OutByEaster? Posted March 19 Moderator Share Posted March 19 The Government are now moving forward with this and it's interesting to see the various reactions. I think as with a number of things it was inspired by 'somebody trying to stop the Saudi's doing what they wanted' and the effect that had on relations with the UK government, but there's still an awful lot of positive stuff in it. It promises an oversight for football with the potential ability to stop clubs ripping off supporters, attempting to join other leagues, move away from their local areas and fall into real financial difficulties. The Premier league hate it - which probably means it's a good thing. Anyways, if you're as bored as I am in international week and you want to have a look, all of the documents are here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/football-governance-bill-supporting-documents#:~:text=The Football Governance Bill will,local communities football clubs service. Quote Supporting documents for legislation which introduces an independent regulator for professional clubs in the English football pyramid. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 19 Author Moderator Share Posted March 19 It's interesting to note that the Independent football regulator considers debt to be the primary concern in terms of the financial health of a football club and includes debt as one of the threshold measures that are required for them to grant an operating licence to any club in the top five divisions in England. It would be fascinating if Utd were forced to address their debt issues before being granted a licence. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 10 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: It would be fascinating if Utd were forced to address their debt issues before being granted a licence. But United don't really have a debt issue. On the face of it the amount seems like a huge amount of debt but in reality they make so much money that they can service the debt quite comfortably. Debt is only an issue when you don't have a reliable income stream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 19 Author Moderator Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, villa89 said: But United don't really have a debt issue. On the face of it the amount seems like a huge amount of debt but in reality they make so much money that they can service the debt quite comfortably. Debt is only an issue when you don't have a reliable income stream. And the IFR insists that debt is kept at levels that could cope with a crisis collapse of income stream. In reality the punishments would involve issuing United a three year provisional licence while they sorted themselves out, but it'd still be great to see debt finally considered. While their debt is greater than their annual income, they'll be concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talldarkandransome Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 18 minutes ago, villa89 said: But United don't really have a debt issue. On the face of it the amount seems like a huge amount of debt but in reality they make so much money that they can service the debt quite comfortably. Debt is only an issue when you don't have a reliable income stream. They do have a debt issue, they were bought by a loan which they are still paying back. United would be fooked. Sustainability isn't the same as debt, yes they can fund the debt but they are still in massive debt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted March 19 VT Supporter Share Posted March 19 I fear the worst tbh, who's gonna pay for this quango and what government regulator has done any good, the water ones a disaster for starters. More jobs for the rugby playing Eaton boys network. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPJCB Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 14 minutes ago, tinker said: I fear the worst tbh, who's gonna pay for this quango and what government regulator has done any good, the water ones a disaster for starters. More jobs for the rugby playing Eaton boys network. Government sponsored regulators pay far too little to satisfy the desires of the Eton old boys network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: The Government are now moving forward with this and it's interesting to see the various reactions. I think as with a number of things it was inspired by 'somebody trying to stop the Saudi's doing what they wanted' and the effect that had on relations with the UK government, but there's still an awful lot of positive stuff in it. It promises an oversight for football with the potential ability to stop clubs ripping off supporters, attempting to join other leagues, move away from their local areas and fall into real financial difficulties. The Premier league hate it - which probably means it's a good thing. Anyways, if you're as bored as I am in international week and you want to have a look, all of the documents are here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/football-governance-bill-supporting-documents#:~:text=The Football Governance Bill will,local communities football clubs service. Whatever is driving this is almost certainly not in the interest of fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted March 19 VT Supporter Share Posted March 19 16 minutes ago, JPJCB said: Government sponsored regulators pay far too little to satisfy the desires of the Eton old boys network Ian Coucher, chairman of Ofwat. Sounds like he's on a considerable amount, while allowing the water Companies to pump untreated sewage into a natural waterways, maybe he can sort football out. "Coucher lives in Argyll & Bute, Scotland and lists his car as an Aston Martin DB9. He married Tanya Nightingale in July 1993 in North Yorkshire. He was previously married. He enjoys cycling and birdwatching and owns a country house and 173-acre estate by Loch Sween on the Sound of Jura in Scotland which he has named ianland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iain_Coucher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 19 Author Moderator Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, tinker said: I fear the worst tbh, who's gonna pay for this quango. According to this quango, the football clubs are going to pay for them through a levy and the licensing fees. Wouldn't be government without a bit of cash would it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted March 19 VT Supporter Share Posted March 19 (edited) 2 hours ago, tinker said: I fear the worst tbh, who's gonna pay for this quango and what government regulator has done any good, the water ones a disaster for starters. More jobs for the rugby playing Eaton boys network. I sort of agree. The bill represents a certain failure. Don't think government on principle should have its hands on sport, apart from consumer safety-related issues (ensuring that safe gear is used -- cricket bats don't have toxic handles, etc.). Historically, football has prospered without government hand-holding. Can't see it assisting the game in the end, and I can definitely see it undermining it. But I do understand that commentators have been calling for it for years, and I respect many of the people who have been calling for it. Edited March 19 by Marka Ragnos 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted March 20 VT Supporter Share Posted March 20 10 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said: I sort of agree. The bill represents a certain failure. Don't think government on principle should have its hands on sport, apart from consumer safety-related issues (ensuring that safe gear is used -- cricket bats don't have toxic handles, etc.). Historically, football has prospered without government hand-holding. Can't see it assisting the game in the end, and I can definitely see it undermining it. But I do understand that commentators have been calling for it for years, and I respect many of the people who have been calling for it. The principle of it sounds good but historically these bodies don't work, our government's have a historically proven track record of failure when it comes to regulators. Not sure what role the FA plays in all this, isn't it their role to govern football matters? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 The problem is, that however bad the private ownership/self(ish) governance has probably been overall, to have a "Govt body" throwing rules etc around is even worse, Govt bodies are usually completely incompetent, pander to interest groups and overall make things much worse overall. Govt involvement in rule making within the game, is a disaster imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 The current rules regarding sustainability are decided by and designed entirely to benefit the establish big clubs, and don't actually stop bad owners or clubs going under. I don't see how a regulator could make things worse than they are currently. What exactly are people afraid of here? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 They can’t really throw open the doors of “spend what you like as long as it isn’t club debt” whilst they are powerless to stop countries buying clubs. If there were controls to stop owners like City and Newcastle flooding in then I’d say let private owners spend what they like as long as money injected is gifted to the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 5 hours ago, tinker said: Not sure what role the FA plays in all this, isn't it their role to govern football matters? This hadn't occurred to me, but yeah, they proudly describe themselves as "English football's governing body". Whoops, not anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 18 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: According to this quango, the football clubs are going to pay for them through a levy and the licensing fees. Wouldn't be government without a bit of cash would it? at least the lower grounds might have another group booking every home game that's my biggest gripe with it, same as these clowns don't really represent the general population the people they put in charge of looking after the interests of your average football fan will have very very little in common with your average football fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 20 Author Moderator Share Posted March 20 6 hours ago, tinker said: Not sure what role the FA plays in all this, isn't it their role to govern football matters? They used to, but the big clubs didn't like it so they formed the Premier league and broke away from the FA. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icouldtelltheworld Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, ThunderPower_14 said: I don't see how a regulator could make things worse than they are currently. What exactly are people afraid of here? Socialism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted March 20 VT Supporter Share Posted March 20 What does the government really know about football? Nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts