'Angry' MSP calls for compromise with SFA and SPFL over 'skulduggery'
However, Whittle, who was a member of the Public Petitions Committee at the Scottish parliament when the governing bodies were urged to scrap regulations which had been branded 'exploitative' back in 2020, expressed his frustration at youth football campaigners turning to legal representatives in an attempt to achieve their objectives during heated exchanges.
He called for compromise from both sides so that a long-running dispute which has now raged for 15 years can be settled and change achieved which enables promising players to flourish at elite professional clubs and kids who fail to make it in the paid ranks to remain involved in the sport.
The Scottish Conservatives politician was speaking following a meeting of the Health, Social Care and Sport committee at Holyrood which heard evidence from Nick Hobbs of the Children and Young People's Commissioner Scotland, Scott Robertson of RealGrassroots and Mahesh Madlani and Alex Waksman of Gunnercooke.
RealGrassroots and the Children and Young People's Commissioner Scotland made complaints to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) back in December about four SFA and SPFL statutes which they alleged violated UK competition law and potentially constituted the economic exploitation of children.
Read more:
The CMA wrote to the SFA and SPFL in March reminding them of their obligations to comply with competition law and recommending they assess their practices.
Whittle, while expressing his concern about the disputed 'no poach', 'no approach', 'unilateral extension' and 'development contribution' rules, admitted that he would now like to see the two factions reach agreement which benefitted the Scottish game.
Hobbs, the head of investigations with the Children and Young People's Commissioner Scotland, alleged the Wellbeing Panel which was set up to determine if players in the CAS set-up could be released from a controversial two year registration which they sign when they turn 15 acted in the interest of the clubs not children.
'The Wellbeing Panel is a really good example of the kind of attitude that underpins all of this,' he told the committee. 'On the surface, it looks and sounds like a very positive mechanism for facilitating that movement between the clubs where necessary.
'But when we met with the SFA we asked, 'In what circumstances would you envisage a wellbeing panel would refuse permission for a child to move from one club to another'. They weren't able to tell us. That strongly suggests to me that the wellbeing panel exists not as a mechanism to facilitate that movement, but as an obstacle to prevent it from happening.
'Children will tend not to raise complaints when there are significant administrative processes that they have to go through and barriers that they have to jump over. I think The Wellbeing Panel is designed to restrict movement between clubs rather than facilitate it.
'The underlying issue here, and it always has been, is that the clubs principally view these children as economic assets and have rules and processes in place which allow them to be monetised. That SFA has made rules which are in the interests of clubs and not of the children.'
(Image: SNS Group) Whittle, who won European Championship and Commonwealth Games medals and competed in the Olympics during his running career, expressed hope that Ian Maxwell, SFA chief executive, and Neil Doncaster, his SPFL counterpart, would address the accusations in person when they are called in front of the committee following the Scottish parliament's summer recess.
However, he revealed that he has two grandchildren who are members of the CAS system and stressed that their experiences did not tally with the evidence which had been given.
He said, 'The changes which have been made to the unilateral extension rule are an adequate compromise if they're actually applied properly. The devil's in the detail here. The reality is that some do it properly, some don't. So I would like to see the application of the rule tightened up rather than the rule changed. The rule is not a problem. The application of the rule is where we need to start looking.
'There are some significant issues which need to be tackled. I have spoken to Mr Maxwell about this in a meeting we had at the SFA offices about six weeks ago. I was equally upset in that meeting as I was today. The 'no approach' rule, for example, doesn't make sense to me whatsoever. What nonsense is that? That's restrictive to everybody.
'But that's not getting to the nub of what the problem is. That's why I was getting so frustrated, because this is not getting us to where we need to be. We need to start with a blank bit of paper and say, 'What do we want?' We want a system here where we bring kids in at one level and they have the ability to route map all the way through to international level.
'But along the way there are other stations where their talent can be utilised, even if that's just playing five-a-side football with their pals. That's not happening at the moment. There's lots of things we could be doing and should be doing that would make it much better.'
Read more:
He added, 'I'm not optimistic the change that is needed can be achieved. If you get two sides so entrenched, it's very difficult to find compromise. My problem is this is a real grassroots issue, but all we heard from were lawyers. You're never going to get a compromise out of that.
'The SFA and SPFL will always be on the defensive if lawyers are involved. If it's a legal problem, deal with it in the courts. They kept saying, 'They're breaching this, they're breaching that'. But they've proved nothing.
'Some of the things they were saying in there did not reflect my experiences. I've got a couple of grandkids who are in the Club Academy Scotland system. One moved from a smaller club to a bigger club as well. I never saw any problems. Don't get me wrong, there are problems. If you've got 2,700 kids and you've got all these clubs, you know there is some skulduggery going on.
'But as it's not just in Scottish football where there are problems. In my sport, in track and field, if you move to a club without it being okayed you get a nine month ban. You need to have extenuating circumstances. The clubs have to agree or Scottish Athletics have to say, 'You're allowed'.'
Whittle continued, 'I am quite frustrated. I think the SFA and the SPFL have got questions to answer here. But I heard a lot of conflated evidence here today which I was actually quite angry about.
'We need to get the two sides in the room with the same objective. We all have the same objective. We want to get all the kids to play football. We want all levels of football to be at their best. We want Scotland to win the World Cup. That's not going to happen obviously, but that's what we want. At the moment, the system is not allowing that to happen.'
The SFA and SPFL were both approached for comment.
Back in March, an SFA spokesperson said, 'We have been in dialogue with the CMA and will continue to monitor our policies and procedures in line with FIFA regulations.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
3 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Two Middle East-related protests to be held in central London on Saturday
A protest organised by groups under the Palestine Coalition banner will gather in Russell Square from 12pm, before marching to Whitehall via Aldwych and the Strand for an assembly outside Downing Street. Former Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf, former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and musician Paloma Faith are among those set to give speeches at the assembly. Meanwhile, a static counter-protest organised by pro-Israeli group Stop The Hate will be held at the same time just north of Waterloo Bridge at the junction with the Strand. The group said it would meet at the location from 12.30pm onwards. Police have set out conditions for the first protest under the Public Order Act which demands that any person taking part in the procession must remain within Russell Square ahead of the protest and must not deviate from its specified route. Demonstrators must then stay in a specified part of Whitehall for the assembly, which must finish by 5.30pm, the force said. The Palestine Coalition is comprised of a number of different groups, including the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) and Stop The War. Stop The War said in an advertisement for the event on its website: 'Israel's attacks on Gaza and the West Bank are intensifying. Their starvation policy continues. And now Israel attacks on Iran seem intended to lead us into a full-scale war in the Middle East. 'The UK Government has at last accepted that Israel's actions in Gaza are unconscionable. Now they must act – words are not enough.' Discussions are ongoing regarding possible conditions for the Stop The Hate protest, the Met said. In a post on X, Stop The Hate said: 'Our families in Israel are under attack: standing bravely in the face of threats and ballistic missiles, whilst the people of Iran are bravely facing down their totalitarian government — now it's our turn to stand proudly in solidarity with them.' The demonstrations come after reports on Friday that the Home Secretary will ban Palestine Action after the group vandalised two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Yvette Cooper has decided to proscribe the group, making it a criminal offence to belong to or support Palestine Action, after footage posted online showed two people inside the RAF base, with one appearing to spray paint into an aircraft's jet engine. PSC described the move on social media as 'outrageous', while the Campaign Against Antisemitism welcomed the news, saying: 'Nobody should be surprised that those who vandalised Jewish premises with impunity have now been emboldened to sabotage RAF jets.'
Scottish Sun
3 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Major update on benefit claimed by thousands of Scots
The consultation carried out after the move was announced last December received 260 responses CHECK IT OUT Major update on benefit claimed by thousands of Scots Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) NATS ministers ploughed on with plans to scrap the two-child cap despite finding overwhelming opposition among Scots. Three-quarters of responses to a Scottish Government consultation on the move were against axing the limit. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 Three-quarters of responses to a Scottish Gov consultation on the move were against axing the limit Credit: Alamy And ministers were repeatedly told parents should not have more kids than they can afford. But despite the findings, SNP ministers this week said they would press ahead with the £155million-a-year plan from next March. Scottish Conservative social security spokesman Alexander Stewart said the consultation responses 'show how out of touch the SNP are with the ordinary Scots who pick up the tab for the Nationalists' ballooning benefits bill'. He said: 'The vast majority of the public back the two-child cap because it strikes the right balance. 'Social security payments must be fair both to people who are struggling and to taxpayers who have to weigh up their own finances when deciding how many children to have.' The consultation carried out after the move was announced last December received 260 responses. Of these, 190 said the SNP should keep the cap. They were predominantly individuals, while the minority who backed the plan were mostly charities and anti-poverty organisations. One said: 'Having children is a financial choice - it is not for the taxpayer to pay for people's choice to have more children.' Another said 'taxpayers should not be responsible for bringing up children' and 'if you can't afford them, don't have them'. Angela Rayner says lifting 2-child benefit cap not 'silver bullet' for ending poverty after demanding cuts for millions One respondent said the policy was not about helping children but 'about the SNP helping themselves in next year's election', while another said the Nats were 'addicted to benefits' and saw them as 'a great vote booster'. An 'easy read' summary of the consulation, published today, added that 'some people said mitigating the two-child cap might encourage people to have bigger families' or 'make people rely more on benefits and not work'. The Scottish Government is currently spending around £1.3 billion more on benefits than would have been spent in Scotland if devolution of welfare hadn't taken place, due to additional spending decisions, and is forecast to be spending £2.1 billion more by 2029-30. The minority that supported scrapping the cap mostly worked in organisations that work with impoverished families. They highlighted the plight of families struggling to fee their children and the traumatic impact of the 'rape clause' the allows women to claim for addtional children if they were impregnated without consent. Lifting the two-child cap is forecast to cost £155million next year, rising to £194million in 2029-30. Polling in 2023 suggested just one in three Scots think the two-child benefits cap should be axed. The rule was backed by 50 per cent of over-16s, according to YouGov. Only 32 per cent said it should be abolished, with 19 per cent of people unsure. The policy applies to benefits including Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit, and stops parents from claiming for a third or additional child born after April 2017. It does not apply to Child Benefit. Scottish Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville told MSPs this week that the two-child cap 'punishes people for having children'. She said: 'The Scottish Government will deliver the effective scrapping of the two-child cap when Labour has failed to do so.'
Glasgow Times
4 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Two Middle East-related protests to be held in central London on Saturday
A protest organised by groups under the Palestine Coalition banner will gather in Russell Square from 12pm, before marching to Whitehall via Aldwych and the Strand for an assembly outside Downing Street. Former Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf, former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and musician Paloma Faith are among those set to give speeches at the assembly. Meanwhile, a static counter-protest organised by pro-Israeli group Stop The Hate will be held at the same time just north of Waterloo Bridge at the junction with the Strand. The group said it would meet at the location from 12.30pm onwards. Police have set out conditions for the first protest under the Public Order Act which demands that any person taking part in the procession must remain within Russell Square ahead of the protest and must not deviate from its specified route. Demonstrators must then stay in a specified part of Whitehall for the assembly, which must finish by 5.30pm, the force said. The Palestine Coalition is comprised of a number of different groups, including the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) and Stop The War. Stop The War said in an advertisement for the event on its website: 'Israel's attacks on Gaza and the West Bank are intensifying. Their starvation policy continues. And now Israel attacks on Iran seem intended to lead us into a full-scale war in the Middle East. 'The UK Government has at last accepted that Israel's actions in Gaza are unconscionable. Now they must act – words are not enough.' Discussions are ongoing regarding possible conditions for the Stop The Hate protest, the Met said. In a post on X, Stop The Hate said: 'Our families in Israel are under attack: standing bravely in the face of threats and ballistic missiles, whilst the people of Iran are bravely facing down their totalitarian government — now it's our turn to stand proudly in solidarity with them.' The demonstrations come after reports on Friday that the Home Secretary will ban Palestine Action after the group vandalised two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Yvette Cooper has decided to proscribe the group, making it a criminal offence to belong to or support Palestine Action, after footage posted online showed two people inside the RAF base, with one appearing to spray paint into an aircraft's jet engine. PSC described the move on social media as 'outrageous', while the Campaign Against Antisemitism welcomed the news, saying: 'Nobody should be surprised that those who vandalised Jewish premises with impunity have now been emboldened to sabotage RAF jets.'
