FAR TOO LONG, FAR TOO LAX

As an attention-grabber, it was tops. “Liverpool to be scrutinised by the Government” screamed the headline, bringing visions to mind of Tom Hicks’ breakfast cereal flying to all parts if he read it.

In announcing the altogether dryer prospect of an ‘All-Party Parliamentary Football Group’ (APFG) inquiry into football’s corporate governance last week, chair Alan Keen mentioned “case studies in governance” (zzz) but woke everyone up with “…including Liverpool FC.” Never mind that Liverpool is being personality-driven into the ditch and that its board structure is neither unusual nor, with Hicks in-built minority, all bad.

Actually, few headlines screamed. And without the Liverpool reference, the “new look at corporate governance structures” would barely have made the ‘news-in-briefs’ next to the Rugby League in southern editions.

It’s a “new look” because the APFG has been down this road before. And got lost. In 2003, they began a nine-month investigation which produced a “comprehensive” report – ‘Football and its Finances”, published on February 11 2004 and…rubbished by its major targets on February 12. “There has been slow, or no, progress on the majority of the group’s recommendations” lamented Keen last week. Hence the new inquiry.

It only covers England and Wales (‘Scottish Football’ has its own group). But the APFG is, unsurprisingly as populism equals success in democracy, the largest of the 530+ all-party groups (including one on ‘Cider’ for which I’ll gladly take the minutes). It has 150 MPs and Peers, over 10% of parliament. Yet sheer numbers haven’t translated into impact. It is resolutely an advisory body, hamstrung by its own prime objectives: “To increase the profile of the football industry” but merely “(raising) awareness of current issues facing the game” – little more than this column does.

“It is not us who will change football,” Keen acknowledged in 2004, “it’s the authorities who have to make the decisions, listening to the views we have gathered.” And that’s the problem. A group without a parliamentary select committee’s authority can only ‘have a word with their mates.’ And their ‘mates’, the Government, were already reluctant to force anything on their mates, the Premier League (PL), the self-styled “best league in the world”, “England’s finest export.”

Before and after the APFG report, the Football Task Force and Independent Football Commission (IFC) fell by the same wayside. “Official reports into what ails football have come along like buses…(producing) near-identical analyses” sneered David Conn, correctly, in his 2005 book ‘The Beautiful Game?’

In the almost-immediate aftermath of the APFG’s announcement, the IFC launched its final report at its ill-attended Upton Park funeral (“could’ve taken place in the foyer” sneered the Mail’s Charles Sale, correctly). Most of its recommendations had been accepted over the years, claimed much-derided chairman Professor Derek Foster. But it achieved some small things, no big ones. Like the APFG.

To borrow ‘Football and its Finances’ description of football’s insolvencies, “it’s a shameful record.” Particularly as the APFG came up with some good stuff. A series of common-sensical recommendations on wealth re-distribution and governance/insolvency – how a lack of governance too-often produced insolvency…”not all of which can be blamed on ITV Digital” (despite many chairmen’s subsequent efforts).

What it lacked was enforcement mechanisms, which meant that being absolutely right, as the report invariably was, meant nothing. Opponents dismissed recommendations simply by talking rubbish, clearly PL chief Richard Scudamore’s tactic.

It’s not addressing the relevant issues,” he declared, without adding what he thought those issues were. “It’s a little bit narrow,” he complained, presumably preferring A3 paper to A4. And “top clubs in Italy and Spain don’t redistribute as much as we do,” he whined, boiling everything down to competition with European Leagues and, in terms of lower-league structures, hardly drawing a relevant comparison.

It didn’t matter that Scudamore’s statements collapsed on merest scrutiny (you must admire his consistency…you can’t admire much else).

The report recommended doubling re-distribution of the PL’s TV money to 10%. Scudamore claimed that this donation, £30m phased in over the three-year duration of the latest TV contract, would destroy clubs’ European competitiveness, while insisting that the PL was “the envy of Europe.” Not much to envy if £10m per year could destroy it. And no reference to the English League’s seven European Cup wins in eight years while 25% of TV money went south.

And only a passing ‘Oh, by the way’ to the PL’s own evidence to the report: “The top-five in last year’s Premier League (the current top-four plus…Newcastle) earned more TV money than all 72 Football League Clubs combined.”

“You can’t argue that change is not necessary when the Football League (FL) and the Football Conference have done so,” argued Keen. “We have to strike the right balance between looking after our top clubs and the rest of the game” cried Scudamore. “A balance needs to be struck,” agreed the report, “but the current one is not the right one.” It’s obvious who’s right, probably even to Scudamore (though some would argue I’m giving him too much credit there). But the imbalance grows to this day.

Where there has been progress on the report’s recommendations that progress had invariably started by the time of the inquiry; for instance, disclosure of agents’ fees. The FL instigated full disclosure from January 1^st 2004. Internal squabbles between Ferguson and erstwhile horse-racing chums John Magnier and JP McManus had opened a brief window on how Man Yoo’s agency dealings were being kept in the family…before the Glazer family slammed it shut. And Portsmouth soon followed suit, for some reason, while Harry Redknapp was manager first time around.

Agents weren’t a central focus of the inquiry - “maybe the subject of a future inquiry” said the report. In August 2006, that inquiry was announced before being submerged by Stevens’ investigations. The mighty Gary Lineker commented: “The money going out of the game is mad, especially when it is such a simple job,” although he may just have been talking about presenting ‘Match of the Day.’

The ‘Fit and Proper Persons’ test was also waiting to happen, with the FL, if not the PL, in no need of persuasion (sometimes you forget FL chairman Sir Brian Mawhinney is a Tory). But, as we now know, the test – introduced for “anyone who can become a director” still seems to mean “anyone can become a director.” And when an owner’s fitness and propriety is called into greater question over a poor managerial decision than a poor human rights and financial record, you despair of progress.

The big one was in Chapter One: “…the football authorities to be given an explicit duty to actively promote the competitiveness of the professional game,” Keen concluding at the end of the report: “Football is nothing without competition.”

But as to how to award this duty? They “recognised work the football authorities are currently doing on this issue” – which was more observant than most. Yet whatever this work was…clearly hasn’t worked for clubs, except in Scudamore’s beloved Europe. “The football authorities have it in their own hands,” Keen continued. But no-one’s making them attend catching practice.

It’s unfair to disparage the inquiry panels, though. One eye-catching addition in 2008 is Iain Duncan-Smith. The ‘quiet man.’ The worst Tory leader of a succession of stinkers. But as a genuine fan, a Spurs season-ticket holder, exactly the sort of panellist required.

Few other Tories with him which, despite Mawhinney’s fine work, is a good thing – Old Etonians reached their last FA Cup Final in 1883. Few women, either – one in 2004, two in 2008 – which isn’t so good. But that aside, a reasonable cross-section of football experience, ranging from club-rugby player Andy Reed, president of Loughborough FC “for a time” to Clive Betts, a club chairman – albeit the All-Party Parliamentary FC.

Betts is “frequently found in the stands at Sheffield Wednesday,” watching the Owls rather than wandering aimlessly, one assumes. Colchester season-ticket holder Bob Russell has seen every level from Conference to Championship at Layer Road since 1992. Alan Keen was ‘tactical scout’ at Middlesbrough – looking for tactics a more arduous job under Jack Charlton than Malcolm Allison. And though Joan Walley strikes a discordant note with: “happily, not being able to buy tickets is not a problem facing Port Vale”, it’s purely unintentional.

In 2003, the interviewees’ cast-list was impressive – bar the execrable Scudamore. Journalists Conn and Mihir Bose, fan representatives from Man Yoo upwards, PFA officials, business and broadcast experts, Peter Ridsdale’s insolvency ‘expertise’ and David Mellor’s fan-loyalty expertise (a lifelong Chelsea fan since he was…a lifelong Fulham fan). It would have been fascinating to interview Bates. But 2003/4 was a golden-era in football because Bates wasn’t in football.

But ‘Football and its Finances’ wasted so many valuable people’s valuable time – this year they’re virtually starting from scratch. To the people they had, and have, to influence, the “good of the game” is hippie nonsense. “For far too long” said the report, “standards of corporate governance within football have been far too lax.” The APFG have their work cut-out changing that.

‘MotorMurph’ is written by Mark Murphy

Entry Filed under: MotorMurph Column

© The Right Result 2008

Terms & Conditions | Contact Us