors Regulatory Authority.and I could go on.....and on.......

Sunday reinforced for me the need for a Regulator when Tamworth were screwed out of around a million quid as a result of being denied a replay at Spurs. This was effecively a result of the PL bullying the FA into doing away with replays. Apparently this is because PL players are"playing too much football". And I'll believe that when clubs stop doing pre-season tours to the other side of the world with the sole purpose of generating money.

But surely whether there are replays or not, is not within the remit of the proposed Regulator.

 

[Springal]

Just a reminder OFWAT signed off Southern Waters 40% rate increase

 

[Springal]

 

[pigmanovich]

I take it Peacock is Barber out then

 

[m20gull]

So she doesn't "doubt the sincerity and honesty of their opinions or their integrity" but in the op-ed said their "tenuous claims ... were wrong and offensive".