The battle for the future of English football intensified on Thursday as former Manchester United captain Gary Neville warned politicians not to be “hoodwinked”, and a Premier League backlash began against radical reform. 

Aston Villa chief executive Christian Purslow reacted to the independent fan-led review of football by arguing that over-regulation risked “killing the golden goose”. He also claimed it would be “difficult to do much more” than the £1.6  billion already pledged from the Premier League to the football pyramid over the next three years. 

The review, which was chaired by former sports minister Tracey Crouch, made 47 recommendations, including an independent regulator, a new financial framework, stricter ownership tests, more fan representation and a new “solidarity levy” from player transfers. A figure of 10 per cent has been suggested for the levy, which could transform facilities in grass-roots football, but has prompted Premier League fears over the potential impact on clubs’ competitiveness in the transfer market. 

“The danger here is…killing the golden goose if we over-regulate a highly successful financial and commercial operation,” Purslow said. Another Premier League club chairman claimed that it could “kill” some transfer deals and complained that football “has lost possibly £1 billion through Covid and nobody seems to get that”. 

Neville, who first called for an independent regulator more than a year ago as part of the ‘Saving the Beautiful Game’ group with former FA chairman David Bernstein, rejected Purslow’s characterisation of the Premier League as football’s golden goose. He also urged politicians and administrators to seize this “historic” moment. 

“It depends what you view the golden goose as,” Neville said. “The 20 clubs or the entire pyramid? I view the wider game, children playing at the age of five, the grass-roots facilities, the FA, the 72 EFL clubs, the National League clubs, the schools and the Premier League clubs as the golden goose. I don’t see it as separate, and the Premier League as the golden goose and the rest of us have to live off the scraps and the crumbs. The [review’s] conclusions were a representation of the game’s thoughts. So why would anyone want to push against what would be a representation of the game’s thoughts, particularly from a fan’s point of view?” 

Neville, who stressed that he “loved” the Premier League and wanted it to thrive, also said that there could be no move to “cherry-pick” parts of the Crouch review. 

“The job now in the next 12 months is to make sure this is seen through, understanding there will be quite a few of the Premier League owners who don’t want this,” he said. “But the Premier League has actually lost control of its Premier League. The 14 [clubs] have got a problem with the [big] six. The six have got a problem with the 14. I’m sure along the corridors of power in English football over the next few weeks … they will be coming up with a new financial sustainability plan, they will offer up some more money to the EFL and try to keep them quiet, they will try to put together a new fit and proper persons test, and they’ll say, ‘Look we’ve done everything, you don’t need it now’. Let’s not be hoodwinked. This report has to be executed in its entirety.” 

The Government appeared to throw its weight behind Crouch’s review, promising to work “at pace” to implement key recommendations, including the national game’s first independent regulator. In a written statement to parliament, Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries warned English football’s governing bodies that they were at “a turning point” and that radical reform was finally coming. 

“It is clear that current oversight of the game is not up to the challenge of solving the structural challenges, and action must be taken,” Dorries said. Sports minister Nigel Huddleston, however, stopped short of promising to deliver the entire set of recommendations. Crouch believes that the reforms, including an independent regulator, could be enacted in time for the 2023-24 season. The football authorities have so far delivered only a lukewarm response.

The Premier League acknowledged a need to “restore and retain” fans’ trust in football governance, but stressed that reforms should not damage the competitive balance or restrict current investment. Despite the prospect of fresh funds for grass-roots football, the FA was similarly guarded. A spokesperson said that it would “continue to liaise with the Government on potential solutions to the topics and recommendations”.

Transfer taxes of 10 per cent — and how else the new football regulator could change your club

A Premier League backlash has already begun over proposed new 10 per cent transfer levy to help the wider football pyramid, with one club chairman claiming that it could “kill” some player transfer deals.

The transfer tax is one of 47 recommendations included in the Government’s fan-led review of football, chaired by former sports minister Tracey Crouch. Other measures include English football’s first independent regulator and conditions to stop clubs joining breakaway leagues.

Responding to proposals one Premier League chairman complained that football “has lost possibly £1 billion through Covid and nobody seems to get that”. The Premier League itself has not yet issued a detailed response to Crouch’s landmark report but internal opposition to proposals for a new five per cent or ten per cent ‘stamp duty’ levy on players bought either from overseas or another Premier League club were always likely to provoke strong opposition.

Also included in the review is a proposed new ownership test that would include an “integrity” check to assess the “good character” of a prospective custodian and three-yearly repeat tests. While Crouch stressed that she could not judge the controversial recent Newcastle United takeover, she told Telegraph Sport that her proposal puts “a lot more focus on some of the particular issues around, for example, character and the existing Owners’ and Directors’ Test doesn’t do that”.

The review was established following a series of crises, starting with the collapse of Bury in 2019 and culminating with football’s fractured response to the pandemic and the disastrous attempt to form a European Super League.

The Government threw its weight behind the review on Thursday, with culture secretary Nadine Dorries warning English football’s governing bodies that they are at “a turning point” and that radical reform is finally coming.

“It is clear that current oversight of the game is not up to the challenge of solving the structural challenges and action must be taken,” said Dorries. The Government intends to make a more detailed statement next spring but, with legislation in the next Queen’s Speech, the key recommendation of an independent regulator could be operational in time for the 2023-24 season.

Here’s what the proposals could mean for your club

Protection of your club’s heritage

The fan-led review involved extensive consultation with fans and, for Crouch, one of the most striking elements of the process was the overwhelming desire for change. “I think the biggest surprise was the level of consensus among supporters’ groups about what needed to be done – I think, for a long time, that they felt really ignored by football and the authorities,” she said. 

There was especially strong feeling over the need to give fans a greater say and treat football clubs as vital community hubs. Not only did this lead to recommending a ‘shadow board’ of fan representatives and more regular channels of communication but also a ‘Golden Share’. This would mean that community representatives — an elected ‘community benefit society’ — could block change over particular questions of heritage. 

This would specifically include selling the club stadium or permanently relocating it outside of its local area, changing the club badge, the club name or first-team home colours. According to the Football Supporters’ Association, more than 60 clubs have lost ownership of their stadium, training ground or another property in the last 25 years. The examples of Coventry City, Darlington and Wimbledon are specifically highlighted in the review.

More cash for grassroots pitches

One unexpected proposal was for a 10 per cent solidarity levy on transfer fees, separate to money that already flows down the pyramid via the Premier League in the form of solidarity payments from their vast broadcast deal. 

The potential value of the ‘solidarity levy’ is spelt out in the review. An estimated £160 million each and every year. Or, to put it another way, 80 new adult 3G pitches, 100 adult grassroots pitches, 100 children’s pitches, 30 brand new two-team changing rooms and enough spare change to cover the average yearly losses of every League One and League Two club.  

This proposal is likely to be among the most fiercely resisted inside the Premier League, whose statement was noticeable fow how it raised concern that “reforms do not damage our game, its competitive balance or the levels of current investment”.

 The review states that the Premier League has more than enough income to absorb this sort of figure. The Premier League  is likely to advance a rather different argument to government.