After years of talk, tension and the odd political sideshow, the Football Governance Act 2025 was signed off in July 2025 and is now law. It’s a landmark moment for the English game — not with fireworks or ticker tape, but with something arguably more important: accountability.
The big headline? We’ve got ourselves an Independent Football Regulator. Yes, a proper watchdog with teeth, tasked with keeping clubs in check from the Premier League down to the National League. It’s a direct response to the painful collapses of clubs like Bury and Macclesfield, whose stories still sting for fans who watched their teams vanish into the abyss.
The regulator’s job is simple in theory, but huge in practice: make sure clubs are run properly, sustainably and with fans in mind. It’ll oversee a new licensing system that clubs must pass through to compete. No licence, no football. That’s the new reality.
There are two types of licence: Provisional and Full. Every club starts with a Provisional Licence, which lasts three years. To get one, clubs need to show they’ve got a solid business plan, that they’ve spoken to fans about key issues, and that their leadership is fit for purpose. If they tick all the boxes, they’ll move on to a Full Licence — which doesn’t expire, but still comes with ongoing scrutiny.
And this isn’t just paperwork. The regulator can investigate clubs, demand documents, issue fines, even send in people to help run things if it all goes pear-shaped. It’s serious stuff, designed to stop the kind of chaos that’s become far too familiar in recent years.
One of the most welcome parts of the Act is its focus on fans. Clubs now have to consult supporters on big decisions — changing the name, moving grounds, tweaking the badge or colours, even ticket prices. It’s about protecting heritage, making sure clubs don’t lose their soul chasing short-term gains.
There’s also a sharper eye on who’s running the show. Owners and directors will be judged on their honesty, financial stability and general suitability. If they don’t meet the mark, they’re out. No more hiding behind shell companies or vague offshore structures. Transparency is the new standard. Few will need reminding of how close Villa came to being wound up under the stewardship of Dr Tony Xia.
Embed from Getty ImagesFor clubs, the message is clear: get your house in order. Understand the rules, engage with your fans, and make sure your leadership is up to scratch. The regulator isn’t there to ruin the party — it’s there to make sure the party doesn’t end in disaster.
This Act won’t fix everything overnight. But it’s a step in the right direction. It’s about protecting the game we love, making sure clubs are built to last, and giving fans a proper voice. In a world where football too often feels like it’s slipping away from its roots, this feels like a win.
Football Governance and Villa’s Challenges
It’s hard not to view the Football Governance Act through the lens of what’s unfolded at Villa this summer. The club, ambitious and upwardly mobile in recent transfer windows, has found itself shackled by the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) and UEFA’s financial regulations — rules that have forced Villa into a delicate dance of sales and swaps rather than the kind of bold recruitment that might have pushed us into the top tier of European football.
Villa’s situation is emblematic of a wider tension in the game. On one hand, the new Governance Act promises to protect clubs from financial ruin, to ensure they’re run with integrity and to give fans a genuine voice. On the other, it risks entrenching a status quo where only those who’ve already climbed the ladder — often before such rules existed — can afford to stay at the top. Chelsea and Manchester City immediately spring to mind.
The Independent Football Regulator (IFR), born from this legislation, is meant to be a safeguard. It’s there to stop clubs from self-destructing, to make sure they aren’t mortgaging their futures for short-term glory. But for clubs like Villa, who are trying to grow responsibly while competing with sides who’ve had years of unfettered spending, the timing feels awkward. The rules are now tight, the margins thin, and the consequences of overspending severe.
Villa have done well to stay within the lines. They’ve sold smart, generally recruited with precision, and leaned into youth development. But there’s a sense that the ceiling is lower than it should be. The Governance Act, with its licensing system and fan engagement thresholds, adds another layer of oversight. That’s not necessarily a bad thing — transparency and accountability are long overdue in football — but it does mean that clubs must now navigate a maze of regulation while trying to compete with giants who built their empires in a far looser era.
The danger is that the Act, while noble in intent, could inadvertently stifle ambition. If the IFR becomes another gatekeeper, enforcing rules that favour stability over growth, then clubs like Villa may find themselves locked out of the elite. Not because they lack vision or support, but because the system is designed to prevent risk — and risk, in football, is often the price of progress.
That said, there’s room for optimism. If the regulator can strike the right balance — protecting clubs without punishing ambition — then the Act could be a force for good. It could level the playing field, ensure fair competition, and give fans a real stake in their clubs’ futures. But it will require nuance, flexibility and a deep understanding of what makes football tick.
Embed from Getty Images