"In the discussions to inform next week’s white paper on football, many stakeholders were attempting to get the government to understand this is much more than a “once a generation” moment. They described it as possibly the only opportunity to properly assess the English game and where it’s going, since nothing like this has ever been done before. It is quite a thought, that illustrates the “enormity” of what this government are taking on. In 160 years of codified English football, there has never been anything like an attempt at a holistic assessment of the sport and what it should look like." [Extract from accompanying article]
I agree with @PragueAddick that selling this to FAPL fans will be difficult, but perhaps the greater danger will come from the lobbying of FAPL Owners & Directors, who unlike the majority of clubs lower in the pyramid will be able to afford professional lobbyists to act on their behalf, both in Parliament and to rally their own fans to their perceived vested interests.
Taken as a whole, the number of fans in the 72 EFL and countless lower league clubs must surely match the number of FAPL fans, but will enough of them take the few minutes necessary to lobby their MP in support of the FLR recommendations? Even with all our recent woes, will all Charlton, Bury, Rochdale, Birmingham & Derby fans take the opportunity to make their voices heard? It will take a massive effort on social media at all levels of the game to overcome the inertia of the many ostriches out there.
@N01R4M, it’s only one person but when I heard Tim’s comments I assumed the Sun had run a piece to order from the lobbyists. Having read it this morning thanks to the link above, I have to concede its not so. It looks like the Sun might be on our side, for now. Yet even so, Tim seems to have been triggered by nothing more than a bit of racy language in there. It’ll be interesting to see how the dialogue with him goes. I’m treating it as qualitative research.
The publication of the UK government's long-awaited white paper proposing reforms to shake up football has been delayed to later this month. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64539586
Not sure this is the right thread - couldn't seem to find another one. But anyway..
With reference to our esteemed Prime Minister getting freebies to see Arsenal, courtesy of the Premier League.
Charlie Methven has been sticking his oar in (and quite right too in my opinion) on the Football Governance Bill.
He is quoted as saying: 'This is a clear conflict of interest, and a pretty drastic one at that. The decision as to whether to include parachute payments in the remit of the regulator is a massive multi-billion-pound decision, which neither Keir Starmer nor anybody who works in No 10 Downing Street should seek to have any influence over, given the lavish financial benefits received and which continue to be received. If Labour's previous commitment to include the parachute payments has been overturned, then there would need to be an inquiry.'
"Strengthened" legislation to establish an independent football regulator for the elite men's game in England is set to be introduced to Parliament by the government.
The regulator will be given "new powers" as part of the Football Governance Bill, including over the Premier League's controversial multi-million pound 'parachute payments' that are given to relegated clubs.
It will "explicitly require clubs to provide effective engagement" with fans on changes to ticket prices, and any proposals to relocate home grounds.
It will no longer be required to consider government foreign and trade policy when approving club takeovers, and there will be "a clear commitment" to do more to improve equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
The bill will be introduced on Thursday in the House of Lords in an attempt to speed up the legislation.
The bill, tabled initially in March, failed to pass through Parliament before the general election was called in May.
But in "major changes" to the proposed legislation, the Labour government is set to strengthen the regulator's remit, which will oversee clubs in the top five tiers of the game.
"Strengthened" legislation to establish an independent football regulator for the elite men's game in England is set to be introduced to Parliament by the government.
The regulator will be given "new powers" as part of the Football Governance Bill, including over the Premier League's controversial multi-million pound 'parachute payments' that are given to relegated clubs.
It will "explicitly require clubs to provide effective engagement" with fans on changes to ticket prices, and any proposals to relocate home grounds.
It will no longer be required to consider government foreign and trade policy when approving club takeovers, and there will be "a clear commitment" to do more to improve equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
The bill will be introduced on Thursday in the House of Lords in an attempt to speed up the legislation.
The bill, tabled initially in March, failed to pass through Parliament before the general election was called in May.
But in "major changes" to the proposed legislation, the Labour government is set to strengthen the regulator's remit, which will oversee clubs in the top five tiers of the game.
Sounds like the exact opposite of what we need, it reads like anyone with a shit tonne of money, regardless of where they got it and how many skeletons are in their closet, can buy a club as long as those skeletons aren't in the UK...
"Strengthened" legislation to establish an independent football regulator for the elite men's game in England is set to be introduced to Parliament by the government.
The regulator will be given "new powers" as part of the Football Governance Bill, including over the Premier League's controversial multi-million pound 'parachute payments' that are given to relegated clubs.
It will "explicitly require clubs to provide effective engagement" with fans on changes to ticket prices, and any proposals to relocate home grounds.
It will no longer be required to consider government foreign and trade policy when approving club takeovers, and there will be "a clear commitment" to do more to improve equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
The bill will be introduced on Thursday in the House of Lords in an attempt to speed up the legislation.
The bill, tabled initially in March, failed to pass through Parliament before the general election was called in May.
But in "major changes" to the proposed legislation, the Labour government is set to strengthen the regulator's remit, which will oversee clubs in the top five tiers of the game.
I think I read somewhere (sorry can't remember where) that FIFA stuck there oar in. Suggesting that such a clause amounted to political interference by Government - a clear breach of FIFA (and UEFA?) rules that would not be tolerated. And that England would be booted out of all international competitions at both club and international level if it was applied.
Sounds like the Govt. have rolled over and played dead on this one.
"Strengthened" legislation to establish an independent football regulator for the elite men's game in England is set to be introduced to Parliament by the government.
The regulator will be given "new powers" as part of the Football Governance Bill, including over the Premier League's controversial multi-million pound 'parachute payments' that are given to relegated clubs.
It will "explicitly require clubs to provide effective engagement" with fans on changes to ticket prices, and any proposals to relocate home grounds.
It will no longer be required to consider government foreign and trade policy when approving club takeovers, and there will be "a clear commitment" to do more to improve equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
The bill will be introduced on Thursday in the House of Lords in an attempt to speed up the legislation.
The bill, tabled initially in March, failed to pass through Parliament before the general election was called in May.
But in "major changes" to the proposed legislation, the Labour government is set to strengthen the regulator's remit, which will oversee clubs in the top five tiers of the game.
The Tory government stuck it in at the time of closer ties to Saudi Arabia to support investment into the area by foreign assets. Now they'll be free to make decisions regardless of what countries the government wants to invest in us.
Comments
(Includes a video of part of the recent HoC debate.)
"In the discussions to inform next week’s white paper on football, many stakeholders were attempting to get the government to understand this is much more than a “once a generation” moment. They described it as possibly the only opportunity to properly assess the English game and where it’s going, since nothing like this has ever been done before. It is quite a thought, that illustrates the “enormity” of what this government are taking on. In 160 years of codified English football, there has never been anything like an attempt at a holistic assessment of the sport and what it should look like." [Extract from accompanying article]
I agree with @PragueAddick that selling this to FAPL fans will be difficult, but perhaps the greater danger will come from the lobbying of FAPL Owners & Directors, who unlike the majority of clubs lower in the pyramid will be able to afford professional lobbyists to act on their behalf, both in Parliament and to rally their own fans to their perceived vested interests.
Taken as a whole, the number of fans in the 72 EFL and countless lower league clubs must surely match the number of FAPL fans, but will enough of them take the few minutes necessary to lobby their MP in support of the FLR recommendations? Even with all our recent woes, will all Charlton, Bury, Rochdale, Birmingham & Derby fans take the opportunity to make their voices heard? It will take a massive effort on social media at all levels of the game to overcome the inertia of the many ostriches out there.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64539586
https://www.petervarney.com/post/independent-regulation-is-a-must
With reference to our esteemed Prime Minister getting freebies to see Arsenal, courtesy of the Premier League.
Charlie Methven has been sticking his oar in (and quite right too in my opinion) on the Football Governance Bill.
He is quoted as saying: 'This is a clear conflict of interest, and a pretty drastic one at that. The decision as to whether to include parachute payments in the remit of the regulator is a massive multi-billion-pound decision, which neither Keir Starmer nor anybody who works in No 10 Downing Street should seek to have any influence over, given the lavish financial benefits received and which continue to be received. If Labour's previous commitment to include the parachute payments has been overturned, then there would need to be an inquiry.'
Full article here: MP vows not to make calls regarding football watchdog, but PM refuses (msn.com)
"Strengthened" legislation to establish an independent football regulator for the elite men's game in England is set to be introduced to Parliament by the government.
The regulator will be given "new powers" as part of the Football Governance Bill, including over the Premier League's controversial multi-million pound 'parachute payments' that are given to relegated clubs.
It will "explicitly require clubs to provide effective engagement" with fans on changes to ticket prices, and any proposals to relocate home grounds.
It will no longer be required to consider government foreign and trade policy when approving club takeovers, and there will be "a clear commitment" to do more to improve equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
The bill will be introduced on Thursday in the House of Lords in an attempt to speed up the legislation.
The bill, tabled initially in March, failed to pass through Parliament before the general election was called in May.
But in "major changes" to the proposed legislation, the Labour government is set to strengthen the regulator's remit, which will oversee clubs in the top five tiers of the game.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9vn8r2zwyno
Sounds like the Govt. have rolled over and played dead on this one.
The Tory government stuck it in at the time of closer ties to Saudi Arabia to support investment into the area by foreign assets. Now they'll be free to make decisions regardless of what countries the government wants to invest in us.