Will the independent regulator fix football?

“Terrible”, “suffocating” and “harmful to the Premier League”.

The opponents of an independent regulator for English football have not been shy by making their feelings known, so why does the United Kingdom government want to get involved? What kind of person is needed to lead it? And have the upper flight clubs be properly consulted?

Lisa Nandy, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sports of the United Kingdom, joined Ayo Akinwolerere, Matt Slater and Phil are in the Athletic FC podcast to discuss.

Your questions and answers have been edited for clarity. Look at the full podcast below or listen to Apple either Spotify.

The English game has existed for more than 150 years. So why does the government need to get involved?

Nandy: I could answer that in a word: Bury. But bury, BoltonOldham, Reading… We have just had so many examples in the last years of clubs whose existence is under threat; Real concerns about the sustainability of the entire pyramid.

Football is an ecosystem and we have to make sure of three things. The first is that fans must be in the center of the game and their clubs. Too often, the experience for fans is that when it comes to things such as team colors, heritage, stadium and decisions about things like tickets, they are just a late occurrence. The second is that we want to make sure that each club has a decent and sustainable business plan. And we want to make sure that each club has a decent owner. And those three things do not have to be not negotiable for football. Many clubs are already doing them, but not all.

That is why we need a regulator. We believe that football could put their own home in order and the objective of this is to encourage it to do so, but if they cannot, there must be support for fans so that someone can intervene. And make sure we don’t have episodes like what happened to Bury again.

Deeper

Explained: What is the independent football regulator, when will it begin, how does it work?

One of the main complaints of the Premier League club executives is that they have not been consulted properly. That’s true?

Nandy: It is completely false. There is no truth crushing in that.

When I was appointed seven months ago after winning the elections, one of the first meetings I had was with the executives of the Premier League, and then a meeting with the premiere clubs.

Nandy arrives at a cabinet meeting in January (Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg through Getty Images)

I told them: ‘This is not just one. We want to work with you closely, as we will do with the EFL and the National League and others as the bill goes through Parliament ‘.

I have had regular meetings, like Stephanie Peacock, our Sports Minister, with them since then.

Some of the Premier League clubs are in a very different place for others. Some support the bill. Some have practical and pragmatic concerns that they want to resolve existing legislation. And then others are completely opposite.

All those views are legitimate. The door has opened, we have met with all the clubs they have wanted and that offer remains on the table.

This is a unique opportunity in life to put fans in the heart of the game and enjoy the sustainability of the entire football pyramid in the coming years, so my door is absolutely 100 percent open.

But the threat of regulation has really prevented the EFL and the Premier League from agreed to agree a financial agreement?

Nandy: I totally disagree. The reason we have ended in this situation is because The EFL and the Premier League could not reach an agreement themselves. If they could have done it in recent years, I am not sure that the last government had ended in a position where they felt that they needed this aspect of the regulation where they have a support where someone can really intervene and make sure there is an agreement that an agreement that It is reached.

The regulator does not enter and makes its own decision on the right agreement between the leagues. The regulator will only act and participate if one of the leagues decides to activate that participation and, at that time, it is for the two leagues to put their own offers on the table and the regulator will choose.

So, the hope is that what will do is take them to the table, make them put reasonable offers and will meet in the middle. But if they can’t, fans have to have some protection.

So who will direct this?

Nandy: There will be no shortage of people who want to do this. I am looking for someone who really cares to put fans in the heart of this game. That is the whole beginning behind the fans directed and it is really important that they come from that starting point. I want someone to put fans first but see the importance of fans in the center of the game, which is therefore interested in the entire pyramid.

We have deliberately conceived this regulator as support. It is not a frontal stop. So, the idea is that football is encouraged to reach your own agreement. We believe that it is very preferable that having to intervene a regulator, but someone who can navigate the complexities around that incentive.

The last thing is that it has to be someone who can order the confidence of a wide range of people. The regulator will have to be someone who can not only go from one room to another and have those conversations, but can unite people.

We can put the regulator as soon as possible. Fans have only waited for too long for this.

The FIFA World Government body and its European equivalent, UEFA, oppose government intervention in football. How does this affect the independent football regulator?

Nandy: We are completely sure in the FIFA and UEFA position in relation to this bill. We have worked with them very closely. No government will do anything that risk our participation in international competitions.

(Upper photo: Visionhaus)