Sourced from The Athletic
In a major development for English football governance, the UK government has made a significant concession to the Premier League by allowing the new independent football regulator to impose a compromise financial distribution deal — rather than being forced to pick between two rigid proposals.
The amendment to the Football Governance Bill, which establishes the regulator, was a key point of contention in Parliament. Initially, the bill proposed a “binary final offer” model where the regulator would choose either the Premier League’s or the English Football League’s (EFL) financial proposal in disputes. However, this approach faced strong opposition from many Premier League clubs.
West Ham United’s vice-chair Baroness Karren Brady, a vocal critic during the bill’s passage through the House of Lords, described the original backstop mechanism as “legally untested pendulum arbitration” likely to cause instability across the football pyramid. While she didn’t specify how, others echoed concerns about the rigidity and unpredictability of the model.
In response, four senior Lords — Birt, Burns, Pannick, and Thomas of Cwmgiedd — proposed a more flexible amendment. Their suggestion granted the regulator the power not only to choose one proposal but also to blend proposals or formulate its own financial determination.
Though initially rejected by the government during the House of Lords debates, the amendment has now been accepted, marking a shift from the “binary final offer” to a “staged regulator determination” process. This change significantly expands the regulator’s authority in resolving financial disputes.
How the New Process Works
When a dispute arises — for instance, over parachute payments for relegated Championship clubs — the regulator will first confirm the issue falls within its remit by consulting the Football Association. Then, a mediator will be appointed to facilitate negotiations aimed at reaching an amicable settlement.
If talks fail, the Premier League and EFL will submit their proposals, backed by evidence demonstrating how their plans support a financially sustainable football pyramid. These proposals will be informed by the regulator’s State of the Game Report, a comprehensive review conducted within 18 months of the regulator’s launch and every five years thereafter.
After reviewing the proposals and requesting further information as needed, the regulator will allow the leagues to amend their offers. Crucially, if the regulator is not satisfied with either side’s proposals, it can now impose its own financial determination.
Implications for English Football
This amendment addresses a primary concern of Premier League clubs by removing the binary choice. However, it simultaneously grants the regulator unprecedented power, marking a notable victory for the regulator’s role despite the Premier League’s costly, multi-year lobbying efforts to dilute it.
Stakeholders across the football pyramid, including the EFL, FA, and National League, have welcomed the compromise as a rare consensus in football governance reform.
David Kogan, the government’s preferred candidate to chair the regulator, emphasized that the backstop mechanism should be viewed as a “tactical weapon” — a last resort never meant to be triggered. Speaking before the Culture, Media and Sports Committee, he remarked, “You don’t use nuclear options, because if you do, well, you all die… There is probably at least a year where there is time for football to agree among themselves, and the more they agree among themselves, the less we have to be involved.”
As the Football Governance Bill moves closer to becoming law, this amendment signals a new era of independent oversight with enhanced powers designed to protect the long-term sustainability of English football’s financial ecosystem.
SOURCE: The Athletic
IMAGE: Getty Images
