In England, whereas the majority of the clubs are privately owned by individuals and other private entities, the opinion trends in that country are shifting towards supporter share ownership. Clubs like Al Ahly and Zamalek in Egypt form a formidable community entity beyond just being football clubs. Some football clubs have a deep-rooted identification with particular cities or regions, they have become fused together with these communities. Supporters invest their financial capital in clubs in terms of gate fees, club yearly subscriptions, and indirectly through television subscriptions to watch these games. Whereas at the elite end of the game it has become economic in basis, it still remains social in nature. Irrespective of their corporate format, football clubs are much more than businesses. It is hoped that the new law will guide the mode of legal ownership and ownership of sports entities, sports clubs inclusive.įootball clubs exist to facilitate participation in and the spectating of organized football. Under this model, the club is committed to running as a sustainable business.Ĭurrently, Uganda is in the process of enacting a new sports law. It also follows that all profits are to be re-invested back into the club as opposed to being distributed to its shareholders. Community ownership has its origins in Germany, according to which a minimum of 50%+1 of the voting rights of the club are controlled by a democratic entity that has open and inclusive membership. This VMT model is the closest reference to the community ownership model in Uganda. Finally, the concept of community clubs is a new one and it hasn’t been fully embraced by those in local football circles.Īt the start of the 2021-22 season, FUFA president Moses Magogo forwarded the Villa Members Trust (VMT) as a proposed intervention to the SC Villa leadership crisis. The second category of state ownership is a typical reflection of the economic reality imposed by the state since it provides a ready source of funds, this category includes clubs like UPDF FC and URA FC, although these clubs are not vulnerable to financial shocks, they remain vulnerable in case of change of policies by these agencies. ![]() First private ownership, state ownership, and finally community ownership.Īccording to FUFA records, a majority of clubs in the Uganda Premier League (UPL) are either individually owned or by other private parent companies. In Uganda, ownership of sports clubs can be categorized into three. ![]() Sports club structures evolve over time and they are mainly influenced by the interplay of economic, social, and political factors. Football governance derives its efficacy from the principles relating to the form of legal club ownership which must then be complemented by robust club structures. Football has a wide ecosystem and any intervention that seeks to wholesomely impact the entire sector must aim to bring together all the interested parties. However, a debate about club governance should not be exclusive to only the federation and the football clubs. Both sides have become accustomed to altercations emanating from the enforcement of the FUFA Club Licensing Guidelines, the main tool being used by the federation to streamline governance among the local football clubs. Issues regarding club ownership and club structures have now become of profound interest to the different stakeholders.Īt the center of this debate is the local football governing body (FUFA) on one side and the clubs on the other. The debate about the governance of football clubs has garnered a lot of prominence among many in Ugandan football circles.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |