The Business of Football Meets Financial Regulation
- 5 August 2026
- SLAM
The Business of Football Meets Financial Regulation: What the FCA's Warning Means for Clubs and Players
Rohit Sharma of gunnercooke LLP and Yasin Patel of Church Court Chambers look at the FCA’s proposals in relation to football advertising and sponsorship.
Commercial Freedom and Regulatory Responsibility
The question therefore becomes: where does commercial freedom end and regulatory responsibility begin?
Sponsorship in itself is not unlawful. However, recent examples around the world have demonstrated the risks that arise when high-profile individuals and organisations endorse financial products that are either unregulated or offered by unauthorised firms. Consumers often place trust in recognisable brands and public figures, and where those products fail, the financial consequences can be significant. Equally, those promoting such products may find themselves subject to regulatory scrutiny, intervention and enforcement action.
Club Responsibilities
Beyond regulatory classification, clubs should also be examining the quality and depth of their due diligence processes. What scrutiny is being applied to the companies they partner with? Could they unknowingly become connected to money laundering risks? Do clubs fully understand the standard of enquiry expected of them? For example, is checking the FCA register alone sufficient, or should due diligence extend to overseas licensing, ownership structures and ongoing monitoring obligations?
Some may argue that sponsorship by an unregulated business does not amount to communicating an invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity. That position, however, carries significant risk.
Player Endorsement
Where a player is promoting products through sponsorship or advertising that is exclusive of the club, the player and their representatives will have the same duty of regulatory investigations and due diligence as applies to the football club or any other business.
Football clubs possess extensive and highly active marketing channels, with influence that extends far beyond traditional advertising. Given that level of reach and trust, is it enough to assess sponsorship purely through a commercial lens? Should clubs not also consider the potential impact on supporters, the integrity of their brand and the reputational consequences of promoting businesses that may expose fans to harm?
Crypto Advertising
The endorsing of companies dealing with Crypto is an example of questionable promotions and sponsorships by a number of clubs. An industry that is partially unregulated and to many is the “Wild West” is promoted to fans and supporters. Where Crypto companies have had financial difficulties or made losses, questions about whether clubs should be promoting them have been asked.
NFT’s
Another reason why the FCA will monitor sponsorship arrangements involving football clubs is due to the fairly recent example of Non-Fungible Tokens (“NFT’s”) and the losses incurred by many supporters and personnel due to the loss of value of NFT’s promoted and sold by clubs. Many supporters bought expensive NFT’s as they were being promoted by clubs, players, personalities and famous personnel. But the collapse of the NFT market meant that 1000’s of supporters bought digital tokens and art that overnight became effectively worthless. The clubs would argue that supporters have got art and that they cannot be liable if the NFT market went down in value. Others may argue that supporters were being sold a product that was effectively worthless, but because it was promoted by trusted institutions like football clubs, people believed that they were buying products that were reputable and worth their advertised value.
Conclusion
The FCA’s message is clear: supporters are not the only parties at risk. Clubs and players themselves face potential exposure to regulatory action, legal liability, money laundering concerns and lasting reputational damage.