Fan-led review white paper. Christine Seddon on BBC Radio 5 live this morning

Well done Christine - the statement on the White Paper is currently being delivered in the House of Commons ….

On the BBC Parliament Channel if anyone interested 👍
 
Excellent as always.

Just been watching Tracey Crouch in the debate in the Commons. Superb advocate for football and football fans.
 
Doesn’t speak for everyone, as well as she speaks.

The death of English football as we know it if this goes through.

We’ll all sit around in twenty or thirty years if I’m still here and wonder where it all went wrong, this will be it.
 
Thatseasider said:
Doesn’t speak for everyone, as well as she speaks.

The death of English football as we know it if this goes through.

We’ll all sit around in twenty or thirty years if I’m still here and wonder where it all went wrong, this will be it.
Click to expand...
Why? (no agenda here, I'd just love to hear what the other side of the argument is, when this has been pretty well received)
 
cside said:
Why? (no agenda here, I'd just love to hear what the other side of the argument is, when this has been pretty well received)
Click to expand...
I’ve written pretty long posts about this previously m, I just don’t have the time right now.

Simply put, the PL and the rest of the League for all their faults became the zenith for domestic professional football in the world because they were largely left free to operate how they wanted.

With that freedom came risks, and you had Wimbledon, Derby, Portsmouth etc who had spectacular and for their fans cruel falls. These were much publicised about the evils of the game.

What wasn’t publicised in the same light was the rise of teams like Bournemouth, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff & Leicester to a PL title. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Our struggles are often held up by people of why a regulator should get involved. This seems bonkers to me because, we are the stand out example of what fan power (with a bit of help) can do to change the course of a clubs history. Do you think if the period of 2013-2019 had been left up to a regulator we’d have removed the Oystons the way we and Belokon did? I don’t.

Has regulation of a free market ever improved it? You’ll get told the joys of regulation on here by many but it’ll be a disaster. This government are attempting to buy cheap votes from people that’ll never vote for them anyway. Government involvement in something as competitive and entertaining as the PL. That in itself should be a major alarm bell for people.

I remember the 70s & 80s football was dead, compared to what it became it was as a package complete crap. If regulation comes in we won’t go back to that but we’ll March backwards to that ‘level playing field’ over taking steps forward to improve the already stellar product we have now.

Ah there we go wrote a longish post anyway.
 
Southend United are facing a winding up petition on 1st March, leaving fans wondering whether this Saturday may be their last home match…..ever.

Thank you Mr Ron Martin.

And anyone who thinks the Oystons were removed by fan power (with a little help from Belokon) are deluding themselves.

There but for the grace of god……

Edit to add. Lest we forget

 
Last edited:
Thatseasider said:
I’ve written pretty long posts about this previously m, I just don’t have the time right now.

Simply put, the PL and the rest of the League for all their faults became the zenith for domestic professional football in the world because they were largely left free to operate how they wanted.

With that freedom came risks, and you had Wimbledon, Derby, Portsmouth etc who had spectacular and for their fans cruel falls. These were much publicised about the evils of the game.

What wasn’t publicised in the same light was the rise of teams like Bournemouth, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff & Leicester to a PL title. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Our struggles are often held up by people of why a regulator should get involved. This seems bonkers to me because, we are the stand out example of what fan power (with a bit of help) can do to change the course of a clubs history. Do you think if the period of 2013-2019 had been left up to a regulator we’d have removed the Oystons the way we and Belokon did? I don’t.

Has regulation of a free market ever improved it? You’ll get told the joys of regulation on here by many but it’ll be a disaster. This government are attempting to buy cheap votes from people that’ll never vote for them anyway. Government involvement in something as competitive and entertaining as the PL. That in itself should be a major alarm bell for people.

I remember the 70s & 80s football was dead, compared to what it became it was as a package complete crap. If regulation comes in we won’t go back to that but we’ll March backwards to that ‘level playing field’ over taking steps forward to improve the already stellar product we have now.

Ah there we go wrote a longish post anyway.
Click to expand...
Dunno what you are worried about.

If the regulator is as effective as OFGEM and OFWAT, those with all the money will be allowed to do whatever they wish ! 😉
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Southend United are facing a winding up petition on 1st March, leaving fans wondering whether this Saturday may be their last home match…..ever.

Thank you Mr Ron Martin.

And anyone who thinks the Oystons were removed by fan power (with a little help from Belokon) are deluding themselves.

There but for the grace of god……

Edit to add. Lest we forget

Click to expand...
The ONLY reason the club was put into the hands of Admin was because of NAPM.

The judge ruled and said (paraphrased) - BFC can never raise its true value while a fans boycott is taking place, therefore the only way to get true value is to remove the Oystons and hence putting the club into involuntary admin.

To highlight this as well - NON of the Oystons other assets were forced down that route.

Without the boycott he could well have paid Belekon off eventually with other assets, loans etc.
 
seasideone said:
The ONLY reason the club was put into the hands of Admin was because of NAPM.

The judge ruled and said (paraphrased) - BFC can never raise its true value while a fans boycott is taking place, therefore the only way to get true value is to remove the Oystons and hence putting the club into involuntary admin.

To highlight this as well - NON of the Oystons other assets were forced down that route.

Without the boycott he could well have paid Belekon off eventually with other assets, loans etc.
Click to expand...
I wasn't criticising the fans protest and I wasn’t saying the boycott didn’t play a part. I was very involved in a lot of what went on so have a pretty good handle on all of that.

What I was taking issue with was the inference that the Oystons were removed by fan power and “if we can do it then so can any group of fans. So there’s no need for any change”. That’s nonsense.

Without Belokon and his minority shareholder action I’m 99.99% sure OO would still own BFC.

My two big footballing memories are Wembley and the Homecoming. Southend were a big part of the second and I think for that reason alone we should be standing shoulder to shoulder with its fans.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
I share some of your concerns @Thatseasider. These things certainly start out as good intentioned, but government intervention and regulation potentially brings its own set of unwanted consequences.
Click to expand...
I’ve got some sympathy with the “unintended consequences” pov but I don’t see it as a reason for doing nothing. “This is really shit but if we try to do something else it could be worse”.

With that logic clubs should never change managers.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I’ve got some sympathy with the “unintended consequences” pov but I don’t see it as a reason for doing nothing. “This is really shit but if we try to do something else it could be worse”.

With that logic clubs should never change managers.
Click to expand...
I’ve never suggested that ‘nothing’ occurs. And of course, football has continually evolved and course corrected throughout its history.

It’s a valid concern though and possibly more of a concern, given the fact that some are obviously totally blind to it.

The fact that some are literally amazed that there might be dissenting voices, suggests to me that adequate attention might not have been given to how those concerns and potential downsides and how they might be alleviated.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
I’ve never suggested that ‘nothing’ occurs. And of course, football has continually evolved and course corrected throughout its history.

It’s a valid concern though and possibly more of a concern, given the fact that some are obviously totally blind to it.

The fact that some are literally amazed that there might be dissenting voices, suggests to me that adequate attention might not have been given to how those concerns and potential downsides and how they might be alleviated.
Click to expand...
It’s probably for those who were actually involved in the review to comment but from what I’m reading in the media it seems to have been a pretty extensive exercise.

There have been criticisms but mainly it seems from the PL and club owners which is obviously what you’d expect. I haven’t seen any criticism from fans groups but that may be either because it’s not being reported or they aren’t organised?

Anyway it’s only a White Paper so plenty of time for the opponents to get themselves sorted if they’ve got any gumption. Given the amount of money involved I wouldn’t be surprised to see the whole thing derailed tbh.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
It’s probably for those who were actually involved in the review to comment but from what I’m reading in the media it seems to have been pretty extensive exercise.

There have been criticisms but mainly it seems from the PL and club owners which is obviously what you’d expect. I haven’t seen any criticism from fans groups but that may be either because it’s not being reported or they aren’t organised?
Click to expand...
An extensive exercise in ‘Group Think’ perhaps.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
An extensive exercise in ‘Group Think’ perhaps.
Click to expand...
To be fair I quite like echo chambers. They make me feel all fuzzy, warm and safe.

You said earlier that you weren’t proposing doing nothing. So as a matter of interest what changes would you propose to football governance?

Or, if you prefer, which parts of the White Paper are you concerned about?
 
Last edited:
Mexboroseasider said:
To be fair I quite like echo chambers. They make me feel all fuzzy, warm and safe.

You said earlier that you weren’t proposing doing nothing. So as a matter of interest what changes would you propose to football governance?

Or, if you prefer, which parts of the White Party are you concerned about?
Click to expand...
I suppose if you want an analogy I sort of look at this a bit like Brexit.. In that case I’d rather we had stayed inside and addressed the issues from there.

In this case I’d have preferred to ‘encourage’ football to continue to manage and resolve their own issues…. (Yes….. I know!!)

I’m concerned generally about Government intervention in anything .
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
I suppose if you want an analogy I sort of look at this a bit like Brexit.. In that case I’d rather we had stayed inside and addressed the issues from there.

In this case I’d have preferred to ‘encourage’ football to continue to manage and resolve their own issues…. (Yes….. I know!!)

I’m concerned generally about Government intervention in anything .
Click to expand...
If you cast your mind back to our dealings with the EFL I think it’s pretty unlikely they (or the PL) would ever “get their house in order”. They didn’t even seem to understand what their own rules said re the fit and proper test!

I take your point about government intervention but sometimes it’s necessary (how else would you “encourage” change?). And any regulator would be independent of government - at least in theory.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
If you cast your mind back to our dealings with the EFL I think it’s pretty unlikely they (or the PL) would ever “get their house in order”. They didn’t even seem to understand what their own rules said re the fit and proper test!

I take your point about government intervention but sometimes it’s necessary (how else would you “encourage” change?). And any regulator would be independent of government - at least in theory.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure our view (or most fans view) of the EFL is particularly objective. I'm also not that unhappy with the situation as things stand.

I'm fairly relaxed about the whole thing regardless... I have more important things going on in my life

The point I was making on here is that I could understand where the other Poster was coming from and that I shared some of his concerns.
 
Thatseasider said:
I’ve written pretty long posts about this previously m, I just don’t have the time right now.

Simply put, the PL and the rest of the League for all their faults became the zenith for domestic professional football in the world because they were largely left free to operate how they wanted.

With that freedom came risks, and you had Wimbledon, Derby, Portsmouth etc who had spectacular and for their fans cruel falls. These were much publicised about the evils of the game.

What wasn’t publicised in the same light was the rise of teams like Bournemouth, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff & Leicester to a PL title. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Our struggles are often held up by people of why a regulator should get involved. This seems bonkers to me because, we are the stand out example of what fan power (with a bit of help) can do to change the course of a clubs history. Do you think if the period of 2013-2019 had been left up to a regulator we’d have removed the Oystons the way we and Belokon did? I don’t.

Has regulation of a free market ever improved it? You’ll get told the joys of regulation on here by many but it’ll be a disaster. This government are attempting to buy cheap votes from people that’ll never vote for them anyway. Government involvement in something as competitive and entertaining as the PL. That in itself should be a major alarm bell for people.

I remember the 70s & 80s football was dead, compared to what it became it was as a package complete crap. If regulation comes in we won’t go back to that but we’ll March backwards to that ‘level playing field’ over taking steps forward to improve the already stellar product we have now.

Ah there we go wrote a longish post anyway.
Click to expand...
That a very good point.

The likes of Bournemouth, Brighton & Leicester are very good examples of fit & proper ownership, and this should of been reflected in the white paper... obviously that's a major oversight by the panel.

If we hadn't of had that Odious family as the captain of the ship! Then maybe, just maybe we could of been one of those clubs? We'll never know now.

But we have to look at this from the opposite end of the system unfortunately now. The white paper for us! Is the right way forward. But the powers that be, I'm sure will be gathering in they're packs now to discrupt this whole process, to which, of course can and probably will be met with opposition from the big six, PL, EFL and club owners themselves.

The ESL (European Super League) will no doubt happen also in the future like it or not. Let it happen and cut a deal for that money to be reinvested back in to our game at all levels.
 
Interesting view from Thatseasider. My view is that we have to square things up more between the top and the rest, but that needs to come with some properly enforced rules as to how the trickle down is deployed. Surely no sentient being would ever expect the Premier league to willingly open its fat purse to support the wider game here in England and Wales. However, as Simon Jordan said recently, there is no point just handing out cash, there are too many chancers and idiots out there and if the money was distributed without controls it would act just like prune juice. Not often he says anything sensible but there you go. As for the free market, well I would just say our recent experience of it (last 40 years for instance) has seen too many of our British owned industries fail or be swallowed up. This thread is about football though so I will park that one.
 
Mark_GT said:
Interesting view from Thatseasider. My view is that we have to square things up more between the top and the rest, but that needs to come with some properly enforced rules as to how the trickle down is deployed. Surely no sentient being would ever expect the Premier league to willingly open its fat purse to support the wider game here in England and Wales. However, as Simon Jordan said recently, there is no point just handing out cash, there are too many chancers and idiots out there and if the money was distributed without controls it would act just like prune juice. Not often he says anything sensible but there you go. As for the free market, well I would just say our recent experience of it (last 40 years for instance) has seen too many of our British owned industries fail or be swallowed up. This thread is about football though so I will park that one.
Click to expand...
I agree.

If you sign up to the unregulated free market then you have to accept that clubs are going to go to the wall. That’s any club.

Happily that didn’t happen to us but anyone who thinks it’s because we’re exceptional fans are deluding themselves.

We got very, very lucky with Belokon’s action. And we got even luckier with the fall out.

It could have turned out very differently.

If you want an unregulated market then you have to accept the reality. And that is that you might have to wave goodbye to your club because of an unscrupulous, unregulated owner. It’s that simple.
 
seasideone said:
The ONLY reason the club was put into the hands of Admin was because of NAPM.

The judge ruled and said (paraphrased) - BFC can never raise its true value while a fans boycott is taking place, therefore the only way to get true value is to remove the Oystons and hence putting the club into involuntary admin.

To highlight this as well - NON of the Oystons other assets were forced down that route.

Without the boycott he could well have paid Belekon off eventually with other assets, loans etc.
Click to expand...
Ignore Mex like brr3 he either has a bad memory or just rewrites history.
 
Thatseasider said:
I’ve written pretty long posts about this previously m, I just don’t have the time right now.

Simply put, the PL and the rest of the League for all their faults became the zenith for domestic professional football in the world because they were largely left free to operate how they wanted.

With that freedom came risks, and you had Wimbledon, Derby, Portsmouth etc who had spectacular and for their fans cruel falls. These were much publicised about the evils of the game.

What wasn’t publicised in the same light was the rise of teams like Bournemouth, Brighton, Swansea, Cardiff & Leicester to a PL title. Didn’t fit the narrative.

Our struggles are often held up by people of why a regulator should get involved. This seems bonkers to me because, we are the stand out example of what fan power (with a bit of help) can do to change the course of a clubs history. Do you think if the period of 2013-2019 had been left up to a regulator we’d have removed the Oystons the way we and Belokon did? I don’t.

Has regulation of a free market ever improved it? You’ll get told the joys of regulation on here by many but it’ll be a disaster. This government are attempting to buy cheap votes from people that’ll never vote for them anyway. Government involvement in something as competitive and entertaining as the PL. That in itself should be a major alarm bell for people.

I remember the 70s & 80s football was dead, compared to what it became it was as a package complete crap. If regulation comes in we won’t go back to that but we’ll March backwards to that ‘level playing field’ over taking steps forward to improve the already stellar product we have now.

Ah there we go wrote a longish post anyway.
Click to expand...

Product 🤣

Ffs, all that matters in football is two fairly evenly matched teams.

The rest is just marketing wank.
 
td53 said:
Product 🤣

Ffs, all that matters in football is two fairly evenly matched teams.

The rest is just marketing wank.
Click to expand...
Marketing wank.

The same phrase I think when I see the title of your latest boreathon. Sorry blog post.
 
Thatseasider said:
Marketing wank.

The same phrase I think when I see the title of your latest boreathon. Sorry blog post.
Click to expand...
Don't read it then. Everyone is happy. Stick to your stellar product. 👍

I'd love to know what I'm marketing tbh.

Anyway.

My point is simply that football is vastly over complicated. You just need people to kick a ball about and if they're roughly evenly matched it's generally good, regardless of the level

The rest is just boring.
 
td53 said:
Don't read it then. Everyone is happy. Stick to your stellar product. 👍

I'd love to know what I'm marketing tbh.

Anyway.

My point is simply that football is vastly over complicated. You just need people to kick a ball about and if they're roughly evenly matched it's generally good, regardless of the level

The rest is just boring.
Click to expand...
Hit a nerve that one didn’t it.

If that’s the point you wanted to make, you should have just made it without trying to belittle a point of view.

You’re point of view is so incredibly naive, if it’s not a product we’d all just line up at the side of fishers field and watch some lads knock a ball about a muddy pitch.

The products been improved for decades. Introducing the bar to the goal post was an addition to the product.

You consume a product every time you watch it.

If you can’t take it. Possibly don’t dish it out.

Oh and I don’t read them 👍
 
Thatseasider said:
Hit a nerve that one didn’t it.

If that’s the point you wanted to make, you should have just made it without trying to belittle a point of view.

If you can’t take it. Possibly don’t dish it out.

Oh and I don’t read them 👍
Click to expand...

That's fine.

My blog costs me nothing and I make nothing from it and therefore, I don't give a fuck if anyone likes it or not. It is just some shite.

The Premier League by contrast has a vested interest in providing a predictable product to a global TV audience and thus does care that it's audience see the biggest names playing for the biggest brands. It does care very much about being a product and it's construct is no more 'natural' than any other thing manmade. It is arguably not a perfect embodiment of capitalist ideals as it doesn't allow the thriving of competition and monopolies have emerged on power and influence within it.

To be honest, I'm not completely convinced by the fan led review. It's not been especially democratic and only taken in a certain number of voices and the idea that you can regulate a pyramid in the interests of both the 'elite' and 'community' clubs may well create stasis.

What is good is that the game is being questioned because there is something weird about a sport where 85 of the 92 clubs best hope of sporting success is to be taken over by a nation state. That's not what I think anyone would have envisaged the national game being. There is too much power in the hands of too few and frankly, I think the Super League (which I wish had actually happened) shows that.

Anyway, I apologise for the glib initial reply. I generally enjoy your posts and I didn't mean to create a spat by it.

I don't apologise if this post is too boring. We are what we are.
 
Sorry if I've missed something but does this review include regulation of ownership in the Premier league? Can't see them having that.
 
Hertsseasider said:
Sorry if I've missed something but does this review include regulation of ownership in the Premier league? Can't see them having that.
Click to expand...
From what I have read/heard the answer is.

Er. Maybe. Possibly. That might be tricky. Um. Community clubs in the pyramid etc....

That's perhaps an unfair reading. I've not had time to read everything. I'm also not mocking it because that problem is incredibly difficult to envisage a solution to.

The problem with regulating new ownership is the horse has already bolted and the power is entrenched so by preventing new owners then you just leave the existing ones to it.

Without a new tier of football, i.e. a global league of super giant clubs including Asian franchises etc, I don't see how you redress the balance when a club like Man Utd have already received well over a billion quid in the course of the Premier League to date, just for being in it and existing.

The redistribution is good but it makes very little difference to the clubs already dominant because they're established as global brands and thus have enormous revenues and market value outwith that.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I wasn't criticising the fans protest and I wasn’t saying the boycott didn’t play a part. I was very involved in a lot of what went on so have a pretty good handle on all of that.

What I was taking issue with was the inference that the Oystons were removed by fan power and “if we can do it then so can any group of fans. So there’s no need for any change”. That’s nonsense.

Without Belokon and his minority shareholder action I’m 99.99% sure OO would still own BFC.

My two big footballing memories are Wembley and the Homecoming. Southend were a big part of the second and I think for that reason alone we should be standing shoulder to shoulder with its fans.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's the way you said it.
 
Thatseasider said:
Hit a nerve that one didn’t it.

If that’s the point you wanted to make, you should have just made it without trying to belittle a point of view.

You’re point of view is so incredibly naive, if it’s not a product we’d all just line up at the side of fishers field and watch some lads knock a ball about a muddy pitch.

The products been improved for decades. Introducing the bar to the goal post was an addition to the product.

You consume a product every time you watch it.

If you can’t take it. Possibly don’t dish it out.

Oh and I don’t read them 👍
Click to expand...
Hang on, you've edited it.

I could write forever on this. You wouldn't read it mind... 😉

My view is this. In the last thirty years, both domestic English and European football has got a higher concentration of skillful players in few leagues and clubs within those leagues.

There is less diversity of trophy winners in both domestic and European football. The better teams are better, yes, I wouldn't deny that, but the flip side is that the overall product is more predictable because the same leagues and teams have the economic wherewithal which creates a cycle because they claim the prize money etc etc.

The game evolves, yes. The current phase of evolution is about the TV market. I am perhaps anomalous as I don't watch very much football on telly. That's not a purist thing, I just don't have Sky and never have and likely never will. I stream a game from time to time and it is generally good football. I also watch lower league stuff, Scottish stuff and international stuff. I enjoy all of it.

I particularly find European competition a bit dull and tedious as a direct result of the fact that there's almost no quality in most of the leagues because it's gone elsewhere. Clearly others don't think that but if we're talking about quality, popularity and quality aren't the same thing.

Teams in Scotland, Sweden, Rumania or wherever have fuck all chance of doing anything because their league aren't attractive TV spectacles.

In my opinion, that makes winning the Champions League all a bit 'meh' as you just have to knock aside some shite teams and then beat a few super clubs like yourself within a structure that is designed specifically to ensure you a) get there and b) get to point which satisfies the TV markets (and also earns you enough revenue to get there next year because it gives you additional spending power Vs your domestic competition)

Might as well just have a super league. The only reason we don't is because the Premier League would suffer.

The Premier League structures are all about maintaining those clubs at the level of competing with the other 8/10 super clubs in Europe.

We are not one of those clubs.

I would argue our interests would be served by a different structure. It is natural to seek a structure that serves the interest of the team you support. To not do so is weird. Why would we support Blackpool and yet also support the system that actively grows the gap between us and the possibility of success.

That's naivity. (I can't spell it ffs)
 
Last edited:
td53 said:
That's fine.

My blog costs me nothing and I make nothing from it and therefore, I don't give a fuck if anyone likes it or not. It is just some shite.

The Premier League by contrast has a vested interest in providing a predictable product to a global TV audience and thus does care that it's audience see the biggest names playing for the biggest brands. It does care very much about being a product and it's construct is no more 'natural' than any other thing manmade. It is arguably not a perfect embodiment of capitalist ideals as it doesn't allow the thriving of competition and monopolies have emerged on power and influence within it.

To be honest, I'm not completely convinced by the fan led review. It's not been especially democratic and only taken in a certain number of voices and the idea that you can regulate a pyramid in the interests of both the 'elite' and 'community' clubs may well create stasis.

What is good is that the game is being questioned because there is something weird about a sport where 85 of the 92 clubs best hope of sporting success is to be taken over by a nation state. That's not what I think anyone would have envisaged the national game being. There is too much power in the hands of too few and frankly, I think the Super League (which I wish had actually happened) shows that.

Anyway, I apologise for the glib initial reply. I generally enjoy your posts and I didn't mean to create a spat by it.

I don't apologise if this post is too boring. We are what we are.
Click to expand...

td53 said:
Hang on, you've edited it.

I could write forever on this. You wouldn't read it mind... 😉

My view is this. In the last thirty years, both domestic English and European football has got a higher concentration of skillful players in few leagues and clubs within those leagues.

There is less diversity of trophy winners in both domestic and European football. The better teams are better, yes, I wouldn't deny that, but the flip side is that the overall product is more predictable because the same leagues and teams have the economic wherewithal which creates a cycle because they claim the prize money etc etc.

The game evolves, yes. The current phase of evolution is about the TV market. I am perhaps anomalous as I don't watch very much football on telly. That's not a purist thing, I just don't have Sky and never have and likely never will. I stream a game from time to time and it is generally good football. I also watch lower league stuff, Scottish stuff and international stuff. I enjoy all of it.

I particularly find European competition a bit dull and tedious as a direct result of the fact that there's almost no quality in most of the leagues because it's gone elsewhere. Clearly others don't think that but if we're talking about quality, popularity and quality aren't the same thing.

Teams in Scotland, Sweden, Rumania or wherever have fuck all chance of doing anything because their league aren't attractive TV spectacles.

In my opinion, that makes winning the Champions League all a bit 'meh' as you just have to knock aside some shite teams and then beat a few super clubs like yourself within a structure that is designed specifically to ensure you a) get there and b) get to point which satisfies the TV markets (and also earns you enough revenue to get there next year because it gives you additional spending power Vs your domestic competition)

Might as well just have a super league. The only reason we don't is because the Premier League would suffer.

The Premier League structures are all about maintaining those clubs at the level of competing with the other 8/10 super clubs in Europe.

We are not one of those clubs.

I would argue our interests would be served by a different structure. It is natural to seek a structure that serves the interest of the team you support. To not do so is weird. Why would we support Blackpool and yet also support the system that actively grows the gap between us and the possibility of success.

That's naivity. (I can't spell it ffs)
Click to expand...
No harm done. It was the laughing emoji that really cut deep. 😅.

You’re a thinker and generally a good one. I’ve no ill feelings towards you, not many poster can actually articulate something as you do and think that’s why I was in initially a bit disappointed with your response.

Sorry yeh I oft quickly edit posts after I hit send when I think of something brilliant to add to my posts.

I agree a lot with both of your posts. There’s something about the competitivity at the ‘pointy end’ which is not optimal. But having said that even though the PL and the league structure is man made there’s still a natural course to it all.

Even if that’s incredible wealth coming into the game and changing the nature of it at the time it’s still a course that can be a success for the pyramid overall. You’d have been laughed out of the room in 1988 trying to explain Chelsea as multiple 1st division winners and a European cup. The changes Abrmaovich’s involvement in the PL causes are really still being felt and we still have no idea if all the ripples were good or bad.

We’re approaching half the PL being able to win it, and like wise I’m really not bothered about a European super league based on meritocracy, that also is probably an evolution, I think generally I don’t live and die by it all I just enjoy it and try and embrace the next iteration of ‘football’. If I didn’t I would be on Fisher’s Field watching lads knock it about a muddy field and would have been there for 35 years.
 
Thatseasider said:
No harm done. It was the laughing emoji that really cut deep. 😅.

You’re a thinker and generally a good one. I’ve no ill feelings towards you, not many poster can actually articulate something as you do and think that’s why I was in initially a bit disappointed with your response.

Sorry yeh I oft quickly edit posts after I hit send when I think of something brilliant to add to my posts.

I agree a lot with both of your posts. There’s something about the competitivity at the ‘pointy end’ which is not optimal. But having said that even though the PL and the league structure is man made there’s still a natural course to it all.

Even if that’s incredible wealth coming into the game and changing the nature of it at the time it’s still a course that can be a success for the pyramid overall. You’d have been laughed out of the room in 1988 trying to explain Chelsea as multiple 1st division winners and a European cup. The changes Abrmaovich’s involvement in the PL causes are really still being felt and we still have no idea if all the ripples were good or bad.

We’re approaching half the PL being able to win it, and like wise I’m really not bothered about a European super league based on meritocracy, that also is probably an evolution, I think generally I don’t live and die by it all I just enjoy it and try and embrace the next iteration of ‘football’. If I didn’t I would be on Fisher’s Field watching lads knock it about a muddy field and would have been there for 35 years.
Click to expand...
I'm knackered so I won't write an essay, my response was flippant and indeed I didn't really even read your post properly which makes it worse, I am disappointed in myself lol.

And yes, the Chelsea point is key. That's the massive challenge. You can complain about Chelsea etc but if you stop the next Chelsea happening then how do you challenge Chelsea (etc)

Football has to be competitive, but if you aren't going to strip the clubs who've benefited from the EPL structures of their historic gains (and how on earth could you) then you have to allow other clubs to compete and thus take risk and/or allow external investment otherwise it gets more static not less.
 
Last edited:
td53 said:
I'm knackered so I won't write an essay, my response was flippant and indeed I didn't really even read your post properly which makes it worse, I am disappointed in myself lol.

And yes, the Chelsea point is key. That's the massive challenge. You can complain about Chelsea etc but if you stop the next Chelsea happening then how do you challenge Chelsea (etc)

Football has to be competitive, but if you aren't going to strip the clubs who've benefited from the EPL structures of their historic gains (and how on earth could you) then you have to allow other clubs to compete and thus take risk and/or allow external investment otherwise it gets more static not less.
Click to expand...
Last two paras hit it.

I like to think I’m not a prisoner of the past. There’s enough billionaires in the world to buy all 92 clubs in theory. If there’s incentive enough which I believe we were on the path too. Wrexham. Hyperbolic but you get me.

It goes all the way through the pyramid this. For every high profile fall like Bury there was Rushden & Diamonds or Scarborough that no one cared about. Clubs took their place without much fanfare, when it became naturally or even artificially viable, it’s never detracted from my enjoyment of the pyramid.
However I do fear the regulation on everything will eventually impact my enjoyment of it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think people across the world love English football and that can never be undone. I'm coming to the end of a month in Uganda and the current scores are arsenal shirts 200 plus, man u 50ish, Chelsea, 10ish, li erpool, 5ish, city a big fat zero. And a handful for barca, real etc.
 
It's a waste of time and effort if you ask me and completely risks everything we now have in the Professional game

Why on earth would people want football to go back to the 1980s?

Also who are these independent regulatory people, there is no such thing as independent in football?

Anyway if a few bods from the trust want to slap themselves on the back then crack on fill your boots
 
Mark_GT said:
I think people across the world love English football and that can never be undone. I'm coming to the end of a month in Uganda and the current scores are arsenal shirts 200 plus, man u 50ish, Chelsea, 10ish, li erpool, 5ish, city a big fat zero. And a handful for barca, real etc.
Click to expand...
That’s only cos Arsenal ‘fans’ were all chucking out their shirts into recycle banks last season though.
 
Thatseasider said:
Last two paras hit it.

I like to think I’m not a prisoner of the past. There’s enough billionaires in the world to buy all 92 clubs in theory. If there’s incentive enough which I believe we were on the path too. Wrexham. Hyperbolic but you get me.

It goes all the way through the pyramid this. For every high profile fall like Bury there was Rushden & Diamonds or Scarborough that no one cared about. Clubs took there place without much fanfare, when it became naturally or even artificially viable, it’s never detracted from my enjoyment of the pyramid.
However I do fear the regulation on everything will eventually impact my enjoyment of it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, there's an essay.

We should maybe have just met at the windmill for a straightener in classic AVFTT style. It would have been more fun for everyone else and I wouldn't be writing reams of shite. I literally can't stop myself writing this sort of thing. The main reason I write a blog is to limit the amount I put on here really. It's like a cupboard under the stairs to put shite you don't want in the front room...

I think a potential positive could be a more decisive decision maker. The EFL have been hopeless for years as our experience tells us. The FA have totally ceded control.

Even if you just kept the present rules, football governance would benefit from not being so dithery and inconsistent. It all smacks of panels meeting ad hoc and reaching decisions too late or different decisions about the same thing.

Secondly, the parachute payment debate is an interesting one. They're absurd but I'd argue necessary - yet they're only necessary because of the way the 1st and 2nd tiers interests are represented by two different bodies and two different negotiations. If it was one body, you'd just smooth the curve between the leagues but with two, that never works because the two leagues just argue and the bigger one wins.

I think if we end up with a mess of complex regulations, it's probably not the FSA or anyone else's fault - it's probably the FA for basically turning their back on the wider implications of the Premier League and existing more or less in name only whilst the EPL clubs devise a system that more and more suits them.

There's no going back overall, no, but equally some of the negotiations of the past have been awful - stuff like the Elite Player Programme that essentially was the concession that EFL clubs had to make to get a few crumbs is just needless. It's financial bullying and undermines clubs ability to even produce their own players and sell them on. If we have a decent prospect, we basically have to accept a set fee for them at a certain age and that's that. Stuff like the size and capacity of academies at the top level is also easily regulated and arguably, it's not good to have all the young players heavily concentrated in particular regions and essentially the biggest clubs managing access to them.

We've ended up with a weird reversal of the trickle down model whereby the biggest clubs have huge numbers of young players who they don't need - they farm them out and charge clubs like us for them. The model used to be that a good percentage of those players would develop with us and the biggest clubs would then compensate us for buying them. Now we're paying to borrow the kind of player that we once might have developed ourselves.

I haven't looked at this in depth, but I'd really like to see a visualisation of where transfer fees go now as compared to say 20 or 30 years ago.

That's something that could easily be addressed and I don't think would especially damage the EPL brand

Things like that only exists because of the uneven power dynamic whereby the economic heft of certain clubs outweighed sporting values because the internal regulation process was utterly broken.

Anyone looking objectively at that would think 'nah, that's nonsense from the point of view of encouraging competition, it will just entrench power further in the long run' - but no one has really overseen football objectively from within football.

I think I'm trying to be balanced. The past was not a glorious rosy time, far from it and the future is unknown. I think you just have to (as you rightly say) enjoy the game for what it is, but also football as a whole has to remember that, yes, it's a brand, but it's also, first and foremost a sport and it must balance the interests of brands and business with the values of sport because ultimately, even the strongest brands are weaker than the more or less timeless appeal of sport. It's the fact it's a ** brilliant game that is the very best selling point of all - and I think a broader debate on how you further evolve that game is good.

Finally, anyone developing anything, be it software, art, business whatever also iterates and sometimes you roll back changes because 'new' isn't always good. The code you write is buggy or the interface isnt intuitive, the colour you chose doesn't quite go as well, the product turns out to have too many issues etc... We absolutely can't recreate 'the good old days (that never really existed as we remember them nostalgically) but I think you can also go 'ah, that particular thing actually isn't better now' if you are selective about it. We look at natural evolution but evolution is about responding to factors outwith our control. When we develop things as humans it's slightly different I think as it's at least in part a choice. Nothing is entirely black and white when we look at history.

I definitely want football to evolve, I just don't want that evolution entirely driven by the interests of the global TV spectacle alone because the ultimate end game is depressing and actually, possibly not very good for the football business as a whole (i.e. as the IPL has been quite bad for the interests of the ECB as a crude example) - if we assume that at some point a 'world league' type model will emerge, then you've got to ensure the game in this country is built on strong foundations because that potentially could be a seismic event

I don't really want to think about all this stuff - I just want to enjoy people kicking a football about but it's not been easy to do that for a while, not least because of our experience - what I'd like to think is that the threat of regulation jolts football into taking self governance a lot more seriously and in various areas it has a hard look at itself and doesn't just rely on 'yeah but richest league so everything is grand' - because I think that's a bit simplistic and I do think football (especially the EPL) is guilty of going 'yeah but money' and not really properly addressing some quite important things.

Fwiw I agree to an extent that our own experience is not actually that instructive, but I also think one of the reason why we allow shit owners is simply because the economics don't really work at certain levels so essentially, the EFL are waving anyone they can find into clubs, just to ensure they're owned by someone. Yes, you can punish 'bad owners' but then you need 'good ones' Aye, theoretically you can find more billionaires but again, I dunno, you just end up waiting about hoping that you get bought out and that's not really a particularly engaging experience as a fan as then everyone just bangs on all the time about takeovers and consortiums and so on and so forth and to go back to my poorly expressed original point, that's quite boring.

I'd guess the optimistic reading would be that if you controlled the flow of money better (i.e. didn't allow it to leave the game so easily or coalesce around 'the pointy end' quite so much - you could actually make it MORE attractive to invest across the pyramid not less as currently, you'd need to be a mentalist to invest at certain levels.

Fuck me, I can go on and I don't know sometimes how I end up where I am from where I started.

We'll see what happens I guess!
 
Last edited:
td53 said:
I'd guess the optimistic reading would be that if you controlled the flow of money better (i.e. didn't allow it to leave the game so easily or coalesce around 'the pointy end' quite so much - you could actually make it MORE attractive to invest across the pyramid not less as currently, you'd need to be a mentalist to invest at certain levels....
Click to expand...

Thoughtful post td53.

This paragraph to me is the simplest and most important.

As someone who watches quite a lot of lower tier football (Witton Albion v Colne today, as you ask), this is the crux of the problem. As you rightly say, you really would have to be a `mentalist` with more money than sense to invest in your local team. Trickle down economics (to coin a phrase) is a necessity at Northern Premier league level to sustain clubs which are often intrinsic to the local community. Yet other than a good FA Cup or FA Vase run, or the fortuitous selling on of a young talent, there is little other than local sponsorship and gate money to swell the coffers. Far too much money exits the pyramid via the `pointy end`, which should be addressed but are unlikely to be, for the reasons you outline in your considered essay...
 
td53 said:
Sorry, there's an essay.

We should maybe have just met at the windmill for a straightener in classic AVFTT style. It would have been more fun for everyone else and I wouldn't be writing reams of shite. I literally can't stop myself writing this sort of thing. The main reason I write a blog is to limit the amount I put on here really. It's like a cupboard under the stairs to put shite you don't want in the front room...

I think a potential positive could be a more decisive decision maker. The EFL have been hopeless for years as our experience tells us. The FA have totally ceded control.

Even if you just kept the present rules, football governance would benefit from not being so dithery and inconsistent. It all smacks of panels meeting ad hoc and reaching decisions too late or different decisions about the same thing.

Secondly, the parachute payment debate is an interesting one. They're absurd but I'd argue necessary - yet they're only necessary because of the way the 1st and 2nd tiers interests are represented by two different bodies and two different negotiations. If it was one body, you'd just smooth the curve between the leagues but with two, that never works because the two leagues just argue and the bigger one wins.

I think if we end up with a mess of complex regulations, it's probably not the FSA or anyone else's fault - it's probably the FA for basically turning their back on the wider implications of the Premier League and existing more or less in name only whilst the EPL clubs devise a system that more and more suits them.

There's no going back overall, no, but equally some of the negotiations of the past have been awful - stuff like the Elite Player Programme that essentially was the concession that EFL clubs had to make to get a few crumbs is just needless. It's financial bullying and undermines clubs ability to even produce their own players and sell them on. If we have a decent prospect, we basically have to accept a set fee for them at a certain age and that's that. Stuff like the size and capacity of academies at the top level is also easily regulated and arguably, it's not good to have all the young players heavily concentrated in particular regions and essentially the biggest clubs managing access to them.

We've ended up with a weird reversal of the trickle down model whereby the biggest clubs have huge numbers of young players who they don't need - they farm them out and charge clubs like us for them. The model used to be that a good percentage of those players would develop with us and the biggest clubs would then compensate us for buying them. Now we're paying to borrow the kind of player that we once might have developed ourselves.

I haven't looked at this in depth, but I'd really like to see a visualisation of where transfer fees go now as compared to say 20 or 30 years ago.

That's something that could easily be addressed and I don't think would especially damage the EPL brand

Things like that only exists because of the uneven power dynamic whereby the economic heft of certain clubs outweighed sporting values because the internal regulation process was utterly broken.

Anyone looking objectively at that would think 'nah, that's nonsense from the point of view of encouraging competition, it will just entrench power further in the long run' - but no one has really overseen football objectively from within football.

I think I'm trying to be balanced. The past was not a glorious rosy time, far from it and the future is unknown. I think you just have to (as you rightly say) enjoy the game for what it is, but also football as a whole has to remember that, yes, it's a brand, but it's also, first and foremost a sport and it must balance the interests of brands and business with the values of sport because ultimately, even the strongest brands are weaker than the more or less timeless appeal of sport. It's the fact it's a ** brilliant game that is the very best selling point of all - and I think a broader debate on how you further evolve that game is good.

Finally, anyone developing anything, be it software, art, business whatever also iterates and sometimes you roll back changes because 'new' isn't always good. The code you write is buggy or the interface isnt intuitive, the colour you chose doesn't quite go as well, the product turns out to have too many issues etc... We absolutely can't recreate 'the good old days (that never really existed as we remember them nostalgically) but I think you can also go 'ah, that particular thing actually isn't better now' if you are selective about it. We look at natural evolution but evolution is about responding to factors outwith our control. When we develop things as humans it's slightly different I think as it's at least in part a choice. Nothing is entirely black and white when we look at history.

I definitely want football to evolve, I just don't want that evolution entirely driven by the interests of the global TV spectacle alone because the ultimate end game is depressing and actually, possibly not very good for the football business as a whole (i.e. as the IPL has been quite bad for the interests of the ECB as a crude example) - if we assume that at some point a 'world league' type model will emerge, then you've got to ensure the game in this country is built on strong foundations because that potentially could be a seismic event

I don't really want to think about all this stuff - I just want to enjoy people kicking a football about but it's not been easy to do that for a while, not least because of our experience - what I'd like to think is that the threat of regulation jolts football into taking self governance a lot more seriously and in various areas it has a hard look at itself and doesn't just rely on 'yeah but richest league so everything is grand' - because I think that's a bit simplistic and I do think football (especially the EPL) is guilty of going 'yeah but money' and not really properly addressing some quite important things.

Fwiw I agree to an extent that our own experience is not actually that instructive, but I also think one of the reason why we allow shit owners is simply because the economics don't really work at certain levels so essentially, the EFL are waving anyone they can find into clubs, just to ensure they're owned by someone. Yes, you can punish 'bad owners' but then you need 'good ones' Aye, theoretically you can find more billionaires but again, I dunno, you just end up waiting about hoping that you get bought out and that's not really a particularly engaging experience as a fan as then everyone just bangs on all the time about takeovers and consortiums and so on and so forth and to go back to my poorly expressed original point, that's quite boring.

I'd guess the optimistic reading would be that if you controlled the flow of money better (i.e. didn't allow it to leave the game so easily or coalesce around 'the pointy end' quite so much - you could actually make it MORE attractive to invest across the pyramid not less as currently, you'd need to be a mentalist to invest at certain levels.

Fuck me, I can go on and I don't know sometimes how I end up where I am from where I started.

We'll see what happens I guess!
Click to expand...
Couldn’t be arsed reading any of that beyond the first line. When’s the straightener? 🤣
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top