THE ROLE OF THE FOOTBALL SUPPORTERS' ASSOCIATION IN FOOTBALL GOVERNANCE

Written by Andrew Page

The Football Supporters’ Association describes itself as the national, democratic, representative body for football supporters in England and Wales. Their website says that: “we are the leading advocates for supporter ownership, better fan engagement, cheaper ticket prices, the choice to stand at the match, protecting fan rights, good governance, diversity, and all types of supporter empowerment.” On 11th December 2024, the FSA released a statement in response to FIFA’s announcement that the 2032 World Cup will be hosted by Saudi Arabia. The statement was highly critical of the decision, raising a number of issues for FIFA to take up with the host nation, and urging the FA to withdraw support for the tournament should FIFA fail to act.

NUFC Fans Against Sportswashing agree with everything in the statement, which references the human rights abuses and abusive treatment of workers that were a feature of Qatar 2022.

The FSA were also clear on their opposition to the Qatar World Cup, and during the run up to the tournament they published a number of critical articles and statements highlighting the problems with the host nation.

However, the latest statement does lead us to ask why the FSA has said so little on the topic of nation state ownership of football clubs. If the FSA are opposed to Saudi Arabia hosting a World Cup, are they also opposed to that same state owning a Premier League football club? The day after NUFC was taken over by the Saudi state on 7th October 2021, the FSA released a statement that offered tepid support for the idea that ethical considerations should play a role in the owners and director’s test. They also said:

“We meet regularly with the Premier League and we will be questioning them, in great detail, about the exact nature of the ‘legally binding assurances’ they received before approving the takeover.”

In spite of this, I cannot see any further update from the FSA on the ‘legally binding assurances’ given by the Newcastle United ownership to the Premier League. In fact, I cannot see that they have given any more comments or updates on the ownership at all. More recently, the FSA have commented on the Football Governance Bill, which was being debated in the House of Lords in December. The FSA criticised the Tory Lords debating the bill, raising the possibility that they were being influenced by lobbying from the Premier League:

The Football Governance Bill is being debated in the House of Lords and some Conservatives are tying themselves in knots trying to find reasons why an idea their party supported during the election campaign is now a threat to the game.

We have no idea where this change of political heart comes from, although Labour’s Lord Blunkett blamed the Premier League for “filibustering” the Bill “with its money and its brilliant legal and lobbying support”. Surely not!

And on X, the FSA account wrote:

“The latest whizz by Tory peers to try and derail the Football Governance Bill is to exempt those with diplomatic immunity from any Owner and Director Test. A stupid idea. Tory peers want to let Kim Jong Un buy your football club – pass it on..”

This sardonic attitude to the hypothetical idea that Kim Jong Un might own an English Football Club loses its punch when you consider that Mohammed bin Salman actually does own one of our football clubs, and it’s the club supported by FSA Chief Executive Kevin Miles. Miles accepted an Order of the British Empire (OBE) in the King's Birthday Honours List in 2024, and has had very little to say on Newcastle United’s new ownership.

Why has the FSA had so little to say on the existing issue of nation state ownership of football clubs, given the enormous problems this ownership model poses for the present and future of the game? In the June 2023 issue of our fanzine, Mark Jordan from the Leeds United Fans Network expressed his concerns about nation state ownership of clubs. In the final part of his article he wrote about his efforts to raise the issue with the FSA at an online AGM:

I’ve... been participating in the Football Supporters’ Association (FSA) for around 12 years now. At an online AGM a few years back, I brought up the issues around sportswashing with the leadership.

Unfortunately, I was muted and no constructive debate on these important issues was permitted.

This is surprising, given the FSA has a supposed policy and mantra of being an independent organisation that pushes for freedom of expression in football.

In reality, the Premier League supplies the FSA with plenty of money through its fans fund to promote diversity and engagement, however that doesn’t seem to be filtering through to anyone who has an issue or doesn’t agree with the policies or narrative line of the association.

I find it incredible that there hasn’t been more criticism from the FSA of state ownership of our football clubs.

What is their actual position? Do they support a further tightening of the Owners’ and Directors’ Test which would exclude states and human rights abusing regimes from owning a football club?

I do feel that, given the supposed democratic and transparent constitution of the FSA, their members and groups should be speaking out more forcibly on this, as they have against the proposed European Super League.

The FSA has supported campaigns to tackle homophobia and discrimination against women, so it seems strange they are not publicly and categorically opposing states and regimes which are openly homophobic and misogynistic buying up our football clubs.

This is a watershed moment for the future of football and the FSA needs to facilitate debate and take action.

Unfortunately, it does seem that money doesn’t only talk but it has an infinite and profound bearing on football governance and how our national game is going.

Mark was correct to point out that the FSA receives money from the Premier League. The FSA published accounts for 2022 show that the association had a commercial income of £1.14 million for the year, of which £531,322 came from the FA, £445,576 from the Premier League, and £106,046 was from the Home Office. Only £2,728 came from any other sources.

If nearly all of the FSA’s income comes from the Premier League, the FA, and the government, are they even in a position to take a serious stand against nation state ownership of clubs?

Perhaps making sarky comments on social media and releasing some non-committal statements is as far as they’ll ever go?

More than 18 months after Mark submitted his article to us, it still isn’t very clear what the FSA’s stance on nation state ownership of our football clubs is. Do they believe Newcastle United, Manchester City, or any other club should be owned by nation states or not? Seeing as this is such an important issue that affects all football fans in this country, is it not time for them to outline a firm position?

There is an urgent need for an organisation which represents the interests of ordinary fans in the face of the monopolisation of the game by billionaires, multi-nationals and now human rights abusing states, but the question has to be asked, is the FSA playing that role?

And if the FSA is supplied with money through the Premier League’s fans fund, then is it really an independent fan’s organisation?

Would you like to support us? All funds will go towards the campaign.

 Follow us on Social Media