FA Special Share

The above is expounded when read together with these

"The ability of the FA to interfere goes back to the original Premier League breakaway from the Football League. The Founder Members Agreement, signed on July 17, 1991, gave the 'Special Shareholder' — the FA — specific powers.

Under the terms of the document, rule variations can 'be effective only with the consent in writing of the Special Shareholder and without such consent shall not be done or caused to be done'.

These two links are basically the same article so its your choice.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fa-would-block-premier-league-attempt-to-abandon-relegation-tcb5vztbh

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/05/07/facould-block-premier-leagues-attempt-stop-relegation-season/amp/

A representative of the FA was present in the last Premier League video conference too. Further reported that the EFL also has a say in this. So does this mean there could be more than 20 votes? Does the Prem have to get FA approval after making a decision that involves not finishing the season? Can the FA step in and say 'enough of this, no football until there's a vaccine?

Thoughts.

Sounds like the FA have majority powers here and can veto any proposals should it deem necessary on those special powers. To be honest, I think the no relegation part was doomed to fail once it was raised and is arbitrary in nature in any event. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

Agreed Loco.

Looks like the FA and EPL are dead in favour of promotion and relegation.

comment by Shijiu (U22385)
posted 34 minutes ago
Agreed Loco.

Looks like the FA and EPL are dead in favour of promotion and relegation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, why wouldn't they be? Being honest, I'm in favour of it because it is just to do so. It be unjust for the likes of teams who did not perform well enough throughout the season to stay were they are. Just my opinion of course. Will be interesting to see how this plays out but you can bet ya bottom dollar that someone in the FA is leaning on someone.

Fairest solution would have been to expand the league but that clearly isn't gonna happen.

comment by Shijiu (U22385)
posted 7 minutes ago
Fairest solution would have been to expand the league but that clearly isn't gonna happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah agree, I don’t see the issue as they could reduce it over the next few seasons.

to be honest the short term fairest might well be to put 23 in the prem and promote all the way up but the medium term view is 6 relegations the following year and then the whining will be astronomical.

we will never satisfy the clubs at the bottom so the only way to deal with it is 38 games played and bottom 3 are out.

if they cant accept neutral venues then the table at 29 games each is taken and whoever is in that bottom 3 is down.

if they cant accept that then go to court

it's all short termism and a lot of people who've respected lockdown and have got the thing in their heads that the outside world is going to kill them are being used as an excuse to look after a few clubs self interest.

the medium term view for football is very poor indeed if these clubs prevent the restart of football. the only thing that's going to save football is massive wage cuts and tv money propping up zero crowd games.

once either everyone who's susceptible to this is vaccinated, dead or locked down for life we will all be back to work like boris wants and this arguement about not daring to kick a ball will be moot.

itd be ridiculous to see daily life go on as "normal" while sportspeople hide in a corner saying they cant. that's what's coming by june and july.