The boss of the National League has said a new independent regulator for football could be a burden and the game isn't in the mess some people think.
Ahead of the second reading of the Football Governance Bill, which will see an independent regulator formed for men's elite football, National League general manager Mark Ives said the costs could hurt small clubs.
The Premier League has already raised concerns about the new plans, which it says could "weaken the competitiveness and appeal of English football".
The announcement comes following the Tracey Crouch review, triggered by an attempt to form a European Super League three years ago.
With well-respected broadcaster Manish Bhasin on hosting duties at the House of Lords event, the National League said questions were put to the panel in front of representatives from a number of clubs ahead of the Bill, "ushering in a new era for the game".
The league said Ives was keen to make clear the competition’s stance as he laid bare the positives and negatives regarding the arrival of a regulator. He told the audience in London: “We didn’t wake up one morning and think ‘we want a regulator’.
“However, we accept it is here and we have to embrace that. That doesn’t mean we agree with everything that is proposed, there are parts we are comfortable with and parts we are not. It is those parts which we are asking to be looked at.
“Naturally, we are concerned about the costs. The expectation of how much it is going to cost clubs at a National League level is a huge concern, it may be a small amount of money, but it is a lot to our clubs.
“We are worried about mission-creep within the Bill and the additional bureaucracy. There is a lot of duplication of work, such as the licensing system. There is an expectation for clubs to do two lots of licensing. This was all started by the Fan-Led Review and my concern is the expectations are not what they were expecting.
“So things dear to our heart such as, three-up, three-down with the EFL, protection of players and 3G pitches were all raised within the Fan Led Review but are outside the scope of the regulator. I understand but we talk about financial sustainability - and all of these issues have an impact on financial sustainability of the clubs.
“If we carry on with the Bill the way it is, it is going to put all of that burden on our clubs instead of actually having an advocacy-first approach. Let the leagues take control of it. My desire is for the leagues to do their piece first and if we fail to do our piece then regulate us.
“People are talking about the need for a regulator because of the mess the game is in. My view is that the game is not in a mess. All the competitions – the Premier League, the EFL, the National League, the FA – they are obviously all doing something right.
“So allow the people to deal with it appropriately and if we are not doing it in the right way, then let the regulator step in. Otherwise, you will put too much bureaucracy, too much burden on the clubs and it will be damaging to them.“
He went on to say: “We urge MPs and Peers for certainty on the Bill. It is written loosely, which allows for mission creep. Think about the impact on our member clubs and don’t put more burden on them.”
.JPG)
