Dispatches & The Football League: Not Quite A Smoking Gun, But Possibly A Start

11 By Ian  |   The Ball  |   July 18, 2011  |     15

Perhaps the least surprising aspect of this evening’s “Dispatches” programme on the subject of the London Nominees Football Fund has been the almost jaded reaction that it immediately received in some quarters. This isn’t a criticism of those offering such weariness in the face of yet another programme detailing one of the ways in which a shady group of business people can plunder our game, but it does serve to act as a reflection upon the way in which the game is now run in this country. For example, the sight of the Football League’s Greg Clarke admitting that, “We are a simple alliance of 72 football clubs who largely lose money” may not have been meant as an act of pathos, but this was certainly the effect that it will have had upon many viewers. Perhaps we have been battered a little too much in recent times by talk of corruption in the media, within FIFA and now on the periphery of our own domestic game.

It would be easy to pick on Bryan Robson, the most recognisable face to incriminate himself in this evening’s programme, but his behaviour and language is a symptom rather than the cause of the ills that the programme hinted at. Similarly, Joe Sim may be no more than a braggart, prone to overemphasising his connections with Alex Ferguson in order to nail that sale – some people, after all, will say anything to turn a buck. The truth of the matter is, however, that until scientists can come up with a way to alter human nature for the better, people such as these will be hanging around football, picking what they can like vultures at a dead animals carcass. The aim of those that run our game needs, therefore, to be to make it as difficult as possible for people like this to achieve their aims. Anybody with a cursory knowledge of football governance over the last few years or so, however, will already be fully aware of the fact that things have not been getting much more difficult for them in recent years.

So, while the public faces of tonight’s show will probably be demonised (it seems, for example, as if it may be a little while before Robson will be managing in England again), the devil of this sort of dealing remains in the detail. It continues to exist in the Caribbean-based holding companies and PO Boxes, and in the serial club owners flitting from A to B to C in the hope of getting it right in the end or making what they can from it if they turn out to be unsuccessful. It continues to exist in the beserk form of free market capitalism that the game has become in a general sense and the reticence of many people with decent, solid business backgrounds to get involved with football clubs for the fear of ruining their reputations and pouring money into a black hole.

Perhaps the most intriguing question that the programme hinted at (and, perhaps for legal reasons, wasn’t fully able to investigate) was the extent to which the tentacles of the London Nominees Football Fund may reach into British football. Nine clubs – Sheffield United, Leeds United, Leicester City, Cardiff City, Sheffield Wednesday, Oxford United, Derby County, Birmingham City and Crystal Palace – were named throughout the course of this evening’s broadcast, a number that makes up one-eighth of all of the seventy-two members of the Football League. Was the company really able to facilitate a purchase of these clubs? How much of this was mere braggadocio on the part of Robson, Sim et al? Perhaps Sim could tell us, for example, what Ken Bates couldn’t – namely, who the people were that Bates bought Leeds United from earlier this year. It seems unlikely that we will find out the answer to questions such as this at any point in the immediate future.

Similarly, the links between Sim and Alex Ferguson were possibly somewhat overstated. That there is (or was) some sort of link between the two seems plausible, but whether this in itself suggests any improper behaviour on Ferguson’s part is a different matter altogether, and on the basis of what we saw this evening Ferguson has little to be concerned about from tonight’s programme. He may, however, wish to disassociate himself from Sim at the earliest opportunity, and it would be unsurprising if there was a press statement from the West Coast of the USA, where Ferguson is currently staying with his team, in the next couple of days or so. The main story of this evening’s show, however, was somewhat less glamorous than Alex Ferguson or Manchester United. This was about the chase for the money that a spell in the Premier League can offer and the desire to speculate and profit from our game and, at the very end of the line, us.

So, perhaps this evening’s “Dispatches” broadcast wasn’t quite the smoking gun that some may have hoped that it would be. There are a couple of things, however, that we should probably take into account when considering this. Firstly, there is nothing to suggest that this is the full extent of what may come out as a result of this particular investigation. There may well be more to follow on this story over the next few days, weeks or months, and there may well be a few people – some of whom might not have been featured in this evening’s programme – that will be sleeping a little less easily in their beds this evening. Secondly, such an investigation might provoke the Football League and/or the Football Association into acting towards tighter regulation, in order to ensure that absolute transparency of club ownership becomes one of the central tenets at the heart of the governance of the game.

Finally, and possibly most importantly of all, this evening’s programme might have made a few more people very angry. If the scales fall from some eyes on the subject of opacity of the ownership of football clubs and the damage that this is doing to the integrity of the game in this country, then it will be reasonable to consider it to have been a success.  While there will be some that will continue to push the argument that attempting to reform the game in this country is futile, change is possible. All we have to do is look at the travails of News International in comparison with just a couple of weeks ago to understand that even the most indomitable looking of edifices can crumble before our very eyes if enough pressure is applied to the right places. No-one is going to seriously suggest dismantling the Football League, but with enough pressure the serious reform of the game that is needed can be achieved. To start with, what we have to do is make our voices so loud that they can no longer be ignored.

Follow Twohundredpercent on Twitter here.



Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

  • July 19, 2011 at 4:07 am

    Lanterne Rouge

    Brilliant summary and a good parallel with News International. I certainly display a weariness in my own post for The Two Unfortunates blog but it doesn’t mean I wasn’t appalled by the Programme and the way clubs are registered in tax havens, rules and bent and ownership hidden.

  • July 19, 2011 at 4:56 am

    Tim Vickerman

    Absolutely spot on summary. I watched with a kind of weary resignation. The major point of concern is just how hard it is to ensure clubs and the people supporting them are separate and have no conflicts of interest. I imagine it wouldn’t be legal to ensure that all owners/holding companies be registered in the UK.

    Certainly, in the short-term, the FA, Premier League and Football League should have unified, strict controls on ownership that are completely transparent but it’s always going to be impossible to stop wealthy people/consortia meeting officials in private and buying influence.

    The suggestions of abusing the loan system also need to carefully considered. I do think it has got out of control recently with clubs filling their squads with players they haven’t actually signed.

  • July 19, 2011 at 6:58 am


    Basically, the program was a complete load of rubbish.
    Sim is no different that the journalist involved. Just trying to make things sound sensational to turn a buck, or in the case of Dispatches, to increase viewing figures. nice bit of aduio editing just when Robson was going to ask a question put to him as well.
    Of course there’s problems in football. Think this lot missed the point completely though.
    Move on!

  • July 19, 2011 at 8:00 am

    Phil Ascough

    Loved the suggestion that Darren Ferguson benefited from his old man supplying him with loan players. PNE fans may have a different view. My biggest concern is how little is known about ownership of some clubs and how feeble the game’s authorities are when it comes to doing anythign about it. The programme changed nothing and on its own wasn’t strong enough to lead calls for a proper investigation.

  • July 19, 2011 at 8:03 am

    Gary Reginald

    I hope it encourages critical thinking fans – unlike the above – to delve a bit further into inappropriate relationships. Also, have we sufficiently emphasised the motives for club ownership? The betting liquidity on single PL matches can be as high as £1 BILLION globally, but the majority of that is in southeast Asia. The ability affect outcomes and trade on insider knowledge is far more valuable to many in football – some of whom really are the first names you’d think of – than the integrity of the competition. Alex Ferguson socialises with an Asian broker / bookmaker. Think about it!
    Another issue people are overlooking with ownership is that a disturbing % of clubs in the top two tiers are owned or sponsored by the gambling sector – obv foreign ownership is not unrelated, but also consider Tony Bloom (Brighton) or Dermot Desmond (Celtic, Betdaq).

  • July 19, 2011 at 9:46 am


    Underlying it all is the subtext that the owners want to make their money solely by getting on the golden ship that is the Premier League.

    It would be interesting to know whether Richard Scudamore was approached to appear on the programme, and if he declined why he chose to do so.

  • July 19, 2011 at 10:59 am


    ‘Of course there’s (sic) problems in football Move on.’

    That’s alright then – I can rest easy now. Ask Pompey fans if that’s OK with them will you? See what you get.

    As others say – the perpetuated myth that promotion to the PL is the way to earn easy money over a short term investment (3- 5 years) is laughable in the extreme. Any investor wanting money out of Sheff Utd in that time span will be brought up short I think.

    However, who gets to make a buck or two whilst they are trying?

    Perpetuating the boom/bust cycle does football no favours. And fan complacency about such problems lets such scam artists just carry on trying.

  • July 19, 2011 at 11:05 am


    The programme was a total disappointment. Nothing was done to determine whether or not London Nominees actually did have the connections they claimed. A few photos of Joe Sim on the pitch at Bramall Lane is nowhere near damning. The more interesting topic of those who currently own clubs (eg. Cardiff, Leicester, Leeds, Barnsley…) was mentioned in passing, but left untouched. A thorough investigation into carpetbagging in football was waiting to break out, but never did. The most shocking thing for me was Greg Clarke’s admission of the Football League’s impotence.

    While I agree that anything which prompts fans to think more deeply about the issue of transparency in club ownership is a good thing, I’m far from sure that this programme will do anything other than increase the general air of cynicism.

  • July 19, 2011 at 4:17 pm


    We have been digging at Charlton for a few months now to find out who is behind our ownership. Mr Slater and Jiminez are the front men and 49% of the holding company is undeclared. Someone has managed to trace it back to the British Virgin Islands and a Kevin Cash. But apart from that, god knows

  • July 19, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    Gervillian Swike

    This horse bolted many moons ago. It’s a good article here, and acknowledges that the programme didn’t really uncover a great many real wrongs there – some foreign businessmen wanting to invest in some kind of British concern in order to make money, and maybe exaggerate a few things, bend a few rules and take advantage of a few loopholes along the way – that’s normal business for most people, however unsavoury. The concern I guess is the possible impact on the clubs that may be involved. But it’s too late, football wasn’t a business, now it is a business, this is the consequence, and I can’t see effective regulation being introduced now. that’s my resigned shrug I suppose.

  • July 20, 2011 at 10:39 pm

    Buying Up Football Clubs « Changing Scottish Football

    […] The Twitter discussion stream has been using the hashtag #ForSaleFC. There’s also a typically thoughtful analysis over on […]

Leave A Comment

Also available on…
Speek Yo Branes
Socialise With Us