Read on Twitter
Masters seems to be planning to filibuster his way through the hearing. Julian Knight isn't having it.
Knight accuses Masters of trying to leverage the pandemic to get his 'pound of flesh'. This is good.
Masters answers questions like a Just A Minute contestant whose been given the subject: 'the Premier League'. He rambles around, jumping from topic to topic, overlapping and getting dangerously close to repeating himself, all the time desperate for the bell.
Masters seems to want to argue that it's not correct to say conditions were attached to a bailout because Project Big Picture, with its many conditions, collapsed before it could get to a vote. Good one.
Steve Brine, the Member for the Big 6, is egging Masters and Parry on to say the Premier League is already generous enough and that smaller clubs should be allowed to go to the wall.
With clubs on the brink and football's governance a shambles, Brine is spending valuable time pushing Masters to distance the Premier League from Black Lives Matter. Forget football, feel the culture war.
Ten EFL clubs may not make payroll this month, but let's not miss an opportunity to attack those demanding social change.
Whenever Rick Parry answers a question, there's an unmistakable testiness about him. With some skilful questioning (which has been notably absent so far), you could imagine him losing it.
Lovely football moment where Masters finishes a response, "And that's the difference, Clive."
Listening to Masters and Parry is extraordinary. It is inescapable that no serious progress has been made since the £50m offer of several weeks ago. The lack of urgency is incredible; pure negligence.
Change is coming, says Masters, setting out the on-going review. There has never been a clearer need for a strong plan for the future of football. No mention of involving fans.
Listening to Masters it is abundantly clear that the top flight intends to continue on the path of remaking football. "If we don't write a plan, someone will to it for us," he says. IE, they are trying to pre-empt any government or independent review of football.
Parry getting a deserved kicking from an otherwise sympathetic Conservative committee chairman for his intemperate letter to Oliver Dowden of a few weeks ago. (His letter was right, but the EFL chair shouldn't be writing to the Minister like that and hoping for a good response.)
Good question from Alex Davies-Jones to Masters. Why did PBP include no one from the women's game? Masters has no good response.
He admits that only a small group were involved but appears to promise that the women's game will be involved in the new strategic review. The question will be, I guess, what involved means. Will they be in the room discussing football's future? Or asked to approved PBP2 after?
Likewise, Masters earlier mentioned wanting the approval of 'stakeholders' (unclear if he thinks that involves fans). Approval, of course, is not the same as helping to shape a proposal. It seems clear that PBP2 will be broader, but not essentially different in who's driving it.
Parry says that the Big 6 driving PBP was "perfectly sensible" which rather overlooks the lack of diversity. No, it was "commendable." He's getting testy again.
It must be very frustrating Rick Parry. He knows all the answers. For decades, people have been failing to listen. Rick knows everything, he doesn't need your stupid questions.
Rick Parry's contempt for almost everyone is amazing.
Asked about fans' involvement, he waffles about the benefits of Project Big Picture in terms of investment and lower ticket prices. Both Parry and Masters claim fans have a dialogue and are heard.
Masters says that fans need to be brought along with any changes, but says that formal, government consultation isn't needed. He claims "fans' views have been taken on board along the way." Which is a f*cking lie, but there we go.
Damian Green immediate brings up and endorses the very critical FSA assessment of PBP. "What did you expect to happen," he asks?
Parry says it's a wrong characterisation. ("I've been saying for months, to anyone who'd listen...")
Parry says it's a wrong characterisation. ("I've been saying for months, to anyone who'd listen...")
Parry says Project Big Picture was "a first class plan."
Parry angry at people dismissing the positives of PBP. Green asks why the need for a bailout is being muddled in with the need for long-term reform. Isn't that the root of the problem?
"No," says Parry, "as I said to you in May..."
"No," says Parry, "as I said to you in May..."
Parry endorses the idea that Covid is in fact a *good time* to remake the whole structure of football. I wish someone would ask him how a fair negotiation can take place about the future when one party hold the short-term future of clubs in its hands.
Green asks why a club-led review is taking place instead of a fan-led reviews. Masters claims all stakeholders are being involved. He is insistent that the structure and finance of football is the sole business of football clubs.
Masters says the two are different, with a fan-led review having limited terms of reference. Did anyone know that terms of reference had even been drawn up, let alone circulated to the Premier League? Is this to be a fan-led review shaped by the PL?
Feels like a big opportunity has been missed here. There seems to be a consensus that fans ought to be listened to, but no serious challenge to the idea that football clubs and authorities need to direct the game's future.
The committee members seem to deeply unimpressed that a bailout still hasn't been done, but little pushback on the idea that Clarke, Masters and Parry will be the people deciding the game's future. As yet, no one has addressed the toxic influence and demands of the Big 6.
Damian Hinds asks Masters to define what level of involvement fans should have given his luke warm response to the fan-led review. Masters claims there is a "structured dialogue with fans" on "all areas of football" which is a "big commitment."
Parry asked about what he thinks about the value of an ombudsman. Looks like he's just been handed a turd and asked to pet it. He claims to be prepared to embrace and consider an ombudsman. It's is clear Masters and Parry have no interest in fans and want them at arms length.
Steve Brine is an absolute buffoon. Incredible waste of parliamentary time as he chats about five subs like they are down the pub. He's angered at soft players who can't play regularly without getting cuts and bruises. (He didn't actually say that, but you get the picture.)
Chairman says to Masters and Parry that he will require they write to him weekly about what efforts they are making to sort out a bailout and then he will make the letters public.
Just coming back to the point about the fan-led review, Masters said, "In terms of the fan-led review... It’s principally focused on governance, my understanding of the terms of remit on that, whereas the strategic review we are undertaking is more structural.” 10:53
Does this mean Masters is guessing or has he had sight of the terms of reference of a fan-led review? If the latter, it's the first I've heard of any official progress on the review.
Finally Greg Clarke, world champion under-bus-thrower is up before the committee. Looking forward to hearing how he's a big, important dude and yet every is someone else's fault.
Knight goes right after Clarke for sticking for months with negotiations premised on increasing Big 6 power and then withdrawing and calling it unacceptable, when that was always the purpose of them.
Greg Clarke, whenever he's caught out doing something bad, does the Jim Hacker being Churchill routine, proclaiming himself a champion of football and people at every level. He is laughable.
His default setting is that anyone criticising his action is to imply that they don't understand the reality of how business is really done. "This happens all the time. I'm involved in discussions at least as big as Big Picture at the moment."
Classic Clarke. Not a meaningful contribution, just posturing about how important he is. This is how negotiations work. He is a man of principle who believes nothing should be off the table during discussions.
Clive Efford: Why just the Big 6 and not a representative group?
Clarke says, with the PL refusing to be part of PBP, it was better to continue with the Big 6 rather than do nothing.
Clarke says, with the PL refusing to be part of PBP, it was better to continue with the Big 6 rather than do nothing.
Amazing that he could think that talks about the future of the Premier League could continue without the Premier League participating on a formal basis.
He then effortlessly segues into saying it's right that the PL strategic review is run by the PL as no decision about it can be taken without it and they are the largest economic power in the game. This directly contradicts his reason for engaging with PBP without the PL.
Clarke: "I will fight a Super League at every level. Our job is to protect football. Not to create some sort of global elite which we look up on from a distance."
Yes, that's the same Greg Clarke who drove Project Big Picture. I honestly think be believes his own bullshit.
Yes, that's the same Greg Clarke who drove Project Big Picture. I honestly think be believes his own bullshit.
Greg Clarke is the classic jack-of-all-trades member of the great and good. He talks a good game, but ultimately he likes the status quo. Of his status. He likes attending meetings, going to nice dinners, being shown respect and, ultimately, he dreams of a seat in the Lords.
Whenever there is a question about the FA's power, he makes it clear that he personally sits on the key European committees. It is his finger on the button. He is such a ludicrous individual that, were football not in such a state, he'd be amusing.
While claiming to speak for democracy, he suggests that all the clubs voting on everything is an issue and that "empowering" a commissioner could've been a solution. He contradicts himself in almost every sentence.
Like everyone caught out doing something bad, he claims that the problem is people leaking something not yet complete for their own benefit. Greg can take it though. "I am a big boy, football is a contact sport".
He claims his authority has not been undermined. It's just the media who don't like him.
Alex Davies-Jones again asking pointed questions about the unfair and "misogynistic" treatment of women's football during Covid. Clarke talks about working hard to resolve the situation with government, but points to a lack of funding as an issue.
But he's off the leash now and waffling about mums not having cars. It's a tidal wave of continuous chat. But, to be fair, he genuinely sounds committed to equality.
"The pyramid is more than just professional football," says Greg Clarke, presumably unaware that it was he who helped initiate Project Big Picture, with the aim of handing almost total control off the entire professional game to just six clubs.
Davies-Jones repeats her question to Masters: We there any representatives of women's football involved in PBP.
Incredible answer from Clarke: "There weren't, but there were three big clubs who have big women's teams and make major investments in women's football."!
Incredible answer from Clarke: "There weren't, but there were three big clubs who have big women's teams and make major investments in women's football."!
Yes, because clearly those clubs were approaching Project Big Picture from the perspective of how to grow the women's game and not, for example, how to take more power and money in the men's game.
Davies-Jones: Can you commit to no further changes without the explicit endorsement of the women's game?
Clarke: "Absolutely." This seems to be based on four of ten FA directors being women, rather than a formal process.
Clarke: "Absolutely." This seems to be based on four of ten FA directors being women, rather than a formal process.
In response to a question about diversity, Clarke tells a story about a county committee which recruited more BAME members, only for them to leave. Clarke's rather purposeless anecdote seems to imply they were impatient and, seemingly, uninterested in procedural matters.
He says there needs to be research into why members of the BAME community disproportionately don't want to volunteer. Former players, he says, don't want to get their hands dirty.
Listening to Greg Clarke give detailed examples when talking about diversity is like watching a drunken tightrope walker. You feel you are always only ten seconds from him unknowingly saying something awful. It is excruciating.
Oh, no! He's on to talking about how many LGBT friends he has.
Answering a question on the lack of out elite men, he says he's heard: "If I look at what happens to high profile female LGBT footballers, if I look at what happens to high profile coloured footballers..."
Answering a question on the lack of out elite men, he says he's heard: "If I look at what happens to high profile female LGBT footballers, if I look at what happens to high profile coloured footballers..."
He says the problem is on government to regulate social media. Which seems, well, a cop out.
He now repeatedly refers to being gay as a life choice. It's classic Clarke. I think he really means well, but I just don't think he really gets it. He is the perfect example of the problem of non-diverse bodies being asked to address problems of a lack of diversity.
I submit that no one watching Clarke, Masters and Parry speaking today could possibly believe that they are the right people to lead football to a new sustainable, inclusive, fair future in which the game at all levels can prosper. They speak unmistakably for one interest: money.
Equally worrying, though, it seems to me that MPs are angry about the lack of a bailout - and gave Clarke, Masters and Parry a hard time about it - but there is very little appetite to step in and stop the current authorities remaking football without involvement from fans.
"Coloured people" 
Sexually as a choice
Greg goes for and get his hat-trick: "What's the issue with goalkeepers in the women's game? Young girls don't like having the ball kicked at them hard."
Sexually as a choice
Greg goes for and get his hat-trick: "What's the issue with goalkeepers in the women's game? Young girls don't like having the ball kicked at them hard."
And with that, the final whistle. A horrible, horrible morning for football.
I tell you, if football administration was one-tenth the meritocracy that playing was - if the leaders of the FA, EFL and PL were properly accountable for their performance - all these people driving English football into the ground would be swept away in an instant.
One final thought: Project Big Picture is not going away and the government are not going to step in.
Fans of all clubs are going to need to come together and demand a seat at the table or we are done for. It's on us now, everyone else has failed us.
Fans of all clubs are going to need to come together and demand a seat at the table or we are done for. It's on us now, everyone else has failed us.
