- guardian.co.uk, Sunday November 3 2002 01.01 GMT
How ironic that the FA's unprecedented commercial success under Adam Crozier - £120 million turnover a year, up from just £20m a decade ago - should have been their chief executive's undoing. And how ironic that the killer blows were dealt by the Premier League's representatives on the FA's ruling board, even though many Premier League clubs have made an unholy mess of their own financial activities.
Given the Premier League's increasingly uncertain financial future, it was inevitable that sooner or later those same Premier League representatives would come to resent Crozier's commercial success and seek a bigger share of that income. In their view, the FA's revenue comes from it borrowing their players in FA Cup and England games, forgetting that their own clubs play in the FA Premier League, which would never have been born if the FA had not sanctioned it.
The trouble is that the FA's lucrative deal-making has led the Premier League's four representatives on its 12-strong board into a situation involving divided loyalties. Whose interests come first: their club or the game at large? That has given them Hobson's Choice. Given the widespread fear that the league's next TV contracts may not bring in anything like the £500m a season they currently share, it's no wonder they are looking to find money wherever they can.
Crozier rightly believes that the Premier League clubs are big enough and wealthy enough to look after themselves without raiding the FA's coffers, and the only reason they are trying to do so now is that too many have for years been pouring their own astronomical TV revenue into paying the players salaries they cannot afford. By contrast, the FA is a non profit-making body, three-quarters of its income goes towards running the game for the benefit of everyone, from the England team at the top down to schemes to encourage schoolchildren and women.
The Premier League's attempts to control the FA and its budget must be resisted, just as Uefa has faced down the threats of the G14 group of big European clubs. Rather than the Premiership having more control over the FA Cup and England, they should have less. And if they don't want to play in the oldest cup competition, or allow their players to represent their country, then they will justly be seen as the men with a selfish agenda.
The Premier League is the richest and most popular league in the world, but that's only been achieved at the expense of the Football League and the FA. All other competitions, including the FA Cup and England games, now play second fiddle to the omnipotent Premiership. So the Premier League is powerful enough already. If they get their hands on the FA's two main earners, where would the money come from for the worthy causes outside the Premiership?
Adam Crozier has a marketing background, enthusiasm for the game and is independent of the Premier League clubs' vested interests. We need him, or someone very like him, to remind the Premier League that they are only a part, albeit a significant one, of the English football family.
If he is deemed unsuitable as the chief executive, then the ability of the FA to act as an objective force for good has been severely compromised. If the Premier League succeeds with its reverse takeover of the FA, then the only alternative to secure the game's future at all levels will be an autonomous regulator.
