Read on Twitter
I’ve seen the idea come up again that putting a fan on the board is the solution to the problems we see in football. I don't think that’s the case because the problem is much deeper. Warning: the explanation potentially justifies the 6 wanting to join a super league.
[A THREAD]
[A THREAD]
1. As far as I know most (if not all) clubs in the UK are owned by private limited companies (LTD) or public limited comps (PLC). It’s important to know companies are treated as separate legal entities in law, which basically means they are in themselves a thing, like a person
2. Comps are controlled by 2 basic groups, shareholders and directors. In simple terms, LTD comps have fewer s/holders who can only trade their shares privately and PLCs have lots of s/holders who can buy and sell their shares on the stock exchange
3. In both cases the directors are a small number of people who run the company on a day to day basis. The most important part is the directors are legally obliged to run the company in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.
4. While there are nuances about what they should consider when doing that, ultimately it usually means making the company as successful as possible financially.
5. Which is where the problem lies. Football fans see our football clubs as almost spiritual beings with morals, a history and unwritten rules to abide by. But company law doesn’t really care about that, so directors aren’t legally obliged to specifically consider those things.
6. They have an obligation to consider the company’s employees and “other” interested parties, but not specifically the company’s customers or, in this case, supporters.
6a. Comps often change direction if it means making more money, totally leaving behind old, loyal customers in search of new markets. That's not only absolutely fine in the business world, but directors have a duty to do it if it's in the best interests of the comp & s/holders
7. Which means there’s always a potential conflict between the interests of the company/its shareholders and the interests of the supporters/the spirit of the club.
8. Arguably, the directors of the 6 were acting as they should in signing up to a super league that guaranteed their companies a lot of money every year without the risk of competition, even if that meant leaving behind old supporters/customers.
9. It’s also why the Glazers declaring dividends to shareholders every year might wind up United fans, but is absolutely in line with what they can and arguably should be doing as directors of a PLC whose shareholders expect dividends.
10. While we don’t like that as supporters, company law doesn’t care. Which is why I don’t think making a fan a director helps.They could easily end up in a position having to breach their legal duties as a director to act in the interests of supporters and the spirit of the club
11. (And that’s aside from asking which fan would really want that poisoned chalice of a role? I’ve thought about it in the past - you’d never be able to go for a pint in public again.)
12. Where this leads is more in line with the idea that to protect football it needs to be put more in the National Trust category than the normal business category.
13. Fundamentally, allowing clubs to be owned by normal comps probably doesn’t work, so we either need legislation that says they can only be owned by charities/community interest companies/not for profit comps or a whole new vehicle is developed through which they’re owned
14. Whatever way it goes, the people who run the club must have a legal obligation to act in the best interests of the club as a whole and its supporters, which must be clearly defined, not just in the best interests of the company
15. That will no doubt take a lot of discussion and work to come close to getting right, and I wouldn’t expect such a fundamental change to solve everything overnight because there will be unintended consequences of any move like that.
16. Without that type of change clubs will continue to be owned by business people who act in line with company law and the rules of business, not in the interests of existing fans and the spirit of the clubs.
17. Right now we rely on those interests aligning, which does happen at times (eg FSG growing LFC commercially has helped to invest more money in the squad)
18. But it’s time we stopped relying on coincidence/the grace of billionaire owners if we really want to protect the game.
19. The big question if we really want change is whether everyone is prepared to walk the huge machine backwards and give up things like big transfer deadline days and some of the benefits that came with modern football to protect the spirit of the game
20. Obviously, though, they're just my current thoughts and open to challenge (especially on the company law front seeing as I've been out of the game for a while now). I could be talking absolute nonsense so please reply with abusive messages if you think that's the case 
