In April this year, the Government announced the terms of reference for its Fans Led Review of Football Governance. Around the same time, I’d written my own article for The Journal, exploring some of the big issues facing non-league football, as it comes out of the pandemic. On July 22nd the Chair of the Review, Tracey Crouch MP, published preliminary findings, headlining with the need for a new Independent Regulator for English Football. So, what does this Review mean for non-league football and what are the implications of a new independent regulator at our level of the game?

Given that the Review was triggered by the failed attempt to launch a European Super League, it’s hardly surprising that the preliminary findings are heavily focussed on the professional game. Financial jeopardy, propagated by reckless owners and a toothless regulatory framework are common themes that underpin both the need for change in the game and the suggested mechanisms that could bring that change about.

The Review concluded that “the football authorities have lost the trust and confidence of the fans as have, in a number of cases, clubs themselves”, a finding highlighted by a survey I conducted in May that found that only 13% of respondents felt the FA is delivering effective leadership. However, the FA aren’t the only “authority” in the firing line, with the Review wanting to see “greater independence in the decision-making structures of the existing football authorities - the Premier League, English Football League, The FA and National League.”

The FA have clearly lost control over the stewardship of the game, leading to the conclusion that only a new independent regulator can “address issues that are most relevant to the risks to the game and already at least partially a matter of English law - particularly financial regulation, corporate governance and ownership”. However, if these risks to the game are already a matter of English law, why can’t these laws be reformed to protect the beautiful game and without such reform, would a regulator have any real power?

Cost controls, real time financial monitoring, minimum governance requirements and revised separate tests for owners and directors of clubs are all on the table, yet the running of league competitions, video technology, Wembley Stadium and the delivery of a grassroots strategy, are not. Whilst the Government can be forgiven for not wanting to get involved in “football issues”, the current surge in Covid cases, seemingly peaking at the dawn of the new season, make many in the non-league game fear the FA is sleepwalking into another curtailed season. 94% of the respondents to the survey I conducted in May, wanted the FA to define in the rules how a season that cannot be completed on the pitch should be concluded. Whilst nothing is yet enshrined in law, the FA have at least consulted Clubs on their plans to manage another interrupted season.

There is better news for future fan engagement, with the Review committing to “explore measures to mandate greater fan engagement, and in particular measures that will seek to provide for fan consultation on key issues”. 70% of respondents to my May survey agreed that all stakeholders, including fans, players and volunteers should have been included in the FA’s consultation on concluding the 2020/21 season. I’d like to see fan engagement expanded across the other stakeholders in the game, but more important is the Review’s definition of what constitutes a key issue.

In terms of individual Clubs, heritage is clearly an important issue and the Review has suggested giving “democratic legally constituted fan groups” the power of veto over reserved items, which could include club badges, location, colours and competitions”. Logically speaking there is no reason why ‘Assets of Community Value’ would be as applicable to Bridgwater United as they are to Manchester United, but the devil is always in the detail and non-league fans will always struggle more than their professional counterparts to assemble the “democratic legally constituted” infrastructure referred to by the Review.

However, the voice of National League supporters has certainly been heard, with the Review recommending that “meaningful discussions” be undertaken to consider the National League’s top division being absorbed into the EFL. Whilst the FA seemingly run the top division of the National League, Step 1 of the non-league pyramid, this level of football clearly has much more in common with the professional game than the non-league game and its departure from the ‘Alliance’ structure of governance would have enabled the FA to deliver a cohesive approach to concluding the last two non-league seasons.

Whilst there is a great deal to welcome from the Independent Fan Led Review, there are also a great many questions still to answer, particularly for non-league football. Stakeholder engagement and consultation is a logical evolution for the game and would provide an effective check on the influence of the FA, yet this has not really been explored in any detail. Neither has the future of the Independent Regulator, whose powers are still very much unclear. Will there be new legislation to enable football to be governed differently from other businesses or will existing legislation have to do? Hopefully, these questions will be answered when the Review publish their final report, but until that time non-league fans will be holding their metaphorical breath to see whether change is only for the top table of English football, not the base of its much-admired pyramid.Ian Nockolds