What purpose does the regulator serve?
In summary, the goal is to maintain the financial stability of football clubs. The Independent Football Regulator (IFR) will be responsible for ensuring that clubs have sufficient funds to operate sustainably and will take measures if they do not meet this requirement. It will attempt to collaborate with clubs and leagues to address any issues, but ultimately holds the authority to enforce significant consequences and will have legal backing to do so.
What about questionable owners?
The regulator’s second duty is to evaluate the suitability of owners and directors of football clubs. By utilizing HMRC information and collaborating with the National Crime Agency, the government asserts that the regulator can conduct more thorough investigations into potential investors than previously possible. Additionally, the regulator has the power to compel an owner to relinquish their ownership if they are deemed highly unsuitable. When assessing new owners, the regulator must also consider the foreign and trade policy objectives of the British government.
What is the purpose of requiring the IFR?
The concept of a regulatory body for English football has been around for some time, but gained momentum following the financial turmoil that recently occurred in the industry. While top clubs sought out new sources of funding from a proposed Super League, some clubs at the bottom, like Macclesfield and Bury, were forced to shut down. Others, including Southend and Reading, are currently facing financial struggles. The sport’s claim that it could handle its own affairs was no longer convincing to politicians and many within the sport.
When will it be ready?
It is uncertain, but there is potential for a regulator to be functional by the summer of 2025. This is contingent upon the swift passing of the Football Governance Bill by parliament (which is expected, as it has support from multiple parties), a smooth establishment of the organization (with key personnel currently being hired), and a completed assessment of the state of the game. Once this is done, the IFR will likely begin granting three-year provisional licenses, after evaluating the finances of clubs and approving plans for long-term viability (although some clubs may already have sustainable businesses, while others may not).
Does this correspond to the “new deal” for football?
You can view the image in full screen.
Yes and no. A long-running argument over how much money the Premier League should give to the English Football League to ease financial problems at lower-league clubs blew up last week as the Premier League walked away from a deal. Once the IFR is established it would have the power to impose a deal should one continue to prove elusive. But the “new deal” is also linked to a number of other issues in the game, such as how many matches should be played and the amount of money clubs should be allowed to spend on players; factors that the government says would not be in the regulators’ remit.
“Disregard newsletter advertising”
after newsletter promotion
What is causing frustration in the Premier League?
The Football Association and EFL released official statements welcoming the introduction of the regulator. However, the Premier League did not share the same sentiment. Instead, the Premier League expressed concerns about the potential negative effects of legislation on the competitiveness and attractiveness of English football. As the dominant force in English football for the past 30 years, it is not surprising that the Premier League is unsettled by the arrival of a new body that will dictate its actions. The clubs, on the other hand, are displeased by the possibility of bearing most of the costs for operating the regulator. Yet, it is worth noting that the Premier League has been a successful venture for England and has unfairly been portrayed as the antagonist in this discussion. This may also be a source of annoyance for the Premier League.
Lastly, what about the supporters?
“The initial argument made by supporters’ groups was that football was not capable of regulating itself effectively. The implementation of the IFR serves as evidence supporting their efforts. The regulator also has the duty of ensuring that clubs maintain regular communication with their fans and take their opinions into consideration, even if they do not act upon them. Furthermore, clubs must obtain approval from their fans before making changes to certain aspects, such as the team’s colors or crest. However, having proper fan representation at the board level, as seen in Germany, is not currently a priority.”
Source: theguardian.com
