Graham Kelly: Transfer transparency only way to dispel whiff of corruption

It all seems a long time ago that the media filed expectantly into a London hotel room to hear the then Premier League chief executive, Rick Parry, deliver the long-awaited report on his commission of inquiry.

Eight years ago it was, in February 1995, during football's last great winter of discontent – of Paul Merson's addiction shame, of Eric Cantona's kung fu exploits, of the Bruce Grobbelaar betting allegations – and now, hopefully, a start could be made in clearing out the stables, with the so-called "bungs" report of Parry, Robert Reid QC and Steve Coppell.

Ugly rumours of corruption in the transfer market had circulated persistently since the Tottenham chairman Alan Sugar had made allegations in 1993 surrounding the circumstances of Teddy Sheringham's transfer from Nottingham Forest to Spurs the previous year.

On the basis of the facts ascertained by the inquiry, the former Arsenal manager George Graham was subsequently found guilty of a breach of Football Association rules and suspended for a year. He had already been sacked by Arsenal after conceding that he had accepted an "unsolicited gift" of £425,000 from the agent Rune Hauge following the incoming transfers of Pal Lydersen from Norwegian club IK Start and John Jensen from Brondby in Denmark.

But it is an examination of the inquiry's recommendations for the future that is most illuminating now, in the light of Tom Bower's recently published book, Broken Dreams – Vanity, Greed and the Souring of English Football.

The author reveals that, even though these warning signals were posted in the early years of the Premiership, opportunities continue to exist whereby breathtaking sums of money can be extracted in commissions without any accountability as to their eventual destination.

The aim of the 1994-95 inquiry, according to Parry at the time, was not to produce a weighty report that gathered dust, but to bring about relevant and positive change.

The report said: "Conflicts of interest abound. The Premier League is committed to running its affairs with professionalism and integrity, and recognises that it must be seen to have effective regulatory mechanisms.

"To achieve this, it is necessary to have rules which are reliable, relevant and realistic; disciplinary procedures which are professional and objective; penalties which are appropriate and applied with consistency; monitoring procedures which are effective. The Premier League is determined to make sure that all necessary steps are taken to ensure that the game is clean. The integrity of football is of paramount importance."

Parry also suggested that agents should be subject to a licensing system, contracts should be drawn up with their principals registered, and a code of conduct introduced leading to a much more transparent process.

Since then, there have been two increases in television rights fees. As the stakes have increased, so the resolve of football's authorities to do anything meaningful to staunch the flow of cash skimmed (or scammed) from transfers into agents' bank accounts appears to have diminished.

Graham Taylor, in his early years in club management, memorably said he would like to line all the agents up against a wall and shoot them.

Leaving aside the fact he would now need the Great Wall of China, so bountiful has English football become to its numerous agents, this admirably robust sentiment obscures the hypocrisy of the chairmen who turn a blind eye to principles when they need a player or a fee. What is the difference between casual expediency over these rules and forcing Sven Goran Eriksson to bow the knee to Premier League clubs over his selections, thereby turning England matches into farces?

From the beginning, the Premier League were determined that they – only they – would be responsible for regulating the clubs. As soon as the FA, in discussion with the Football League, the Professional Footballers' Association, and the League Managers' Association, brought forward proposals for a compliance unit, the chairmen objected violently, citing bureaucracy. The idea was quietly forgotten.

So Parry drew up new rules and codes. Every director must certify material payments to agents under the various codes, which apply to managers too, and audited confirmation is submitted to the League with each club's annual accounts.

But this is only scratching the surface, when the system dictates that the agents operate outside the formal framework of the game and their accounts and activities are not subject to proper scrutiny.

Even if the long-suffering supporters are prepared to tolerate the players receiving their legitimate fortunes, it cannot be too long before the tax authorities who, after all, started the Graham investigation, begin sniffing around on the trail of other kickbacks.

Honest managers and agents are inevitably tainted by the pall of suspicion.

Why can't all transactions be placed on a public register? Parry couldn't have put it better eight years ago: "We believe on matters of integrity there can be no room for compromise."

grahamkelly@btinternet.com