After the Super League fiasco: five reforms that could save the game

Independent regulation, consistent with other reforms including greater power of supporter organisations, is absolutely essential to control behaviour of those at the top. Once that behaviour is controlled, to produce a more acceptable culture, it is then more likely that behaviour on the field is better controlled. The culture begins at the top.

All the cheating, bias and corruption that we've seen, stemming from the vast amounts of money in the game, are more likely to be better controlled through such regulation.

Regarding immediate actions, it is essential to set the agenda in the right direction, and punish the offending clubs sufficiently to represent a deterrence against any future similar attempts. The tone of the necessary new regime must be set now. If it is not, and if what the authorities and government have been saying this week is lip-service, then elite football is wrecked and not worth watching. The reforms, particularly independent regulation, are vital if the ‘beautiful game' is to be worth following.

An independent regulator is essential.

The game cannot regulate itself, it needs absolute protection from incredibly wealthy, powerful and influential owners of the richest clubs.

All of these greedy clubs owners have been fully proven to have protectionist , cartel-like and anti-competitive motives.

Therefore no proof is required that a regulator is needed and binding changes must be made.

All other ways of policing it cannot be trusted or have already failed.

As the review chair Tracey Crouch says, we must do whatever it takes to maintain ''integrity and competitiveness'' as cornerstones of football in this country.

Ditch FFP, and replace it with what baseball does over here.

Set a salary threshold. Any club can go beyond it as far as they want. No financial restraint.

If they do, they're required to kick in the the amount beyond the threshold into the fund, which is then divided amongst the other clubs.

I agree with more active fan representation but not fans having voting rights and the ability to change decisions made by a legally constituted board of directors and the shareholders of the club. I could possibly agree with fan representation on the board provided that the person truly represented the views of the majority of fans via electronic referendums on key proposals or questions that could be put to the board if a threshold of votes is reached. The elected board wouldn't have to follow the recommendations but would be bound to at least consider them. Fans can't control the clubs as they are Limited Companies and few fans have a financial interest in the club but fans should at least be heard and should be able to influence the way that the club is run.

But we know what fans want. They've been telling us it's all about big signings and making more money to afford them. Well that's the same thing the overseas owners want.

Regulation might limit things... but will drive the rich owners away if they can't run their business the way they want. And we know that won't happen anyway. There's too much money in football to suddenly make it all about sport.

Personally, I was hoping this would collapse and reset the whole system. I'd watch Everton play on a council park – not that I think it would actually get to that.

Or we just carry on as we are. But the Premier League and Uefa will have to neuter the dirty dozen. They might not get another chance to belt them back into their box.

Moshiri has increased his shares to just over 90%, cannot see Everton going along with fan ownership.