Furious PFA to turn up heat on FA boss Clarke
THE pressure intensified on FA chairman Greg Clarke last night with senior figures at the Professional Footballers’ Association preparing to contest key evidence he gave to MPs last week.
Relations between the governing body and the players’ union are at an all-time low after Clarke’s astonishing attack on the PFA and their chief executive, Gordon Taylor.
Indeed, Wembley officials privately winced at Clarke’s outburst when pressed by MPs to explain why he fired back a disrespectful email to the PFA after being contacted about the Eni Aluko bullying and discrimination case. ‘Why are you sending me this?’ he wrote.
Clarke came up with two excuses, claiming that at the time he was struggling with the workload created by the childhild sex abuse scandal. He said:d: ‘You might remember it wass the biggest crisis in the FA’ss history.’ But then he tried to suggest his response was one of exasperation after being pestered by the PFA — he said they had pursued him at three matches — prior too sending the email.
Clarke claimed he had alreadyady explained that sports governernance rules prevented him fromrom assisting them with the Aluko uko case. The email was sent to Clarke by PFA assistant chief executive Nick Cusack on November 14 last year and PFA insiders have told Sportsmail it was the first contact between the body and the FA chairman about Aluko.
‘Nick did not have any kind of relationship with Greg Clarke prior to sending that email and nobody else at the PFA had contacted him about Eni,’ said one source. ‘It was some time after the email was sent, and Clarke had sent that reply, that Nick then bumped into him and raised the issue again. We think Clarke has the chronology wrong when he’s had those questions fired at him.’
Clarke, it is understood, stands by his version of events but the PFA are furious about his attack, claiming he has ‘burned a lot of bridges’ with union bosses. The grilling by MPs proved catastrophic for Clarke and the FA, with committee chairman Damian Collins concluding the credibility of Clarke and chief executive Martin Glenn was in question.
Clarke accused the PFA of refusing to continue funding counselling sessions for a victim of child sex abuse while paying ‘millions’ in salary to Taylor. Taylor hit back, insisting: ‘To say we turned an abused player away is wrong. It might have been said in Parliament, but it’s untrue. It’s classic diversionary tactics.’
Last night another senior PFA official added: ‘Because of parliamentary privilege Clarke knew he could say that without us taking action. It was a cheap shot. We are unhappy about it, as we are about what he said in trying to explain his response to the email about Eni.’