Football regulator told: Give well-run clubs a bigger slice of game’s billions
The Independent Football Regulator has been urged to mandate a new deal between the Premier League and English Football League that funnels more money to well-run clubs.
The IFR this week published a new consultation on the club licensing regime it will implement from next year, which will give it the power to suspend a non-compliant team from competition.
Think tank Fair Game, which represents more than 30 EFL and non-league sides, argues that incentivising clubs that set a good example would be a more effective approach.
If the Premier League and EFL fail to agree a new financial redistribution deal in the coming months, the IFR has the power to impose one that it sees fit.
“For Fair Game, the solution has to be to incentivise good behaviour,” said CEO Niall Couper.
“The Regulator now has the power to oversee football’s financial distribution – worth £3.2bn a year. Link the two. Those that meet the Regulator’s requirements get cash, and those that don’t, don’t.”
Speaking this week, IFR CEO Richard Monks emphasised that it wanted to work with clubs to help them meet its licensing requirements rather than seeking to punish infractions.
Fair Game: Promising reforms but devil in detail
The key pillars of the club licensing regime will be having enough money to survive sudden financial shocks, such as relegation or the loss of owner funding; active fan consultation; and a commitment to good corporate governance.
The IFR’s latest proposals have beefed up the latter area in particular, following criticism that equality, diversity and inclusion requirements were too soft.
“At first glance this looks promising. The devil as always will be in the detail,” Couper added.
“There remain some fundamental questions around fan engagement: Who designs the consultations? Does a club have a duty to respond to the findings? What sanctions will be put in place if consultations don’t take place?”
Non-compliant clubs face having conditions attached to their licences, which could then be suspended by the IFR if they do not adhere to them.
“Taking away a club’s license is a nuclear option. We’ve got lots of other tools,” Monks said.
“If necessary, we could determine that a club has met the conditions to be granted a provisional license, but immediately we might have to put a control on if we thought they were high-risk.”