The follow up report of the House of Commons cross-party committee on Culture, Media and Sport on football governance has attracted considerable attention on social media and elsewhere throughout the day. There has been a variety of reactions, some seeing it as a feeble report and an admission of ineffectiveness, others as giving new momentum to the reform debate.
The follow up report of the House of Commons cross-party committee on Culture, Media and Sport on football governance has attracted considerable attention on social media and elsewhere throughout the day. There has been a variety of reactions, some seeing it as a feeble report and an admission of ineffectiveness, others as giving new momentum to the reform debate. What its longer-term consequences will be remains to be seen.
Sports minister Hugh Robertson has threatened legislation if the Football Association (FA) does not take appropriate action by the start of the 2013-14 season. The committee complains that progress towards reform has been too slow. However, whether the Government really has an appetite to legislate on, and then regulate, football is open to question.
The Government would prefer the FA to put its own house in order. However, as David Conn has pointed out, the essence of the report is that the FA is too weak, particularly in relation to the Premier League, but how that can be sorted out is an interesting question. In his evidence to the committee, Premier League Richard Scudamore argued that the FA was ‘an association of interests’ rather than a governing body.
In a 93-page report, the committee covers a number of issues, but their main concerns are providing for greater engagement for supporters and the financial risks taken by clubs and the lack of transparency about their ultimate owners. In one of the more practical suggestions which could be acted on without taking up valuable legislative time, they do suggest that the Government should convene a group of experts to help remove barriers to supporter involvement and ownership.