Football governance

[The Prophet]

Good stuff.

[xLiaaamx]

Into the new age of government controlled football we go then.

[LV]

Great. Something else for them to bungle 

[Nobody]

I'm sure they will make sure the 'Top 6' get all the protection they need. 

[Guest]

Warren G gonna mount up

[Fantail Breeze]

Intrigued to know how this will work. The regulations and potential enforcement will be interesting.

[Guest]

"ARE YOU DOING THE CORRUPTION?"

"Yes."
"Cool, let us in on it."

[Kid Icarus]

All depends on how independent it truly is and how long it stays that way before being corrupted.

 

[Guest HTT II]

They couldn’t run a bath so won’t make any difference to how football is run. If anything it will end up more corrupt!

 

 

Edited April 26, 2022 by HTT II

[FloydianMag]

23 minutes ago, HTT II said:

They couldn’t run a bath so won’t make any difference to how football is run. If anything it will end up more corrupt!

 

 

 

And the lawyers will make a fortune.

[elbee909]

Like a kind of 'football association' I guess?

[Groundhog63]

It'll be like their "Corruption Tzar" overseeing things like the £37BILLION pumped into Dido Harding's Test & Trace scam. 

John Harding MP who, by amazing coincidence, is her husband. 

 

Remember, when the ESL was being touted, Boris Johnson was all for it until the shit hit the fan. 

 

 

[The Prophet]

Regulators aren't corrupt, but they do tend to be slow and bureaucratic. Given they're usually concerned with balancing the interests of the industry vs the interests of the public/customer/end user it's interesting to see what it's remit will be and how it goes about it.

[Guest neesy111]

1 hour ago, elbee909 said:

Like a kind of 'football association' I guess?

 

No, the FA is their to run the game.  When things get too big and too many stakeholders then you need a regulator.

[The Prophet]

My guess is that all twenty clubs will be registered or licenced and part of the terms of that registration will be to abide by a Code of Conduct. That Code of Conduct will encompass everything from finances to general behaviour.

[Abacus]

Apparently, about 16% of the PL's revenue goes to the lower leagues, with approximately half of that in the form of parachute payments.

 

For me, one simple thing would be to abolish parachute payments altogether and redistribute that money more fairly instead. They massively distort competition in the lower leagues and so do more harm than good.

 

Incidentally, the sports minister also confirmed that with a new regulator any new owners and directors' test would be stricter financially on terms of sources of funding, but wouldn't impose any new rules on state ownership, which seems a pretty direct reference to us and Man City.

[Yassassin]

It’s really odd that clubs in lower divisions are apparently seen as deserving of support without any examination into how they are managed. Why should a well-run Brentford, say, be effectively taxed into supporting a badly run club lower down even though it is innovative and careful husbandry that has got Brentford to where they are and they need to maximise their revenue to stay there, not transfer funds to a basket case lower down. Is there any detail at all as to how the proposals would have prevented Bury going to the wall, it all seems to be the pitches at the local rec are crap so Premier League clubs need to give more money to Sunderland or Burton or whatever other failing club

 

I do agree that parachute payments are ridiculous mind if the £100m Fulham wage bill story is true

[number37]

That's quite a sobering thought about parachute payments if you've effectively got 8% of Premier League revenue circulating among a dozen or so of the 72 Football League clubs. No wonder things are skewed, then you throw in owners the likes of Bury, Macclesfield, Oldham have to endure and what a fine mess we've got. 

 

AND IT'S LIVE... 

[r0cafella]

Without them, we get clubs running up massive debts and trying to reach the premier league. Also very odd that the Tories want to impose revenue sharing amongst competitors. 

[Stifler]

1 hour ago, The Prophet said:

Regulators aren't corrupt, but they do tend to be slow and bureaucratic. Given they're usually concerned with balancing the interests of the industry vs the interests of the public/customer/end user it's interesting to see what it's remit will be and how it goes about it.

Yet OFGEM have just allowed the energy companies put prices up by 50%, despite the majority of them making record profits.

[Stifler]

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

Without them, we get clubs running up massive debts and trying to reach the premier league. Also very odd that the Tories want to impose revenue sharing amongst competitors. 

You’ll start seeing them buying small clubs and them milking the new money really.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Stifler

[Guest neesy111]

Just now, Stifler said:

Yet OFGEM have just allowed the energy companies put prices up by 50%, despite the majority of them making record profits.

No.

The retail side of those businesses are not making those profits, did you not see the 50+ companies going bust over the last year?

[Lazarus]

27 minutes ago, neesy111 said:

No.

The retail side of those businesses are not making those profits, did you not see the 50+ companies going bust over the last year?

 

29 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Yet OFGEM have just allowed the energy companies put prices up by 50%, despite the majority of them making record profits.

 

Aye - as discussed in general chat the energy companies have indeed put their prices up hugely but their still making a loss on the domestic side. This why theres talk of another huge increase in October so that they can break even.

 

And by 'they', i mean the retail suppliers, as Neesy pointed out. The exporation, drilling and research side of the industry are separate companies, at least in a legally defined companies house way.

 

Getting off topic i know but a few domestic energy suppliers are basically nothing more than call centres.

[gdm]

 

[HaydnNUFC]

Fuck off.