What next for Wembley Stadium after internal FA politics result in a ‘no deal’ for £600m sale?

1/75
James Olley18 October 2018

No deal really is all the rage these days.

There were figures within the FA Council desperate to torpedo the proposed £600million sale of Wembley Stadium from the moment they first learned of Shahid Khan’s offer, as exclusively revealed by the Evening Standard in April.

Traditionalists placing an excessive emotional attachment to bricks and mortar the FA did not even own prior to 1999 were unwilling to sacrifice the national stadium for unprecedented and accelerated investment in the grassroots game.

Ultimately, it came down to a lack of trust, a withering assessment of the organisation’s operations which begs the question: where does the FA go from here?

Chief executives have come and gone, citing frustrating inertia at a structure paralysed by self-interest. Martin Glenn has made mistakes along the way, but alongside chairman Greg Clarke, he has made genuine progress in modernising and reforming an organisation which often struggles to reconcile its multiplicity of responsibilities to English football.

The Wembley deal crystallised many of these issues. As guardians of the game, is the prime directive to safeguard the national stadium and its England teams or provide a high-quality network of grassroots facilities throughout the country?

The FA Council simply didn’t like having to choose one or the other and leaked sufficient negativity to prompt Khan’s reluctant withdrawal on Wednesday .

“I cannot rule out revisiting the opportunity at another time when perhaps the Football Association family is unified in its views on the opportunity.”

Shahid Khan

There is a strand of thinking within the ongoing Brexit debacle that walking away from the European Union will enable the United Kingdom to reclaim some sort of lost identity. Similarly, some were opposed to the Wembley deal out of a revulsion born from similar thinking, fearing that Khan would Americanise an iconic British institution despite Government guarantees in place to avoid this.

Many Council members were not convinced the proceeds would be distributed fairly or evenly. To turn their back on such a huge injection of cash on the grounds of projected mismanagement is a damning indictment of the organisation’s current state.

The FA board could have pushed on regardless of Council concerns, but in wanting to pursue a more inclusive and respectful path, Khan was eventually deterred by a conservative consensus which will have to change before any other potential bidders test the water with a fresh offer.

Until such time, the FA are left with the capital expenditure costs on a stadium that is a decade old and requires upgrades throughout. It is estimated those costs will reach around £72m in the next six years, while improvements to the stadium’s connectivity and its scoreboards - both issues Khan identified some time ago - may have to wait.

So, the choice now facing the FA reverts back from how to spend Khan’s money to difficult decisions in reinvesting profits to maintain Wembley’s ability to monetise itself or neglect certain aspects of the stadium to invest in grassroots facilities.

For example, the floodlights need upgrading at a cost of around £2m. Instead of Khan footing the bill as owner, the FA must decide whether to direct a portion of its own limited money towards that aim or spend it on, say, overhauling a local 3G pitch somewhere in the country. These are the tough choices Glenn (below) was looking to leave behind.

They did not need to sell. Football funding will continue.

Dan Mullan/Getty Images

Photo: Dan Mullan/Getty Images

But in trying to transform the financial landscape, the FA now has a fresh chapter to add in a lengthy story of failed initiatives defeated by internal politics.

Rather than back a progressive deal aiming to make the best of a controversial situation and improve circumstances for generations to come, the blazers created an environment where all parties were forced to walk away.

Theresa May will surely sympathise.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in