Graham Kelly: Truce between FA and Premier League leaves big issues unresolved

The row between the Football Association and the Premier League which simmered for many months was smoothed over at the FA's executive board meeting last week. But will there be lasting peace in the struggle for power?

Both sides issued conciliatory statements. The FA, after confirming that the new Team England contract, the catalyst for the recent escalation in the dispute, had been concluded properly by its executive staff, said that constructive dialogue would continue "over time" in order for shared objectives to be achieved and re-affirmed its desire to work with all parties. Normally, some considerable time is required if rule changes are necessary.

The Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore issued a fuller press release: "Our four FA board members and the executive have engaged in very constructive dialogue with colleagues at the FA. Recent events have resulted in ideas being put forward to improve the running of the game and ensure that we can all unite behind the common purpose of promoting FA Cup competitions and the success of the national team as well as league and club interests. The issue starts and ends on how best the game can be managed, ensuring decisions are made with full transparency.

"We are satisfied that the FA's own strategic model of dividing its net income equally between the national game and the professional game is a reasonable one and we have no intention of altering this position. We clearly want to achieve this within the auspices of the FA. This is the structure which has enabled football to be so successful and any speculation that our motives are other than that is simply inaccurate. We are looking forward to continuing positive discussions in the coming weeks."

Certainly the tone of Scudamore's statement was an improvement on the letter he sent to clubs recently, when he accused his FA counterpart Adam Crozier of either lying or being grossly incompetent, as be believed there had been a breach of trust by the FA in refusing him advance sight of the Mori report into the state of football. The survey had been the subject of a press briefing at FA headquarters at the same time the two men were meeting elsewhere in the building.

The cause of the final flare-up was Crozier's action in finalising the Team England agreement with the England players' representatives. On the face of it, it was not a major deal, for a man earning around £500,000 a year and working to an existing template laid down in order to secure the FA's commercial sponsorships. But, to the club chairmen who felt increasingly marginalised by Soho Square's proprietorial hold over their crown jewels, i.e. the England stars, and who asked that no contract be concluded without their being given prior warning of the personal appearances requested of the players, it was a red rag to a bull.

A vote was taken at the board meeting agreeing in principle to set up a professional game board in order to allow the representatives of the Premier and Football League much greater influence over the administration of matters affecting the professional game. Such a professional board would be akin to the FA's national game board already in operation, which has under its auspices matters not concerning either the Premier League or the Football League.

However, the establishment of a new (professional) board could lead to increased levels of bureaucracy of the kind thought to have been eradicated before Crozier's recruitment. What will happen to the existing executive board with its equal split of amateur and professional members?

Moreover, there are many personality issues lurking behind the placatory words issued following the meeting last week. The FA chairman Geoff Thompson is due to seek a new four-year term next year, and knows that he needs the support of the big guns in the professional game.

Having granted a vote on a professional board and needing time to win the understanding of the grassroots representatives for any diminution of their traditional authority, Thompson has written to councillors to reassure them that any improvements to relationships with the professional game will be effected within the existing structural framework.

Notwithstanding Scudamore's assurances, anyone concerned about issues wider than who is walking which corridors of power should press him for his best estimate of how much he might expect the FA's net income – and therefore its distributions to, say, junior football – to be reduced by wage compensation claims for players on England duty under the proposed arrangements. Or how a professional game board might ease the eternal club v country impasse. Or, specifically, how many friendly internationals would be categorised as meaningless.

When this power struggle is resolved, hopefully the rescue plan for Nationwide League clubs can be implemented.

grahamkelly@btinternet.com