Some thoughts about arts funding and football

The “cuts” debate has – perhaps unsurprisingly – brought about an agonised response from the arts establishment, the Theatres Trust and an eclectic collection of the cultural great and good who say:

“…to “cut us but don’t kill us,” warning that if belt-tightening was drastic and immediate, museums would cancel blockbuster shows, theaters would go dark, and 200 of 850 state-funded bodies would lose their subsidy.”

The problem is that – unlike other sectors – the lion’s share of arts funding doesn’t go to the grass roots but to the elite establishment run by those whining about how those cuts will damage them. There is no doubt that the way in which we support the arts needs to be changed – elite art should be able to pay its own way, indeed should contribute to the development of new art, the support of emerging artists and the encouragement of audience.

Art – and especially performing art – should learn from another part of our cultural sphere:

The Football Foundation was set up as a partnership to oversee youth development and football at the grassroots. Premier League chairman Dave Richards said: "This is an exciting and important moment for English football. "We have pledged over £7m to the Foundation for the rest of this year and £27.5m each year for three years from 2001 under the terms of the new TV deal - a total investment of almost £90m.”

And that funding continues today backed up by ongoing commitment from the Football Association and the active involvement of individual clubs and players. Without a single penny of taxpayers funding football supports the development and extension of the game.

Why can’t theatre do that? Or opera?

....

Why shouldn't footballers get paid all that money - they're the ones earning it!

This morning I was listening idly to the radio when a discussion came on about Deloitte’s latest report on the finances on football. Now I don’t propose to go into a detailed discussion of the report but instead to take a glance at the reportage. And it will be no surprise that, a few seconds into any discussion, the matter of football payers’ wages comes up – usually accompanied by words like ‘excessive’ and ‘obscene’. The reports go like this one from the BBC:

“Soaring wages are threatening the stability of Premier League clubs, according to a report into football finances. The Deloitte Annual Review of Football Finance found that clubs spent 67% of their revenues on player wages during the 2008/09.”

Now it seems to me that a business sector, where despite a deep recession worldwide, UK revenues have grown isn’t a business that we need to worry about qua business. What we should be concerned about is whether that big wage bill (not that dissimilar from many high value-added service businesses) compromises the viability in that the remaining 33% of revenues do not cover the other costs and especially the debt repayments. In reality, our problem is that we somehow feel it wrong for some chav to earn such a load of cash kicking a ball round a pitch for 90-odd minutes every Saturday. I mean it’s not fair is it!

We make up all this rubbish about players wages threatening the game’s viability when it’s nonsense. We just don’t like folk earning so much money especially when they squander it all on chunky jewellery, big (rather ugly) cars and other such indulgence. No class these football players, no class!

"Aha!” I hear you say. “The big wages just mean that competition is squeezed out of the Premiership – there’s only a few clubs that can win now because of the cash.”

Like that’s new – 31 out of the 50 league champions since 1960 have been one of Manchester United, Liverpool or Arsenal (and a further 11 come from Leeds, Everton and Chelsea). The English League has always been dominated by a few big clubs – there’s nothing changed from all the extra cash.

Overall English football is pretty healthy – some of the clubs have a problem and (like most of our economy) there’s rather too much debt. But paying the players loads of money is the right thing to do – you get the best players in England helping build club and premiership brands and somehow it seems right to me that the people who provide the entertainment, who make it possible for the game to earn billions get most of the money. Where else should it go? To the owners, to the directors?

....

Dear Football - be careful what you wish for it, might come to pass

I must be getting old and grey – forgetful even – but isn’t the Conservative Party supposed to be against “government intervention” in private businesses? If so perhaps someone should explain the concept to Hugh Robertson MP, who is (I’m told) the Party’s Sports Spokesman:

“I encourage in the strongest possible terms footballing bodies to come together and work out a proper solution as a matter of urgency. My final point is that if they do so, we will back them, but if they do not, Government intervention remains an option.”

It seems to me that there is a growing pressure for government intervention in the affairs of football clubs. Indeed, Manchester United fans protesting about their clubs owners (presumably for the terrible crime of making money from said ownership while the club wins cups, leagues and championships) are reported to be:

“Calling on their considerable contacts in Westminster and Whitehall, Manchester United supporters are to make the future of their club, and particularly the controversial, debt-driven regime of the Glazers, one of the issues of the forthcoming General Election.”

Reading Henry Winter’s uncritical piece (from which the quote above is taken) it strikes me that the Manchester United Supporters Trust is seeking to use political pressure merely to promote a takeover bid for the club. It really is as simple as that – the Trust wants to own the club and if it can't do it the honorable way through raising money and writing a cheque out for the current owners’ interest, it will enlist political campaigns to force the change through.

Football supporters are making a big mistake by letting government regulation in through the door. As I have said before – be careful what you wish for as it may come to pass. I have absolutely no doubt at all that government regulation would be bad for football, bad for supporters and bad for the clubs.

...