Football Governance

Written evidence submitted by Paul Norris (FG 16)

1. Short Biography

1.1. I am a football supporter with at heart the best interests of the game in this country at all levels. I work in semi-professional football on a voluntary basis and I’ve been involved in semi-professional football as a player, coach (FA qualified), club secretary and general administrator for the past 10 years. I am currently involved with Eton Manor Football Club of the Essex Senior League, however, this submission is made in a personal capacity.

2. Introduction

2.1. Football Governance in this country has become confused at the very highest level since the creation of the Premier League in 1992. This lack of clarity and direction at the top of our national game has directly resulted in a number of worrying developments that, should they be allowed to continue unchecked, risk the very fabric of the sport in this country. These are:

· The increasing trend of irresponsible ownership of a number of our top professional clubs.

· The continued decline of our national teams (not only of England, but also of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland).

· The destruction of non-league football.

2.2. It is my submission that the only way to resolve these issues is for clear and appropriate delineation top of the game. The current Football Association, Premier League and Football League structure is not working in the best interests of the game.

3. Issues around the Ownership of Professional Clubs

3.1. Football at the highest level is now a multi-billion pound international business. Owning a football club, particularly one in a league with the commercial power and worldwide appeal of our Premier League has never been more attractive, and wealthy investors from right around the world have bought, or attempted buy into English football clubs.

3.2. It is important that we do not make generalisations about the pros and cons of foreign ownership. Whilst many fans would prefer their club to be run by the traditional "local boy done good" type of owner (an example might be Steve Gibson at Middlesbrough) or through fan ownership models, the reality is that the finances demanded in order to compete at the top of the Premier League mean that this is now rarely possible.

3.3. However, it is just as possible to have bad English owners of football clubs as it is bad foreign owners. Whilst Portsmouth’s financial collapse over the past couple of years can largely be held up as an example of bad foreign ownership, the collapse of Leeds United’s finances in the first half of the last decade was under what you might call a "traditional English regime". Nationality and personal background of an individual are not relevant factors in relation to whether they are "fit" to run a football club.

3.4. The "Fit and proper persons Test" which was introduced by the Premier League in 2004, in part as a reaction to the events at Leeds United, and since extended to cover the Football League and the Football Conference, considers the following as disqualifying factors for people wanting to become a director of a football club.

· They have power or influence over another Football League club

· They hold a significant interest in another Football League club

· They become prohibited by law from being a company director

· They are filing for bankruptcy

· They have been director of a club while it has suffered two or more unconnected events of insolvency

· They have been a director of two or more clubs of which, while they have been director, has suffered an event of insolvency

3.5. In May 2010, Richard Scudamore, the Chief Executive of the Premier League admitted that the fit and proper persons test was "limited". I agree with that view. The disqualifying criteria as they exist are acceptable in as far as they go, but they do not go far enough. For example, the existing criteria could be tightened so that any person who has been involved as a director in two periods of insolvency with companies of any kind (ie. not just football clubs) would be disqualified from becoming a football club director.

3.6. In addition, the current criteria focus only on the individual concerned and not on the way in which they are buying or intending to run the football club. I do not profess to be an economics expert, but it seems to me that it can not be right that people can purchase a football club, by using the value of that club to secure loans, against its assets, that are required for the purchase. I accept that this would probably be making a special case in relation to football. I do not know for certain, but I presume that in no other industry is a potential buyer prevented from using this specific method in order to purchase a company. However, I believe that in few other industries do the companies involved evoke such depth of feeling in the communities that they represent, and whilst I am sure that there are difficulties with such an approach on which the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills would wish to make representations, from a pure football point of view I believe that this would be a positive step.

3.7. Furthermore, I should stress that I do not believe that football should look to prevent potential owners from purchasing clubs with borrowed money across the piece. If the money is borrowed against their own assets and not those of the club that they are seeking to purchase, then there is a greater amount of protection afforded to the football club should the owner fall into financial difficulty, and I believe that to restrict ownership in such a way would make owning a football club purely a pastime of the super rich, and reduce as opposed to improve opportunities for supporter based ownership models to flourish.

Recommendations

· That the "fit and proper persons test" be controlled and administered by the Football Association.

· That the disqualifying criteria is amended as below to say:

¾ They have been a director of "any company" while it has suffered two or more unconnected events of insolvency

¾ They have been a director of two or more "companies of any type" of which, while they have been director, has suffered an event of insolvency

· That the disqualifying criteria is extended to include any person who is seeking to undertake any form of leveraged buy out that attempts to use the assets of a football club as collateral to secure loans against the club.

4. The decline of Home Nations National Teams

4.1. In the 20 years prior to the formation of the Premier League England had appeared at 3 of 5 World Cups. Scotland had appeared in 5 of 5. Wales had appeared in 0 from 5, but Northern Ireland 2 of 5. From the four home nations that makes a total of 10 qualifications from 20 opportunities. Since the formation of the Premier League England have appeared at 4 from 5 World Cups, Scotland at 1 of 5, and neither Wales nor Northern Ireland at even 1. So the qualification rate of the home nations has dropped from 10/20 (50%) to 5/20 (25%).

4.2. I accept all of the other arguments that exist as reasons for this decline. Children have so many alternatives for entertainment now than going outside and kicking a football around, the Internet, the Playstation, Satellite TV, Social Networking, Mobile Phones etc. But there is something wrong somewhere with the way in which we, as a United Kingdom are attempting to develop young footballers. There has also been a marked move away from the importance of National teams and a switching of emphasis to the strength of the clubs.

4.3. This inquiry is interested in looking at the way in which football is governed, as opposed to youth development and other related issues (which would require a submission all of their own), so I will restrict my discussion to the second point that I raise in the paragraph above. The move of power away from the National teams and towards the clubs.

4.4. In my view the Football Associations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should be a lot stronger with the clubs. There should be an effort to reach collective agreement, maybe as a group of FAs, with the clubs competing in the English and Scottish Leagues around the release of players for international duty. This could be in the form of contracts that state where a player is called for international duty a club must release him for that purpose. Any club found to be in breach of the agreement would be liable to a sanction, for example, a fine of £100,000 for an English Premier League club, reducing in size as you move down the league structure.

4.5. This would send a strong message about the importance of the National teams, which, after all, are the ones that can often have the effect of lifting the mood of a country, and creating an economic boost, especially around the time of a major international tournament.

4.6. In addition, it is my belief that the Football Associations of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, should proactively petition FIFA to review the International footballing calendar. Suggestions have been made that three "International Periods" of 3 weeks duration could be built into the calendar. One to run from the last week of September to the end of the second week in October. A second to run from through the first three weeks of March and the last one to run from the last week of May to the end of the second week in June (obviously in years of a summer International Tournament this period would be extended to last the duration of the tournament. All internationals could then be played in those three periods. This would improve the standard of international football as it would give managers prolonged periods to work on team cohesion and it would improve club football as it would allow managers to better plan for international breaks. I realise that such a proposal represents a significant change to the current position. However, we have a footballing calendar designed for the "old" footballing world, not for the modern international and commercial game that we have.

Recommendations

· That the home National Associations seek to secure a collective agreement with professional clubs in England Scotland with regards to the release of players for international duty. This agreement to include penalties for any club found to be in breach.

· That the home National Associations petition FIFA and UEFA as appropriate, in relation to a review of the International Footballing Calendar.

5. The destruction of the Non-League game

5.1. As any keen horticulturist will confirm, if you kill the roots the flower will eventually die. Make no mistake, non-league football in this country is being killed. Killed by the crippling cost of running a club, killed by the declining attendances, killed by the lack of support afforded to it by the professional game and killed by the amount and the scheduling of televised football.

5.2. I understand that the focus of this inquiry is intended to be the professional game. However, I implore you to consider how the professional game can better support the grassroots. Too often non-league is forgotten about. It is completely maladministered by the Football Association, there is no direction, no plan for support. Last summer Grays Athletic, for financial reasons had to withdraw from the Football Conference. It took the FA until 3 weeks before the season began to decide in which league Grays would play. This caused a huge amount of delay in a number of leagues finalising their constitutions, and consequently left any number of clubs completely unsure as to which league they would be competing in. It delayed the draws for the early rounds of FA Competitions for a number of weeks. All particularly sickening for those involved in non-league when they can see FA Executives sitting in the posh seats at the World Cup in South Africa at the same time.

5.3. And Grays Athletic are not the only non-league club in recent years to have hit financial hardship. Many long standing football clubs, with terrific amounts of history and pedigree have gone to the wall in the past 10 years. Many have reformed, some have not. Darwen FC (founder members of the Football League second division), Runcorn FC, Fleetwood FC, Kings Lynn FC, Tiptree FC, Berkhamsted FC, Enfield FC, to name just a few. That list includes some clubs that were once big names in semi professional football, but who have either disappeared or had to be reborn.

5.4. I will deal with the lack of leadership and direction in non-league in the next section of my submission. So I turn first to the crippling costs of running a non-league football club. The simplest cost to eliminate is the cost of league registration fees and cup competition registration fees. I personally believe that it is a disgrace that non-league football clubs are expected to pay to enter the FA Cup. The Cup is about giving the underdog a chance. In my view no non-league team from the Conference all the way down, entering the FA Cup, the FA Trophy or the FA Vase should be charged a competition entry fee. These fees could easily be recouped by charging the Premier League sides extra to enter the FA Cup. I would reckon that if you charged every Premier League club an extra £5,000 per year to enter the FA Cup you could easily remove entry fees for non-league clubs, and probably have money left to spare.

5.5. Secondly, televised football has always hurt non-league attendances in mid-weeks. However, since the introduction of the Saturday evening televised game (5.15 / 5.30 kick off) attendances have noticeably slumped. People would prefer to sit in and watch a live game on the TV than get out and support their local grassroots club. It may be the case that even if these games were no longer televised that those supporters would not return to watching non-league games, but I believe that it should be considered as an option.

Recommendations

· That FA competition entry fees should be removed for all non-league teams. This to be financed by charging all Premier League clubs £5,000 per year extra for entry to the FA Cup.

· That the televising of games at 5.30pm on Saturday evenings is prevented, in an attempt to boost non-league attendances.

6. Overall Governance Structure

6.1. In addition to some of the specific problems and possible solutions that I have discussed elsewhere in this submission, I believe that there is an overarching structural problem in the governance of English football that has existed since the Premier League breakaway. In my view allowing the Premier League and the Football League to exist separately of the FA as corporate bodies is largely responsible for the lack of cohesive management and governance on the national game. I submit that power should be centralised in the Football Association (which needs an entirely separate review of its functions – again not for this submission or this inquiry). The Premier League even dropped the reference to the FA in its name in 2007 further highlighting that they almost see themselves as equal to the FA in terms of importance as a governing body.

6.2. However, I believe that if the FA was in control of all decision making, game development, and had the ultimate decision making deciding power in relation to commercial negotiations above a trio of game bodies, which each would have a managing director who reported directly to an elected FA Chief Executive then there would be a clearer delineation of roles and responsibilities. In my view the trio of game bodies should operate as below:

· The Elite Game Board, which would have responsibility for the management of the Premier League and the England National team.

· The League and Competitions Board, which would have responsibility for the management of the Football League divisions, the FA Cup, the Football League Cup and the Football League Trophy.

· The Grassroots Game Board, which would have responsibility for non-league football, the organisation and structure thereof, as well as the non-league specific FA competitions (FA Vase and Trophy) and for the FA’s youth development programmes and the new National Football centre.

6.3. Each of these boards would have the right to take all decisions relating to the day to day running of their areas of responsibility. However, in relation to suggestions to change competition rules and in the negotiation of commercial contracts the individual boards would only be able to make recommendations and the final decision would be for the Football Association Chief Executive and the Football Association Executive Board to take a final decision.

6.4. I understand that this restructuring is a radical suggestion, which is unlikely to be taken forward. However, I feel that failure to accept that the Premier League breakaway has caused confusion and a lack of direction at the top of our National game will lead only to the accentuating of the problems in the three specific areas that I have already outlined.

7. Conclusion

7.1. I conclude by re-iterating that the individual recommendations that I have made in response to the very real problems that I have identified in sections 3, 4 and 5 of my submission would go some way to addressing some of the immediate governance problems that English football faces. However, it is my submission to the inquiry that in order to achieve the very real and necessary changes to the way English football is governed, consideration should be given to the kind of more radical change that I proposed in section 6.

7.2. I would be happy to be invited to appear in front of the Select Committee to allow them the opportunity to further explore the written evidence provided in this submission. I attach an Annex with a full composite list of my recommendations.

ANNEX A

LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS

· That the "fit and proper persons test" be controlled and administered by the Football Association.

· That the disqualifying criteria is amended as below to say:

¾ They have been a director of "any company" while it has suffered two or more unconnected events of insolvency

¾ They have been a director of two or more "companies of any type" of which, while they have been director, has suffered an event of insolvency

· That the disqualifying criteria is extended to include any person who is seeking to undertake any form of leveraged buy out that attempts to use the assets of a football club as collateral to secure loans against the club.

· That the home National Associations seek to secure a collective agreement with professional clubs in England Scotland with regards to the release of players for international duty. This agreement to include penalties for any club found to be in breach.

· That the home National Associations petition FIFA and UEFA as appropriate, in relation to a review of the International Footballing Calendar.

· That FA competition entry fees should be removed for all non-league teams. This to be financed by charging all Premier League clubs £5,000 per year extra for entry to the FA Cup.

· That the televising of games at 5.30pm on Saturday evenings is prevented, in an attempt to boost non-league attendances.

· That the FA structure is altered to include three separate Game boards and provide a clear delineation of responsibility.

January 2011