Football From The Ashes

Pinterest

The storyline in Carroll’s ‘nonsense’ rhyme is a simple one. Lured into a proposed revelation by the high born, wealthy and aristocratic Walrus and his subservient , artisan subjugate; the Carpenter, a group of young, ambitious excitable oysters ignore the wisdom of an elder and leave the oyster bed to follow the devious pair who then gobble them up.

It is a tale of greed, deceit and opportunism. Don’t read the rest of the poem until you have read this final part of my trilogy, then see how many more analogies you can find like ‘oysters in suits?’

‘Football From the Ashes’

 The time has come to talk of many things.

Project ‘big picture’ has increased in notoriety since it came to light back in October that Manchester United and Liverpool had, through their respective owners been discussing a potential proposal for a restructure of the Premier League. At first it was seen as two sets of greedy American owners attempting to set themselves up to:

·       Control Decision making within the PL shareholders ( the clubs and FA)

·       Create a wealth distribution mechanism that included the sale of games by clubs through their own platforms favouring the big clubs.

·       Reduce the size of the PL in order to make room for lucrative fixtures within Europe or Globally ( which would also mean scrapping the EFL Cup and Community Shield)

·       Protecting the big clubs from relegation.

The detail can be found easily online and people will form their own opinions, however it would only be fair to say that following the initial discussions, other big clubs were invited to discuss the proposition as well as the other major stakeholders. The ‘big six’ which included Tottenham Hotspur, Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal were joined by The EFL in the form of Chairman Rick Parry and Golden Share owner the FA, it would seem through an invitation to the Chairman Greg Clarke. It has been reported that these ‘other’ stakeholders were involved from the outset.

Later the other clubs from both Leagues and FA’s Executives Teams were brought up to speed and a proposal was discussed at a full PL Shareholders meeting and rejected by the current voting system of a 14 vote majority although it was disputed in some quarters that a vote actually took place. The proposal was also condemned by the Government as ‘ a backroom deal’.

Actually this is a shame. Rick Parry EFL Chairman was telling the truth and being honest when he said according to talkSPORT:

“ It’s a broken system, it was broken before COVID, from our perspective, what project big picture does is address everyone one of those inequalities”, He went on to say “ I look at the benefits for us and if its taken two of our leading clubs to come up with a plan, lets congratulate them and hopefully make something radical happen, because we need radical solutions”

 I would ask is the devil in the detail ? Is it the components of PBP that is in question or the need for some kind of proposal as a starting point? Has the detail been communicated effectively? The answer would be no. Is there a need for a radical proposal? If the system is broken then it would seem that there is.

Pros and Cons

Upside

It must be a good thing for the Stakeholders in football at all levels to get together and assess the level and depth of the problems facing football whether they be COVID related or not

A solution to the three questions I presented in the last article needs to be found and all stakeholders need to contribute. A proposal is required so maybe PBP is a starting point or catalyst.

When we look at FIFA and UEFA and other big league activities we will find that doing nothing is not an option and English football needs to get its house in order to get a seat at that table.

The Premier League and its biggest clubs cannot benefit the lower levels of the game without evolution. The EFL and lower league football and grass roots is threatened more by the PL not being able to participate and compete favourably in global football than by the Premier League and its biggest clubs getting more control over their ability to manage their earning potential.

As it stands the PBP proposal would put more money into the EFL system than before and would create a more equitable distribution of Parachute payment money than currently exists. This could be improved upon if the PL is able to compete favourably as a league and as individual clubs in the global market and the right caveats are put in place.

An immediate cash injection to counter the losses made due to COVID in the EFL cannot be a bad thing. ￡100m to the FA will contribute to grass roots in a significant way.

Downside

Control is a big issue, the proposal to create a cartel of ‘longstanding Shareholders’ who hold the vote is a great application of smoke and mirrors as with only a two thirds majority required to carry a vote it means 6 clubs ( probably the big 6) control the decision making of the whole league. Given that would also include the power to remove the CEO it would mean the CEO and Executive report in practice to 6 clubs rather than the entire group of shareholders.

The power of veto. It is proposed that the nine long term shareholders ( therefore the big 6) would have the power of veto on club ownership. A potential buyer would need the approval of six of the nine to purchase a club in the Premier League. Certainly one way to limit the opposition!

The proposed financial distribution would work well for the EFL. Currently they receive 8% of the profit distribution. Under the proposal they would receive 25%. This , however is at the expense of the bottom half clubs in the Premier League whose prize money diminishes and it creates a bigger gap between them and the top six whose share increases.

The proposed broadcasting rights adjustment to include 8 games per season for clubs to live stream on there own platforms with the profit going directly to the club. Creates further revenue for big six and less for the rest whose games will be less attractive and streamed to a smaller audience than if they were live on TV ( Sky / BT)

The EFL would lose the Football League Cup and FA Lose Community Shield.

There would be fewer clubs (18) in the PL and a new promotion relegation play off system. Initially four teams would be relegated and only two promoted then a play off involving the 3rd,4th,5th team in the Championship and the 16th pl team in a fight to survive .

There is more as I have said but the above points serve to create some kind of comparative assessment going forward. Can the stakeholders agree on the upsides as a starting point ? and can they review the downsides with a different perspective and present something more palatable to all?

Consider:

·       A reduction in league fixtures for all professional clubs which does not impact on revenues, delivers overhead savings and creates sustainability across the game

·       A structure of leagues that allows the biggest clubs to compete favourably in Europe and potentially globally.

·       A constitutional restructure of the PL, EFL and National League which rewards sustainability and competitive success encouraging investment by those at the top into the system and the clubs below.

·       A promotion and relegation system which delivers excitement and retains a league structure that is competitive and compelling and provides opportunity for all clubs to grow and ‘live the dream’

·       A structure that ensures the Premier League is still the best league in the World and that the pyramid is the envy of everyone.

 Hold those thoughts, its beginning to sound like an agenda !

In our story, who plays the Walrus ? Did John Henry open the ‘ the secret’ meeting like this ? Maybe it was Joel Glazer? But then who would be the carpenter? Some might say Mr Parry. Others may see the ‘big six’ as the Walrus and the ‘ other fourteen’ as the carpenter. Either way it would appear that the EFL clubs are the oysters and the perception is that they are about to be gobbled up!

What if we offer an alternative hypothesis.

There are some indisputable facts here. FIFA definitely plans to expand its competition structure and UEFA definitely wants to expand the Champions League. We have already seen that they both need to do this come what may, in order to increase revenues and produce a surplus that can be significant enough to support and develop the global game. We can be cynical and look back at corruption allegations and mismanagement of funds but lets look beyond this and accept the roles of these two powerhouses in World Football. They need money.

They also want to support and grow the notion of ‘one football family’.

There is a major threat to both of these elements. Independent or breakaway football competitions with no global governance or affiliation.

FIFA recognise this as a real and present danger in an open letter to the football world in January the World Governing Body stated:

“ Any club or player involved in such a competition would as a consequence not be allowed to participate in any competition organised by FIFA or their respective Confederation “

 The letter was endorsed and signed by every Confederation. The key competitions would be The World Cup, European Championships, Copa America, The European Champions League and Europa League and the transcontinental equivalents. It is not clear whether this would be enforceable in law but if it came to it the governing bodies top competition could be devoid of the best players in the World and fail anyway, the consequences for all football would be devastating.

England is not the only country with a problem. Barcelona’s financial problems are well documented whilst Real Madrid are openly claiming front row seats in a reorganised or independent European League, The value of the Bundesliga’s domestic rights appear to have dropped throughout COVID, Inter Milan are experiencing ownership issues and there is more.

Let us for one moment revisit our needs and wants. There is a lot of ‘sociology’ out there referencing football and what I am about to say is not meant to disrespect that. There is a lot of truth about the ‘tribal’ nature of the game, its role being core to the communities it serves, its global power to do good and deliver awareness of social issues but essentially it exists because it is fun. It is fun to play, it is fun to watch, it is fun to talk about and its fun to enjoy with your family and your mates. Take that away and all the rest falls away with it. So with radical thinking in mind, shall we put entertainment, enjoyment and fun at the top of the agenda?

Football is entertainment, not just any entertainment its purpose is to thrill. Why do players struggle to obey COVID rules when celebrating a goal? Because of the thrill. Why do fans sing and cheer and chant and get carried away on a wave of emotion; win ,lose or draw? The thrill of being part of it. I want that if I am a fan in the National League, a player in League 2, A physio in League 1, an assistant coach in the Championship or Jurgen Klopp at Liverpool. That’s why it spoils my weekend if I am a Weymouth fan having just lost to Yeovil Town in a derby match. Why the effort to get to Oldham as a Barrow fan and enjoy a couple of cans celebrating an away win in the back of the minibus on the way home is worth it. Why saving up and sacrificing a few treats because I want to watch Southampton play Inter Milan in the San Siro in the Europa League or keep the faith in the stadium in Istanbul, knowing deep in my heart that Liverpool are going to rise from the ashes in the second half and be Champions of Europe. I also want to wrap myself in the flag of St George, the classic yellow and blue diamond of Brazil or any one of a number of Tricolors and thrill to the glamour and excitement of a World Cup.

The football industry owes this to its fans and it doesn’t matter whether they stand on the lower league terraces or wine and dine in corporate hospitality or even sit at home watching by virtue of their TV subscription, they pay for the privilege to be thrilled.

 Is it fair to criticise the people who are actually starting the discussion ? None of the above can happen without finance. This is true of all sport. Elite Sport both creates revenue and feeds on it.

Every season in F1 the cars have to be better, faster, more reliable. Billions of dollars go into R&D, Driver Salaries, safety and Marketing. Prize money continually increases in golf and tennis and Billions go into better equipment design, facilities and players travel to tournaments in private jets. Add the finances in NFL and other traditional North American sports and its many billions not going into football.

Cricket and Rugby may not be in the same league but more competitions, tours and International Tournaments are required to support the sport.

None of these billions is going to football.

 Elite sport is continually competing for market share and investment. The Premier League does extremely well – for now. Football overall does well globally but the biggest football countries and there Leagues want to gain parity with the PL. If they get a bigger slice of the ‘football’ cake there is less for the PL. If the PL increases its appeal and its revenues , as it has done in every cycle to now, there is less for the rest.

I have not attempted to take sides in this debate or criticise the proponents of change, whether that be PBP, FIFA or UEFA. I know all of the people I have mentioned, I have debated with them or done business with them and more whose names have not been mentioned but who are central to this issue. None of them is foolish, they are all intelligent, brilliant business people and do understand this industry. It would be wrong to assume this is all about greed and avarice as it has been described in some circles. Would it be na?ve to believe that they understand the issues facing football and are actually trying to step into the threshold and pull the game back from the edge?

All participants in this understand that there can be no apex without a solid and firm foundation. Pyramids might be in the desert but they are built on a bed of stone, not the shifting sand. The game has a chance to reinforce the stone at the base and raise the apex to a new and higher level. It needs Diverse thinking from all sides and egos left at the door so that further discussions are held in a psychologically safe environment, where radical ideas can be debated and creativity can take place.

Maybe there is enough money in football to go around and maybe all needs and wants can be met but it may also be that there is not and a collaborative strategy to streamline overheads and tap into those billions that are currently going elsewhere is needed. Apple would develop a new phone. Dell would design a new laptop and Amazon would create a new market meanwhile Elon Musk will keep sending rockets into space until one lands properly.

None of these companies would do these things without an eagle eye on the bottom line and of course investors in football are no different. They want to make profits to invest in their businesses and to increase their bank balances. There is no golden rule that says you can only earn money from something you don’t enjoy. Deep down we would all like to be paid by following our passion or for having an adventure.

So we have covered the Why? The What ? now for the how?

There are some options

1.     Take PBP and adjust it

a.     18 team league

b.     Change voting from 14/6 to majority ( 10 votes carries)

c.     3 up / 3 down two automatic ( 1&2 Championship up 17& 18 down)

d.     Play off 1 up or stays up from 1,2,3 Championship 16 PL. 

e.     Profit Distribution 75% divided amongst Premier League clubs and 25% to Football League

f.      EFL Cup Scrapped .

g.     EFL three leagues of 24 teams

h.     EFL to receive ￡250m one off bale out payment

i.      ￡100m to FA for grass roots and facilities

j.      Each club to be granted 8 matches per season to live stream across their own channels sold direct to consumer.

Or

2.     Take PBP and adjust it a lot

a.     18 team league

b.     Change voting from 14/6 to majority ( 10 votes carries)

               i.    FA vote comes into play on constitutional and ownership issues where there is a tied vote.

c.     3 up / 3 down two automatic ( 1&2 Championship up 17& 18 down)

d.     Play off League ; 1 up or stays up from 1,2,3 Championship 16 PL. Round Robin league of four. Winner goes up.

e.     Profit Distribution 70 % divided amongst Premier League clubs and 30% to Football League of which 5% is prize money for the Play off League.

f.      EFL Cup Scrapped .

g.     Championship of 20 Teams (EFL)

h.     Three National Leagues of 22 Teams ( EFL)

i.      Two Regional Leagues of 24 Teams (EFL)

j.      EFL to receive ￡250m one off bale out payment

k.     ￡100m to FA for grass roots and facilities

l.      Each club to be granted 6 matches per season to live stream across their own channels sold direct to consumer.

With both of these options English Football needs to support a revamp of FIFA and UEFA Competitions which benefits our biggest clubs. This should generate more for them individually so that more of the collective revenue can be distributed further down the PL and the EFL. It would also make the PL more attractive as it makes the biggest clubs more successful outside the league and create a bigger PL following globally; benefitting all clubs and creating more wealth.

 These are the key elements of PBP. There are of course other elements and more detail but lets move away from that and be really radical.

Project Phoenix

Potential League Structure

•   4 National 18 team leagues.
•   PL and PL Championship ( Governed by the PL)
•   Title Sponsorship overall or Split
•   14 Longest serving clubs in PL in any one season become Standing Shareholders
•    Constitutional, Governance and Regulatory issues (TBD) to be governed by this group.
• Voting on a majority basis 8 votes carries. FA Vote with Golden share in event of 7/7 split.
• 65% of overall PL domestic profit goes to PL on equal basis
•   25% goes to PL Championship on equal distribution basis
•   10% goes to EFL for distribution to National Leagues ?
•   18 PL teams right to stream 6 live games per season on own platforms .
•   Streamed games must incorporate a mixed category of fixtures
•   PL Championship broadcasting remains as a collective.
• 3 up / 3 down two automatic ( 1&2 Championship up 17& 18 down)
•  Play off League ; 1 up or stays up from 1,2,3 Championship 16 PL. Round Robin league of four. Winner goes up.
•  EFL Cup played out by two EFL National Leagues and next two Regional Leagues.
• EFL govern two Regional Professional Leagues of 22 clubs ( EFL North and South)
•   EFL to receive ￡250m one off bale out payment
•   ￡100m to FA for grass roots and facilities

EFL Play Offs:

•   EFL League 1 to PL 2 and EFL 2 TO EFL1.
•  4 up / 4 down two automatic ( 1 & 2 up 17 & 18 down)
•  Play off League ; League of 6 Winner goes up.
•   3,4,5,6 EFL Plus 15,16 PL 2
• National League down)
•   Play off League ; League of 6, Winner goes up.
•  2,3,4 EFL Regional Plus 14,15,16 PL 2
•  Prize money for Play off Leagues TBD.

 Cups

•      FA Cup format remains the same
•     A new cup competition for all clubs not in Champions League from PL, PL 2 Championship and EFL National Leagues

These are simply ideas that may need adjusting according to Champions League format. All remaining clubs will be split between FA Trophy and FA vase with a Semi and Finals Festival over a long weekend at Wembley. All levels of the game get some showcase events through the play off formats. There is scope for some David and Goliath games in two cup competitions. Wembley finals can be spaced over the second half of the season due to less league fixtures all round and the FA get some great Wembley events. The FA Cup is great and unique and should be protected but it’s not the ‘Superbowl’

The formula needs detail and negotiation but the concept is that promotion and relegation is live throughout the season making games more meaningful. Mid table is not far from a prize or a fight, no one can coast.

I am not saying my mathematics above is perfect nor is this my proposal. If it serves as a framework for an agenda or as Matthew Syed would say for some ‘Rebel Ideas’ then great.

Author – Paul Gardner who wrote a book called ‘Nice Guys Finish Last’ wrote:

“Where you have a race, you have winners, and where you have winners you have prizes. Ah, the prizes. It is the prizes. that glitter and beckon, the prizes that keep everybody running. There is no mystery about the prizes; they are worldly goods and the things that are misguidedly assumed to go with them: power, respect, happiness.”

Then there is the greatest prize of all

Currently this would be the Champions League at European Club level. The World Cup at International Level. Clearly as the EFL and lower leagues must embrace a debate about the structure of the domestic game in order to avoid the inevitable collapse of the current structure by default, so must the big clubs and the Premier League embrace a debate about the future of International Competitions. There are three reasons:

1.     Money. Radical and Diverse thinking also needs to be applied here to generate revenue from the piece of the pie not yet consumed. That includes revenue flowing into other entertainment and sport .There is money out there despite the current downturn in traditional revenues. There are funds waiting to get to work.

2.     ‘Inevitability of evolution’. Blindly refusing to explore change would encourage discussions around independence and breakaways and an inevitable collapse of the football family with in my opinion devastating repercussions. I am old enough to remember Kerry Packer.

3.     Audience. Finally the bit that everyone pays for; Fun, enjoyment, best against best, gladiatorial combat and the thrill of a brave new world.

Why would we not consider a FIFA controlled World Clubs League. If the calendar can be adjusted with fewer teams in each domestic league without danger to the players by controlling match frequency better, why not discuss it and derive real benefits from it.

In conjunction, why would a UEFA Controlled, expanded and rebranded Super Champions League not be worth a look. Again with fewer domestic commitments for the biggest clubs in Europe, why not look at it with caveats around distribution of wealth and protection for International Football. Could this become the European ‘ Superbowl’

An excellent article by Oliver Kay in the Athletic explains the whole issue exceptionally well.

I would suggest that if we accept that change is needed for the whole game then lets make proposals like the above work for the whole game.

The danger in ignoring or dismissing this could result in independent action.

A European or Global independent Super League would certainly plunge the Phoenix into the fire. If the above helps this to be avoided, the above should be pursued.

Highly competitive, compulsive International Football. International Representative Football should still be the pinnacle of a players career, it should be meaningful and cherished, it is part of the fun and the rich tapestry of the world greatest sport. Does the Nations League in its current format really achieve that? Would Bi annual Euro’s and World Cup make International Football more challenging and meaningful?

Would all of the above contribute to a better product ? ( yes, as well as being many other things it is also a product) Would thinking creatively here generate the revenues to ensure the game lower down remains intact or actually improves?

So what of the future of broadcasting, sponsorship and partnerships. If we do nothing we will lose these essential investors into our game.

 Audiences are changing,

Andrea Radrizzani, major shareholder and Chairman of Leeds United is convinced of this.

“ The game must democratise the rights markets by giving generation ‘Z’ and millennials the chance to pay ￡2 to watch the individual games they want to watch”

“ Maybe they end up spending more but they want the flexibility to decide what they watch, when they want”

According to The Athletic, Clair Enders, the Media Industry analyst who declared that the live rights for Europe peaked in 2018 warned that ‘every finance director, agent and Ferrari salesman should start to panic’ speaking at the Sunday Times Football Business Summit. Athletic reporter Matt Slater asks ‘ Premier League TV rights: has the bubble burst?’

Enders lists a broadcaster loss in the billions, an ageing audience and the inability of Netflix ( and one can assume all streaming platforms) to save the day.

Slaters article is extremely informative and touches on all of the salient points and highlights the diverse interests of all parties and the conundrum that the big leagues across Europe face when preparing for tender. This is an essential consideration in choosing a new and radical direction.

We must embrace new ways of doing things so that football still enjoys a live experience with the presence of fans but if the game is going to change with more global competition and our favourite clubs playing overseas, games must still be available to the non-travelling fan it needs a pricing structure that makes money but also creates access to many.

Ticket pricing is a prickly issue. PBP suggests that a ￡20 cap be introduced for away fans in the Premier League and an increase in away allocation. We have seen how important the full house live audience is to the spectacle. Broadcasters need full stadiums as do the clubs and the players. This then seems to make sense but how does it get funded in what appears to be a diminishing rights market? There have been experiments in club funded or sponsor funded away travel for fans and incentives to encourage take up of away fan allocations.

On Jan 31st the Sunday Times front page headline stated

“ Sport faces biggest cash crisis since tobacco ban”

The paper reported that ‘ Civil servants have warned leading sports industry figures that a crackdown on gambling firm sponsors is being considered’

It went on to say that ‘ MPs and campaigners had welcomed news that the Government was considering plans for a blanket logo ban as part of their review of the gambling act 2005’

It also quotes former conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith:

“ Banning gambling logos on sportswear would be a welcome step but given the risks presented by gambling, the Government will need to deal with this issue more widely.”

Given that half of the Premier League have gambling logos on their shirts with revenue from this alone ranging from approximately ￡7m - ￡20m and additional revenues from betting partner commissions, it will create a significant non Covid shortfall.

Gambling is going to go. Firstly in terms of sponsorship, advertising and branding. Secondly in house gambling on matches. When this happens and remote gambling via apps is limited to an online betting slip, without the ads and the promotions using players and clubs, the enormous revenues associated will dry up. It will need to be replaced.

Transfer fees, windows, contracts, GBE and Brexit.

There is pressure from a number of fronts, not the least Agents and Intermediaries to end transfer fees. Before we think this cant happen we should remember Bosman.

What will the transfer window look like? Are we in for a North American style draft system? How will this affect the future of recruitment? What will Jim White do then?

Agents and Intermediaries

There is a drive for freedom of movement without compensation, this would give control to the agents, or would it ?

·       Why give a long contract on big money if a player can walk away without compensating the club?

·        What would the terms be for cancelling a contract mid-term?

·       Could a club sack a player who is not performing?

·        How can an agents fee be calculated without a long term contract?

·        Can we imagine a player with a six month notice clause and agents payments cancelled on termination?

Agents or should I say the regulations, influence and control of agents divides opinion. It is not an equitable divide and generally they are seen as pariahs, living off the talents of their clients, screwing clubs and taking money out of the game.

Intermediaries come in all shapes and sizes and I have experienced all of them. It is grossly unfair to brand them all in the same way. They are part of all sport and not just football and the good ones provide a great service to their clients and will negotiate aggressively and stubbornly to get the best deal they can. Is that any different to an individual buying a new car, making an offer for a house or getting the best deal from your energy supplier? I expect my Independent Financial Adviser to get me the best deal he can on a mortgage and investors expect the best returns from their brokers. Brokers get a commission based on how well they perform and lawyers can set their fees, like surgeons on their reputation and track record.

The question is however, how should those fees for agents and their commissions be set and how should they be paid. The truth is if the client is sought after, the agent decides; he /she has the leverage. If the agent is desperate to get the client a contract, the club can be strong. It is a game of cat and mouse and almost anything can be built into the agents agreement and the players contract.

So can the frequency of payments and how the commission is calculated. One favourite is the agents fee being split 50/50 between the player and the club, so 50% of the fee is deemed as for work the agent has done for the club as part of the deal, its called dual representation. It really means the agent is paid commission by the club for doing his job for the player and again by the club for brokering the deal on the clubs behalf.

On the 10th September 2020 off the pitch .com reported, through reporter; Emil Gjerding Nielson that Super-Agent Jorge Mendes firm, Gestifute was paid €7m of the €40m transfer fee that Wolves paid FC Porto for Fabio Silva. This was according to a release on the Portuguese stack exchange. Gestifute, apparently did not represent Silva, this was apparently Soccer Talents Vision (STV) who received €3m.

We can be sure that agents worldwide will be following progress on any restructure of the industry , they will want their say and their piece of the pie.

Who are the other stakeholders? Do they all need a say?

In an article in the Athletic by Oliver Kay ( referenced above) a statement by Football Supporters Europe (FSE), signed by 139 fan groups of leading clubs in 16 countries, stated:

“We recognise that the game is in desperate need of broad reform,” the FSE statement continued. “But proposals to this end must seek to revive the competitive balance in European competitions, protect domestic leagues, promote the interests of fans and encourage fairer revenue distribution. A European Super League would achieve none of these objectives — quite the opposite.”

Essentially they and others are all stakeholders and must be invited to contribute to the conversation. As well as those already mentioned in the article we have a non-exhaustive list including:

European Clubs Association, European Leagues Association, , the PFA, LMA and their European counterparts, FIFPro ( The international Federation of Professional Footballers), the Association of Football Agents, The European Football Agents Association, the Association of Sporting Directors and

What about the wider stakeholder network, often forgotten?

Grass Roots and Schools

Government ( DCMS )

Community Football Groups and Diversity Groups. (Kick it Out, Women in Football etc.)

Topics and Issues

Project Phoenix would also have to stimulate conversations about the game we see. Facilities; including grass roots resources and spectator facilities like safe standing. Rules, Laws and regulations related to all the above and the Laws of the Game ( VAR ?) Youth Development in its entirety including compensation, the drop out from the Academy System and EPPP, Diversity , Equality of opportunity and inclusion. Access to and quality of coaching, Player Care and Safeguarding, mental health and wellbeing.

I hope to address these and other related topics in future posts and blogs

There is no simple answer or silver bullet and I am not trying to provide one, merely stimulate debate and provoke thought.

Its complex, it has started but is it under control?

My great mentor once warned me just before he set off for Italia 90

“ It’ll be tough, It’ll be hard and it won’t be easy but it'll be worth it!

Sir Bobby Robson