Football Team Owners, the FA and the 'Fit and Proper' test.

[LBNo11]

...Pompey look in dire straits as the taxman is challenging the way they went into receivership, and what the taxman wants he gets, as long as the accountants can differentiate between avoidance and evasion!

But what I want to know is how are the FA getting away with not being investigated by an external source about their obviously flawed 'Fit And Proper' test that all directors who hold over 30% of the club shares must prove themselves worthy of their position.

The rule was introduced by the authorities in 2004 following concern that anybody, even those convicted of fraud, could take over football clubs, and it is intended to protect the clubs from people not "fit" or "proper" to run them.

What is the FA interpretation of the words 'Fit and Proper' is it purely down to having enough wonga, or are there any background checks made as to their personality, or citizenship? It should be made much clearer as Pompey in particular have suffered with as many owners of their club in the last 5 years as we have had in 30 years.

Look at Thaksin Shinawatra, and his human rights record, how he made his personal fortune and at whose expense, was he deemed fit and proper based purely on the promise of the wealth that he had, and the gravy train the FA mandarins could ride along in..?

[TonyGilroy]

"Fit and Proper" is obviously a nonsense. Anyone without a criminal record is entitled to be assumed to be honest.

So you have to be specific as to the qualifications that owners must have and the obvious one is proof of finance.

EUFA are being criticised for trying to implement debt rules but that's the way forward. Insist that clubs account for their ability to spend next years money as a condition of entry into competitions.

[finnster01]

Agree wholeheartedly that Fit and Proper is obviously not working.

The problem we will have with implementing debt rules for clubs though, is going to be the lack of transparency and audited financials along the same rule set. If every club was listed on LSE, no problem. However, until a common set of accounting rules are applied to all Prem clubs, it will be too many open holes for accountants to explore and too much dirty laundry in the closet (e.g. Pompey and West Ham) they don't want to disclose.

If you have any kids, have them become accountants. Good jobs for life

[TonyGilroy]

I had in mind something more like cash flow forecasts.

"We plan to spend £Xm and our income will total £X+Ym from the following sources". Those sources could involve loans or gifts from owners but proof of ability to pay would be required.

Ideally there would be maximum amounts clubs were allowed to spend.

Points penalties to be incurred for clubs that overspend.

Far from foolproof and full of problems but something along those lines would keep clubs focused.

[LBNo11]

...that sounds far too sensible to me TG, the FA would never approve such a thing.

The annoying thing in all this is that the fans are the ones that suffer, not the directors, the chairman, the hangers-on and the agents. The fans are condemned to a lower league with points deductions, and the effect is potentially terminal, Luton, Southampton, Portsmouth, these clubs and the fans have suffered because the inept and shady dealings of the very people the FA had approved to look after those clubs.

It is they who should carry the can, not the fans, not the clubs, but the individuals who cause such disasters, those on the boards - and the FA - greed by both guilty parties...