FA Professional Game Board
Response to the All-Party Parliamentary Football Group Inquiry into Football Governance
April 2009
The Professional Game Board (PGB) is a committee of the FA Board which performs on behalf of the FA Board certain delegated functions in relation to the Professional Game. Accountable to the FA Board, its membership comprises 4 nominees from each of the Football League and the Premier League. Its constitution and remit are contained in the FA Handbook 2008/9 (p27 et seq).
In this capacity the PGB has some observations regarding UEFA’s submission to the All Party Parliamentary Football Group’s Inquiry into English Football and Its Governance.
“UEFA, an association of 53 national associations, is the governing body of European football and organises competitions for national teams and clubs.”
The PGB recognises the principle of subsidiarity in the governance of football and welcomes UEFA’s indications of support for this important principle. UEFA’s main purpose is to organise cross-border competitions played between Clubs or national sides at the European level. The FA is the national governing body for football in England while the world governing body is FIFA, bringing consistency to football governance at the international level. The four national associations in the UK are accountable to FIFA in that capacity. The PGB recognises and supports this established structure for the regulation and governance of football.
“The successful model both in football and other sports in Europe (but also throughout many parts of the rest of the world) is that of having a single governing body for each national territory – namely the national association (or federation).”
The FA is the national governing body for football in England, bringing together a wide range of interests. Within this general framework the Leagues run their own competitions and related matters. This allows each organisation to focus on their own priorities within a system where co-operation on shared interests is a founding principle. The single association model is standard around the world, with some variations in how it is applied at an operational level. These variations arise from different cultural and historical traditions and from the wide range in scale that exists, from those with the weakest and least-developed football infrastructure and those with the strongest. There is therefore no single definition of the best way to run football, and homogeneity is not an objective in itself. The test of the English model for the governance of football is whether it works.
Recent reforms prompted by Lord Burns have led to the formation of the Professional Game Board within the FA, bringing together those responsible for running the professional game, building on the long history of productive co-operation that has characterised the English game.
The English model is working when assessed by the usual measures of success. Attendances are strong throughout the Leagues and in FA competitions, integrity standards are regarded as high, and participation at the grassroots remains strong. Youth development is well funded, although improvements in standards are still needed and are being sought by all parts of the professional game. Investment in stadia over the past fifteen years is in excess of £2.4 billion; the professional game’s commitment to grassroots development has seen nearly £700 million go to build or improve a new generation of multi-sport pitches, indoor facilities and changing rooms; and the performance of the national side in the past twenty years in qualifying for and performing in tournaments is improving slightly. English Club football tops the UEFA rankings, suggesting that the playing standards at the highest levels have improved in recent years, while the economic success of English football (revenues to the Premier League, the FA and the Football League together make England the most successful football economy in Europe) allows for high investment levels. The general good economic health of English football does not mean that there are no concerns, especially in the current recession, and the Leagues and the FA continue to keep the issues of financial viability under review.
“In practice, and so that football can develop in a coherent and balanced way, it is vital that the rights and duties of professional leagues be clearly set out in the statutes (constitution) of the relevant national association.”
The statutes of The FA provide for this. All competitions in England, including the Premier League and Football League, must be sanctioned by The FA as must the competitions’ Rules.
“Nevertheless, to ensure coherence across the sport and the country, uniform sanctions should be fixed for certain types of offences (if a player attacks a referee, for example, the sanction should be the same for a player in the highest league as in the lowest league).”
It is right that there should be broad consistency across the sport and the country, and it is the case that for some offences the sanctions are consistent regardless of level. However there also needs to be sufficient flexibility to allow penalties to be appropriate for the level in question. For example, match based suspensions work well in the professional and semi-professional game where they can be readily administered but time based suspensions are more appropriate for lower levels.
The FA retains ultimate responsibility for on and off-field discipline.
“Furthermore, at the highest professional level, it can be dangerous for professional leagues to become involved in certain tasks such as refereeing or certain disciplinary matters. Both FIFA and UEFA policy is that professional leagues should not be involved in refereeing (appointments, etc), and that this should be a service provided by the national association”.
The professional game in England shares a strong commitment to FIFA statutes and recognises that it is an important practice for competition organisers to maintain a proper distance between themselves and refereeing and some other disciplinary matters. It is also important for competition organisers to take the right decisions about the improvement of refereeing standards, ensuring that resources are made available, best practice is disseminated and training is of the highest quality.
This balance is achieved in England through the structure of the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials), an arms-length body formed by The FA, Premier League and Football League. This ensures that The FA, Premier League and Football League have no input into the selection of match officials, although this practice is not universally applied elsewhere in world football.
High refereeing standards are a key component in the quality of football in this country, something that is widely recognised around the world. English football continues to make this knowledge available to other national associations and leagues. FIFA President, Joseph Blatter, has spoken highly of the PGMO stating that it should be seen as a template for the professionalisation of refereeing.
“Therefore, whilst the theory of having three or more competing governing bodies – each trying to expand its own area of competence as far as possible – in a particular sport in a particular country may bring some benefits (e.g. through competition between the different bodies), such benefits are relatively minor and the net effect of having competing regulators in the same territory is generally inefficient and detrimental to sport.”
As explained above, the Football Association, the Football League and the Premier League are not competing governing bodies; each League looks after its own affairs within the established football framework, the main benefit being the discipline and efficiency that comes from a precise focus. Neither League has expressed any desire to extend them beyond the established limits, or to change the relationship with the FA. In any event The FA holds a ‘golden share’ in the Premier League which ensures that any substantive changes to the structure of the competition need to be approved by The FA. It is not correct to see the three bodies as “competing regulators”, rather the relationship is one of co-operation. The system is adaptable to changing circumstances and challenges, especially where this will aid clarity and transparency.
“In summary, the inter-relationship between the FA and the two main professional leagues should be the FA as national governing body and overall regulator responsible for the sport; and the two main professional league organisations responsible for organising the top-level club competitions in England.”
This describes the existing position and neither the Premier League nor the Football League wishes to challenge this arrangement. Both Leagues sit within the established system of English and international football governance and both participate in shared structures with the FA (PGB itself, PGMO and so on). Where there is variation in governance standards this is usually explained by the different circumstances each body faces. For example, stadium standards are rightly more onerous for the Premier League and the Championship than for the lower divisions while the financial reporting structures Premier League clubs operate under, which meet UEFA Licensing requirements, would be prohibitively burdensome for some clubs in the Football League. Youth Development obligations are also related to scale – the cost of implementing the criteria laid out for clubs to attain Academy status is not viable for all professional clubs. Rules such as the Fit and Proper Persons test are broadly aligned and in each case are in addition to the common requirements of national law.
“ In certain countries (including England), the absence of a proper legislative framework means that the control and development of top-level sport can simply end up being the outcome of pyrrhic turf wars between sports bodies, with generally negative results for the sport and country in question.”
The European Union covers countries with different legal traditions. Some have written Constitutions and detailed legislative codification for activity in many walks of life. Others, notably the UK, have a Common Law system where codification is less widespread and where there is a tradition for non-governmental bodies to go about their own business without requiring specific statutes so to do. There is no evidence that in general one system is better than another, nor is it the case that disputes in sport are more common under one system rather than the other.
“There appears to be a perceived paradigm in English football whereby the "professional game" is considered to be separate to The FA.”
The structure of The FA represents an association of interests from both the professional and amateur elements of the game. Both the Premier League and Football League representatives at PGB and main Board level take their responsibilities seriously and respect The FA’s remit and role.
“All governing bodies, where they are able, have a duty to try to ensure that football develops in a balanced way across the territory that they cover – on UEFA's level, this means to consider whether it is helpful to the balanced development of European football that investment and development funds go to the parts of Europe where they are least needed.”
The PGB notes that in general UEFA distribution goes to the Clubs and Nations that generate the most revenue, with some solidarity mechanisms for investing in the less developed football economies. In England solidarity mechanisms are long established, with 13% of the Premier League’s central revenues being distributed beyond its own Clubs, while the participation of Premier League Clubs in the Football League Cup contribute to that competition’s value. Further solidarity measures include the funding by the FA and the Premier League of the Football Foundation.
“While there is no uniform European concept or tradition regarding ownership of football clubs, the fan ownership model seen in certain parts of Europe (e.g. at clubs such as Barcelona and Real Madrid) has many positive features, not least the stronger intrinsic link that this structure creates with local and regional communities and the relative degree of stability that may be achieved as a result of this.”
The PGB notes that strong and enthusiastic fanbases exist in Clubs with different ownership structures and traditions and is of the view that all Clubs, regardless of ownership model, need to recognise that fans are their lifeblood and should work hard to maintain and develop strong links. A great strength of English football is the commitment shown by Clubs at all levels to sustain their community ties and no one ownership model should be regarded as being the best.