Football Supporters (Access) Bill 2016-17

Mods may want to remove this if already covered. Apologies.
Ehab no doubt thinks he is a statutory consultee
https://goo.gl/Pw7OGW

Ooops sorry - very political

 

Excellent

 

Bloody politicians doing what's morally right for other people instead of themselves !

 

They're clearly up to something Den

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38828349

Campaigners criticise Premier League clubs over access deadline problems

At least three clubs are at risk of missing a self-imposed deadline to improve access for disabled fans, the Premier League has said. ... blah, blah, blah ....

A report suggests Bournemouth, Chelsea and Watford may not fulfil a pledge to meet standards by August 2017... blah, blah, blah

Burnley, Middlesbrough and Hull (Ehab is waiting for his 'pen licence') were given extensions to 2018 to meet the guideline standards as they were only promoted last summer.... blah, blah, blah ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38828349

 

"I will have failed": Football Association chairman Greg Clarke offers to resign if he doesn't reform organisation

please log in to view this image

Clarke: "Our governance needs changing." (Source: Getty)

Football Association chairman Greg Clarke says he will step down from his role if he fails to "deliver real change" to the under-fire organisation.

Ahead of Thursday's House of Commons debate on a motion of no confidence in the FA, Clarke said he had already begun a process to improve its governance.

The Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee last week revealed that the FA had failed to demonstrate its willingness to comply with guidance on sports governance issued by the government last October.


http://www.cityam.com/258651/have-failed-football-association-chairman-greg-clarke

 

and it was the majority of the Elderly White Men that voted against our name change.

There's a fine balance between preserving tradition and implementing change.

 

From Martins Samuel's column in the DM-

"On Wednesday afternoon at approximately 2.15pm, Parliament will debate the governance of the Football Association.

The motion: ‘That this House has no confidence in the ability of the Football Association to comply fully with its duties as a governing body, as the current governance structures of the FA make it impossible for the organisation to reform itself; and calls on the Government to bring forward legislative proposals to reform the governance of the FA.’

It has been brought by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee led by Conservative MP Damian Collins.

‘The committee published two reports in the last Parliament calling for reform of the FA, to allow representatives of fans, women’s football, black, Asian and minority ethnic groups, officials such as referees and the grassroots sport a significantly greater say in the governance of the game,’ a statement from the committee read.

We can see why such a diverse group of 11 MPs would be affronted by the glacial advance of reform at the FA.

Just to recap, then, the committee members are: Damian Collins (white, male, 43); Nigel Adams (white, male, 50); Andrew Bingham (white, male, 54); Paul Farrelly (white, male, 54); Nigel Huddleston (white, male, 46); Julian Knight (white, male, 45); Ian C Lucas (white, male, 56); Chris Matheson (white, male, 49); Jason McCartney (white, male, 49); John Nicolson (white, male, 55); and Julie Elliott (white, female, 53). So 10 white guys between the age of 43 and 56, and a 53-year-old white woman will school the FA on diversity and inclusion. This is why satire is dead."

 

What the **** is this ****e?

Are we reforming the FA to be more like FIFA? That will work well.

 

I think it's been poorly communicated.

I keep reading that the FA needs to reform but despite taking an interest I have no idea why. Demographics of the council are not important to me; that sounds an awful lot like box-ticking to me. So what if they're all white?

If this motion is about any of the key issues in the modern game, such as those described in the bill linked in the original post of this thread, then I'm all in favour of it. But just using the buzzword reform with no further detail means absolutely nothing. If it's just about getting a token representative from every possible demographic on the FA council then it's ****ing pointless.

 

Not sure what it's got to do with the Government, or how they could legislate to change what is effectively a private company? (Not to say it doesn't need it)

 

Will they be discussing the under representation of white Brits in the PL?

 

Didn't realise that
They should lose it regardless...take £1.5m off each PL club instead ( if that amount is needed)

 

That's my point, nowhere does anyone seem to be saying anything about fans having a say.

It's just the word 'reform' over and over which means nothing on its own, and the only specifics are about trivialities like demographics.

It sounds very much like a dodgy arrangement at the FA, but only thanks to comments from the likes of Greg Dyke. The actual campaign and motion says **** all apart from buzz words.