• Charliepanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    Anything that the Premier League is so strongly against must be a good move, in my view.

  • Russpanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    Anyone who is supportive of the move should read the Crouch Report. An independent regulator who is appointed by, funded by and accountable to the Government is not independent, it's simply handing control of football to the political climate of the day. A government controlled regulator will make decisions around things like football club ownership based on whatever suits the political expediency of the government of the day.

    It is a terrible idea.

  • trickylens
    3 months ago

    On considered conviction policy, or paid advocacy, grounds?

  • JimShadypanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    What types of things are you concerned they would, or wouldn't, get involved in?

    If it can help with levelling the financial disparity between divisions I think that would be a good thing. I mean clearly the PL will always be the most wealthy, but the breadcrumbs the rest of the pyramid receive needs addressing - and the PL have shown they are incapable of doing the right thing themselves.

  • trickylens
    3 months ago

    Undoubtedly.

    But not necessarily worse than what we currently have.

  • Charliepanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    I take your point, but as somebody who hasn't read the Crouch Report and much prefers to spout random opinions based on little more than my total suspicion of everything the EPL or FA do and say, I still believe that (almost) any regulator is better than no regulator. We can argue about the nature of such regulation and refine it at a later date, but in the meantime I'd prefer whatever Starmer & Co think about football and the fans' role in it to anything the EPL and FA have to offer. Both those organisations have proved themselves to be incapable, short-sighted and totally in thrall to the interests of big money.

  • Russpanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    My primary concern is that decisions on whether to allow or block ownership of clubs will be determined not by their suitability on a financial, moral or commercial level to be the owner of a supposed community institution, but ny how important it is to the government to keep that individual or organization sweet. "We'll let you buy a stake in XYZ FC if you agree to this particular political demand we have that's completely unrelated to football" is not a direct consideration for the Premier League or EFL, but it 100% will be under an "independent" football regulator owned by the government of the day.

  • Charliepanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    Agree with this, but it's just part of the picture. And the Premier League didn't exactly cover itself with glory over ownership issues with Newcastle and Man City anyway, so something different could hardly be worse. I'd like a regulator to also look at how money is cascaded down the pyramid, PSR and how it is effectively protecting the Sky Six, lack of replays in the FA Cup, fixture planning that puts the interests of TV companies ahead of those of fans, sponsorship by betting companies and I'm sure I could come up with a whole lot issues if I gave it some more thought.

  • Russpanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    Independent regulator: we're going to change the way money flows in football

    Multiple foreign investors who own Premier League clubs: if you do then we will reconsider our multimillion dollar commercial investments in the UK and look to use our money in countries where the government doesn't interfere with our playthings

    Independent regulator: we've had another look at this and think football is just fine the way it is, let us know if there's anything else you'd like us to fix for you

    I think your belief that the government is going to do a better job of regulating football than the football authorities is wishful thinking of the highest order. I think it will be worse, not better.

  • trickylens
    3 months ago

    At worst the same, surely? Football is run for big business, not fans. There is half a chance that a regulator run by representatives of the people, might actually consider the wishes and interests of the people. No? Of course that might require the people to get their shit together, and overcome their apparent desire to bend over and take it up the arse from anyone who expresses a financial interest in rinsing them.

    Your argument is effectively for complete de-regulation, and the industry marking it's own homework. Luckily we are right in the midst of an avalanche of such regulative environments that provide direct evidence that the outcomes of that philiosophy are really more than quite shit.

    Who regulates the regulator? If it's the government, then it's the people. If it's the industry, it's no fucker - biggest cheque wins.

  • Russpanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    Right, but - in theory at least - football regulating itself means that decisions are made solely in the best interests of football. As soon as government is involved, bigger geopolitical considerations come into play.

    I'm not opposed to the idea of an independent regulator at all, it's the ideal scenario. I'm opposed to them being appointed by and accountable to the government, because at that point they're not independent at all. Maybe the solution is to create an independent body, have government and industry jointly fund it, and then have leadership elected jointly by fans, government and industry.

  • trickylens
    3 months ago

    Just look at football. This contention is immediately disproved.

    Your move. Whatchagonnado?

  • Russpanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    I just told you what I'd do. I'm not arguing that status quo is good, I'm arguing that the proposed replacement is worse. It solves none of the existing problems and introduces new ones.

  • trickylens
    3 months ago

    ....isn't an 'independent' regulator just a third party power base able to be controlled by other interests? How is it better, except that you would rather not know who owns it, than the people actually own it? I don't want an unknown quantity. I don't want business interests that have taken over football and fucked it. I want the community to be represented.

    'Independent regulators' are just merkins (something for the cunts to hide behind), in the same way that enquiry's are just kicking the can down the road.

  • Russpanorama_fish_eye
    3 months ago

    I don't think there's an optimal solution for exactly the reasons you state, but I do think the least bad answer is diversified accountability. Government, EPL, EFL, FA, and fan groups should all be direct stakeholders.

    I don't think we're disagreeing on this topic. I think we both understand that governmental ownership of this role simply allows Middle Eastern wealth funds and American institutional investors to lean hard on a wide range of MPs to ensure they get what they want. I think a government regulator is the fastest way to a breakaway European league, the removal of relegation, and regular season games in other countries.

  • trickylens
    3 months ago

    The difference is that I don't see how this becomes less likely with unaccountable regulation.

Search
  • Enter search query (at least 3 characters).

Your options