The barrage of Premier League spin and misinformation about the Football Regulator bill continues with West Ham vice chair Karren Brady the latest to scaremonger and spout nonsense about the possible implications of the bill.
The Football Governance Bill, created through the input of football fans was debated in the House of Lords with Brady pontificating on the proposed regulation.
You see, the real reason why Brady and the like are protesting is not because of some sense of moral duty. No, it’s to try and keep the status quo (and the money)…
Brady bizarrely claims that a regulator, whose job it will be to level the financial playing field, will have “dangers” because it may “risks suffocating the very thing that makes English football so unique, the aspiration that allows clubs to rise and succeed in our pyramid system.”
That’s all nonsense of course. The regulator instead will improve the resilience of clubs financially and tackle rogue owners. It will promote fairness not remove it.
Brady could do well to look at the history of the Premier League if she bafflingly thinks it isn’t a closed shop at the moment. Who has won the title? Four clubs – Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea and Arsenal are multiple winners. Liverpool, Blackburn Rovers and Leicester City once apiece. Of those seven, five are arguably the richest sides, Blackburn won it when bankrolled by Jack Walker (breaking transfer records to bring in the likes of Alan Shearer) which leaves Leicester as the outlier, the fluke as it were. In what way is a League with one winner outside of the top five in the last thirty years not a closed shop? What hope does that give any smaller club – the hope of a once in a generation fluke – is that it?
And looking away from the football on the pitch in what way is a top-flight hogging huge sums of money not a closed shop? It’s even a closed shop to the extent it tries to help any relegated clubs to return, giving them loads of parachute payments to assist them and destroying the financial stability of the Championship in the process. It’s a League that, thanks to its financial resources, hoovers up all the young talent into multitudes of youth teams, often neglecting talent because it cannot progress into the first-team due to the sheer number of expensive, experienced players already in there.
You see, the real reason why Brady and the like are protesting is not because of some sense of moral duty. No, it’s to try and keep the status quo (and the money). We, as football fans should do all we can to see through this rubbish and back the bill. After all, it’s not just some sort of anti-Premier League agenda – it’s also a bill to counter dodgy owners (and we’ve had enough of them), to stop clubs falling into financial difficulty (yep, been there) and also to make it a more level playing field. It’s really a no-brainer and it’s clear why the Premier League are opposing it – they don’t want their closed shop (and cash) to be broken up and fairness to come into play.
In fact I think the Premier League are so blind and so guided by money that they don’t see that this bill is actually good for them, because by definition it’s good for all clubs. It helps clubs by promoting better ownership, by helping in times of trouble, by introducing necessary rules. If a “big” club falls out of the top-flight the financial abyss will no longer be there because money will be shared more equally. So, it benefits everyone – from the tiny clubs to the giants.
So why write this? What has Premier League reaction about regulation got to do with a League Two club fansite? Well, it’s because I think the Premier League complaints get unfair attention and the counter argument isn’t given. I care about football and fairness. This site may only be miniscule in the football world but I feel it’s right for all of us who love the game to counter the Premier League spin. If you’re a football fan, I hope you agree that for the good of the game, for the good of all clubs, we need fairness and regulation.
How can a club like Vale,(if they did get in the championship) compete with clubs that come down . They are getting millions not in one season, but multiple seasons for failing. What other buisinus would give firms money for failing. Ask Brady to ask Lord Sugar what he would do if a team failed and got relegated.
Well said all round mate. It’s just greed.
The Premier League is a closed shop, particularly as far as the so called “Top Six” are concerned. They were bricking it when Newcastle were taken over by the Saudi PIF and its bottomless pit of money. As soon as it happened the rules about linked sponsorship deals were changed so Newcastle couldn’t challenge their financial supremacy. Yet Chelsea were allowed to sell two hotels on Stamford Bridge for eyewatering money to a company also owned by the new American owner. As is mentioned in Rob’s article, the use of parachute payments is iniquitous. These payments are made over three years on a sliding scale which average out at over £30 million over club over the three years. This is why so often relegated clubs are immediately promoted back to the Prem in the season following their demise. How anyone can say that the sport does not need a regulator is simply because they are solely motivated by self-interest.
Best thing to happen top six go to European league of their own. Premier league was the worst thing ever happened to football. They give practically little T 7o lower leagues and even moan about that. Good accountants cheating the regulations. If I remember right stoke sold their ground to beat the financial fair play.
The EPL and EFL benefit from the loan player system, especially with Premier League youngsters reinforcing the playing squads of lower division teams. Perhaps what EFL clubs haven’t exploited enough is the income stream that can be derived from sales of their best younger players to the EPL. If the new Regulator Legislation doesn’t come off, EFL clubs should use every opportunity to extract multi million fees from EPL clubs that spot and rush to sign the EFL’s best young talent. After all, EPL clubs are all too familiar with price gouging.