The BBC hosted a televised forum on the ‘Business of Football’ in Manchester on Tuesday evening (2nd March). The panel consisted of Gordon Taylor (Chief Executive of the PFA), David Gold (West Ham United joint owner), Hugh Pym (Chief Economic Correspondent of the BBC) and Dan Johnson (Premier League). It was hosted by Mark Pougatch of the BBC who chaired a fairly well-constructed panel although perhaps the addition of a player (for example, Sol Campbell possibly?) would have added value on the question of players wages and bonuses and their impact on the English game.
Filmed in front of a studio audience which appeared to be made up largely of genuine football supporters (including at least one from Portsmouth) and people with an interest in the financial state of the game and its future, the BBC had created an opportunity to host discussion and opinions and encourage debate on the financial mess within our national game, a debate that Pompey have effectively acted as the catalyst for.
In part, the programme made interesting viewing but Mark Pougatch made a hugely frustrating contribution by diluting much of the added value that might have been obtained from the forum. In truth, the one hour scheduled time could and probably should have been two hours. This is a huge subject with massive implications for the game. However, Pougatch irritatingly interrupted both questions and responses frequently - rapidly moving on to another question or topic, almost as if he was about to hear something that could potentially have been too controversial or pointed to possibly be fit to broadcast. The reality was that he uncannily prevented the debate developing at precisely the point at which each speaker appeared to be about to make things interesting.
As is typical of such forums, the inter-panel questioning and debate was supplemented with questions and comment from members, some pre-selected, of the studio audience. And needless to say, some of the focus was on the situation at Pompey. Reflecting on this, Gold said that there was a real danger that despite how far the Premier League has come in the past 17 years there are now signs of a “*** in the armour” and football needs to react to what is happening. He was then challenged about his own willingness (when after announcing that West Ham were £110M in debt) to pay a player £100K per week (believed to be Ruud Van Nistelroy). Gold said that “there is a big difference between paying £10M for a player and £100K per week on a 4 year contract to simply paying a player £100K per week for 4 months.” A shot without doubt directed at Fratton Park’s bows.
Anyway, for those who didn’t see it, here is my take on some of the other key points for what they’re worth :
Dan Johnson was asked why the Premier League had been so quiet on the Pompey issue. He denied that they had but added that they were bound by process and rules. He said that they were just ‘football competition organisers‘. Nice one Dan! A football competition organiser that has the right to withhold cash from clubs. I think we need to somehow marry responsibility with the organising role - if only to justify your very existence.
Taylor was asked if he thought that wages were at the root of the problem. He dodged this quite nicely and said that in this country the Insolvency Act makes it easy for companies to fold, write-off debt and pay 10p in the £ before re-opening a day later under a different name. Taylor was challenged as to why football felt they had the right to special treatment as a creditor. Taylor, in slightly cryptic mood again, said , “who would want a club to gain success with players that they can neither afford to buy nor pay and at the expense of clubs who are managing themselves properly“. I think I get his point.
Gold feels that debt is a form of cheating. Gold was asked why he offered PFC money to help them and he unsurprisingly admitted that it was out of self-interest but also that he was a football fan and he genuinely doesn’t want to see a football club go bust. Administration is one thing but a club going bust is disastrous he said. Well I guess that West Ham are either a bunch of cheats or suddenly clear of the £110M of debt that Gold and Sullivan bought into.
Taylor said that if we’re not careful then the Premier League could end up being a bit of a poisoned chalice. I think I said that once!
Pym challenged the fact that football creditors have a priority that is different to other businesses. A definite bone of contention but again something that could be resolved by a change in the rules regarding inter-club payments. As for players, to my mind they are insulated enough by the contracts that they sign.
Johnson confirmed that the 20 Premier League Chairmen met in September and voted for new regulations that come into force w.e.f. 1st March 2010.
A supporter in the audience felt that ticket prices are prohibitive and he and his friends simply cannot afford to go. Gold agreed saying that empty seats were appearing in the Premier League. He said the trouble is one club cannot do it (reduce prices) alone because he’ll end up a local hero but eventually with a bankrupt club. Change in football must start at the top and this again is where the likes of FIFA and the Premier League need to have a significant input, if only as a facilitator. Wouldn’t want them taking too much responsibility would we!
Gold also feels that docking Pompey nine points now is bolting the door after the horse has bolted. Points deductions should instead take place in lieu of misdemeanours as and when they occur e.g. fans running on the pitch, missed payments as and when they occur. Taylor argued that there has to be a better way of dealing with financial problems than a points deduction. He added that we need to be more proactive than reactive. Johnson agreed that a points deduction should always be a last resort. Can we have ours back then please Dan?
A Man United fan asked David Gold how a £25 ticket became £43 in the space of three seasons at Birmingham. Good question. Gold said that Birmingham have to charge more when they can to maximise the revenue from their 25,000 stadium. Man United fans get charged more because they will fill the stadium regardless. Gold added that they often charge kids just £1 and when Stoke (for example) turn up for a game on a Sunday morning they only charge £5. Taylor said that it was wrong to disadvantage away fans but Gold added that he has been lobbying for a 50% reduction across the board but he can’t get everybody to sign up. Good answer too. Shall we take a guess at which clubs are being a bit backward with this one.
Another supporter in the audience stated that Bundesliga clubs charge an average of £13 and achieve higher average attendances than the Premier League. Pougatch argued, “but when was the last time they came close to winning the champions league”. So that’s what the rest of us are here for; making up the numbers to allow the rich clubs to try and dominate the Champions League!
Dan Johnson said that he didn’t want to be drawn into the Portsmouth situation. Why ever not Dan? Pougatch said “but you can’t be happy with the fact that they’ve had four owners” to which he replied, “if they were decent owners then we wouldn’t have a problem”. Hang on a minute; regulatory controls, FPPT. Oh No, I forgot, the Premier League are just a football competition organiser aren’t they.
On the subject of ownership, Taylor warned about the size of the debt at Man United. Pougatch said that the recent bond issue was twice over-subscribed but Taylor replied that their debt is only sustainable while they consistently get into the Champions League. Hugh Pym said that there are better ownership models than those being used in the PL. Johnson said that we aren’t saying that Germany is wrong or right but argued that the Premier League enjoyed greater freedom to choose the models they wanted. Pym said to Johnson that the Pompey case suggested that the Premier League needs to look a lot closer at regulating ownership and Taylor agreed.
A Burnley fan said that he had just returned from Japan and that the Premier League was very popular in Japan. He added that he thought that Pym was correct in what he said about ownership models and that freedom brings distortion and also that clubs could ultimately be caught in breach of the Competition Act. Dan Johnson said the distortion has existed for a long time. Oh, that’s ok then Dan! Pougatch remarked that the distortion is far greater than it was in the 70’s. The Burnley fan said that the reason he’s worried about ownership is that clubs with billionaire and sovereign wealth can buy up the best players not necessarily to use them but simply exclude them from playing for other teams. Gold said that the upside of all the money is that they are in our league and nobody else’s. Oh big deal - and at what cost!!
The Derby County Chairman, in the audience stated what we all know i.e. that wage bills don’t necessarily equal points in the Premiership. And he said that rather than focus on wage caps as a potential issue we should think more about Fiscal Responsibility Plans. I think that’s American for proper budgetary control!
And finally, a supporter then picked Taylor up on his statement that the players were the most important thing in football. Taylor quickly backtracked and stated that the players and fans were equally important. But we know what he really meant now don’t we.
The same fan resurrected the topic of wages and said that the more money that comes into football the richer the players become; his argument being that the money doesn’t get used to reduce ticket prices. A good and valid point in my opinion.
And the trivia :
Man United’s debt exceeds the combined total of the Bundesliga, and there is a correlation between football debt in both UK and Spain and the general economies in those countries.
And personally I have a problem with the concept of sustainable debt in football. It is one thing to own a credit card, pay for “stuff” with it and then clear it every month. Sustainable debt. But it’s a bit different at football clubs because (a) the numbers are bigger , and (b) the source of the funding for required payments isn’t always in the control of the club holding the debt. To that extent, sustainable debt in football remains a risky business.
All in all, it was still difficult to gain any greater confidence from the debate that radical change will be made, despite some of the key players clearly believing that it should. But perhaps we should at least be encouraged that the topic is firmly on the agenda, thanks to Pompey.