FA backs sport-betting levy to fund grass roots
Glenn pledges support for Telegraph proposal ‘We don’t need to sell Wembley,’ he insists
Martin Glenn, the Football Association chief executive, is calling for a cash raid on the booming sports gambling industry as part of his alternative funding plan for the grass-roots game after the collapse of the £600million Wembley deal.
In his most extensive interview since American billionaire Shahid Khan dramatically withdrew his offer, Glenn welcomed The Daily Telegraph proposals to raise income from football betting, as he revealed the FA was now exploring a socalled “fair return” – potentially worth tens of millions every year.
Glenn also said this newspaper’s Save Our Game campaign was “absolutely right” to call for slashing of bureaucracy in the amateur game, explaining the FA was working on a digital database of millions of players to ensure county chiefs could reduce paperwork. In an additional proposal to raise money for artificial pitches, he suggested local authorities could benefit from planning agreements with developers.
Glenn had faced criticism for failing to win the support of the FA’S 127-member council before Khan withdrew his offer, citing the “divisive” atmosphere last week. Reflecting on the loss of a windfall potentially worth £1.5billion after investments, Glenn said that helping the grass roots was one of his major reasons for joining the FA.
“I was disappointed, but being involved in a lot of big mergers and acquisitions transactions in my life, things like these happen,” he said. “You just have to be philosophical about it.”
Nine of the 20 Premier League teams and 17 of 24 Championship teams are sponsored by gambling companies – but Glenn’s plan would see a small percentage levy on bets, rather than sponsorship.
“There are things definitely worthy of consideration,” he said. “France has effectively a tax on gambling. We would call it a fair return on football gambling. All those betting companies use our intellectual property to have people lay bets, so why wouldn’t a small percentage of that be put into the thing that made that possible in the first place? We, as football, could approach government and say ‘Have you thought about something like that?’
“It doesn’t need to be a big lump sum. We’ve got £64million going into the Football Foundation between the three of us [FA, Premier League and government] – imagine if it was £80 million or £100million. If we could get to that it would be brilliant.”
Another alternative was encouraging local authorities to use Section 106 agreements – where planning consent is agreed as part of improvements to local infrastructure – to encourage developers to help build local facilities.
“When Tesco build a supermarket they say, ‘Here’s the supermarket and we will give £500,000 to go into a pot’, and we don’t know how much there is but it doesn’t tend to get spent,” Glenn said.
In addition, the FA is hoping to help cut bureaucracy by building a huge database with the details of every amateur player via a new mobile app, Match Play. “It’s in beta-testing and it makes it really easy to run your club,” Glenn said. “The biggest problem for a volunteer is that it is just tons of paper. In the next generation, you will get people [volunteering] in a certain phase of their life who can use technology and make it easier to run.”
Glenn said it was hard for him to ask for more money from government when the perception was that football is so wealthy. Following the collapse of his bid to sell the home of English football, Glenn said the FA was facing an annual bill of £15 million to keep the stadium updated and competitive with other new venues.
“We don’t need to sell Wembley,” he insisted. “The finances are as good as they ever have been, but I don’t know what life’s going to be like in 20 years. A couple of years ago we [the FA] were making £320million [in revenue], now it’s £450 million. That’s a dramatic change but if you look at the Premier League TV rights, the rate of increase has gone down. People are consuming football differently. It’s going to be harder in the future to get that sort of upfront income.”
He added: “My opinion is that we are at a high-water mark in terms of FA profitability and Wembley profitability, but it’s also going to face more competition.”
Despite the need for grass-roots facilities, Glenn said he would never borrow money against the stadium’s assets. “One thing I would rule out is that we would take debt,” he said. “Part of our business plan is pay off our debt [on Wembley] by 2024. People have said why don’t you borrow from the TV rights, but it doesn’t feel right. There could be chilly winds ahead.”