Football chief wants framework for agents
Football League chairman Lord Mawhinney today called for the urgent introduction of a regulatory framework to govern agents in football after it was revealed clubs spent £7.8m (€11.2m) on intermediaries last season.
The Football League, which published its third Agents Fees Report this morning, is increasingly concerned with how much money is leaving the game.
Of the £7.8m (€11.2m) spent by the Football League clubs on agents – which represents nearly a third of the total £25m (€36m) television money earned in a year – the Coca-Cola Championship accounted for £6.8m (€9.8m).
Leeds, perhaps unsurprisingly, were the biggest spenders last year – forking out £1.9m (€2.7m) on agents fees as they worked desperately to adapt to life outside the Barclays Premiership.
Crewe were the only Championship club amongst just 13 in the whole Football League to commit no money at all to agents fees last year.
League One clubs spent a total of £595,870 (€857,000) and League Two clubs £325,020 (€467,400).
“The issue of agents is going up the agenda. It came up at our annual meeting. There is a lot of strong feeling, a lot of unified feeling amongst the clubs that a regulatory framework is required,” Lord Mawhinney said.
“Too much money is leaving football through payments to agents and League clubs have made it clear to me that they want a stronger regulatory framework governing how agents operate.”
On the back of the clubs’ strong support, Lord Mawhinney has written to the Football Association urging them to implement a regulatory system.
Lord Mawhinney’s demands are three-fold. He wants:
:: Agents to be paid only by the player, unless the club specifically commission an agent to work on their behalf.
:: Agents working only for one employer in a transaction.
:: The issue of agents “defused” because he sees it as a “serious niggle in football“.
Lord Mawhinney believes a number of Premier League clubs are against such a structure being implemented and feels that may affect the FA’s decision to take up his request.
But if that proves to be the case, the Football League are happy to take matters into their own hands.
“It is a Football Association issue, not a Football League issue, and it needs to be addressed,” said Mawhinney.
“The introduction of this much-needed framework is currently being hindered by a lack of consensus on the issue across English football as a whole.
“My understanding is that is because a number of Premier League clubs don’t want to have the sort of regulation the FA has in draft form. We do, they don’t.
“I have now written to the FA and made quite clear that our clubs want regulation.
“If they want to do it, that is fine. If not we want delegated powers to implement our own regulations.
“The consequence might be that if players have to pay the agents, the amount of money going out of the game might be reduced.”
Lord Mawhinney hopes the regulatory structure might also go some way to clearing the murky image that the footballing public have about agents and their role in the game.
“It’s an effort to get some clarity into the system. It’s an effort to get some public perception of respectability to the role of agents in football,” he said.
“There are a lot of agents doing a proper job with integrity and there is no problem with that.
“It’s an effort to separate those agents who behave responsibly from what appears to be a small minority whose behaviour causes more controversy.”
An even playing field would also assist those chairman who refuse on principle to pay agents fees when they are not representing the interests of his club.
Crystal Palace owner Simon Jordan is one such chairman. Palace famously missed out on signing Australian international Tim Cahill from Millwall last season because of his agent’s demands.
Everton agreed to pay the fee, signed Cahill and he went on to prove an integral part of the side that qualified for the Champions League.
Palace, meanwhile, were relegated from the Premiership and last year spent just £50,000 (€71,900) on agents fees.
Of the other relegated sides – obliged to enter their figures as they are now members of the Football League – Southampton spent £12,000 (€17,300) while Norwich spent nothing.
