Burns to propose radical FA changes

Lord Burns is tomorrow set to propose reducing the power-base of Premier League clubs by putting forward significant changes to the structure of the Football Assocation’s main board.

Lord Burns, who has been carrying out a structural review of the game’s governing body, revealed in his interim report earlier this summer that the current composition of the 12-man board is a “recipe for delay and even deadlock“.

This is due to the equal split between the six members on the professional side of the game and six members from the amateur ranks, while FA chairman Geoff Thompson and chief executive Brian Barwick attend only in a non-voting capacity.

In tomorrow’s final report, Burns looks likely to recommend reducing the influence of the professional game down to just three members – two from the Premier League and one from the Football League – as well as three from the amateur ranks.

Thompson and Barwick could be handed new voting roles – giving the FA executive more control over its own affairs – while, crucially, two non-executive directors may also be appointed.

These would be entirely independent figures, drawn possibly from the business world, who would not have the interests of any club or other organisation at heart.

This solution, of course, may not find favour with leading Premier League clubs, who could attempt to flex their muscles by either blocking the plans or by trying to gain more control over the England team or the release of international players.

However, in his interim report, Burns argued “boards always operate best when no individual group can exert control or a veto, and where persuasive arguments have to be made and coalitions established in order to achieve majorities on contentious issues“.

He added: “The presence of executive directors [Thompson and Barwick] on the board is important because it ensures that those who are responsible for the day-to-day running of the FA share the same collegiate board responsibility with those who are not.”

Burns claimed independent non-executive directors would “not face conflicts of interest, unlike other members of the board” and were “uniquely well-placed to judge difficult issues from the perspective of the FA, rather than that of the bodies represented at the FA“.

Although he tended to favour the board chairman being an independent candidate, he was minded to leave this decision to the members of the board to determine themselves.

Burns must still gain a significant majority on the FA council for his recommendations to be passed, and he may yet come up against stiff opposition in his proposed changes to the council itself, as well as the complicated committee system.

However, there seems to be a growing acceptance within the game that influential groups, such as fans, managers, referees and players, deserve a greater say within the corridors of power along with a broader mix of gender, age and ethnic groups.

And there is always the threat of Government intervention if the FA cannot find a self-regulatory solution to their internal structure issues.

Whether the Premier League clubs accept any dilution in their powers remains to be seen, with Burns stressing the FA should retain control over the England team, the FA Cup, Wembley stadium and a new regulatory and compliance unit.

Although he has already concluded that “the present structurs of the FA are in need of substantial reform“, he has recognised the need to build a “consensus for improvement” – and the real power battle may now be just beginning.