Indian football stands at a critical crossroad. With the Indian Super League (ISL) facing uncertainty following the expiry of its Master Rights Agreement (MRA) and the ongoing delay in starting the league, clubs and the All India Football Federation (AIFF) are now exploring a fundamental restructuring of how India’s top-flight competition is governed.
At the heart of these discussions is a proposal inspired by the English Premier League model a joint leadership structure where clubs collectively hold operational power while the federation plays a regulatory role.
The proposal, expected to feature on the agenda for the AIFF Annual General Meeting on December 20, is driven by urgency. All stakeholders want the league to begin as early as possible, but doing so without structural clarity risks repeating the instability that has plagued Indian football governance over the last decade.
Why the Current Model Is Under Strain
Since its inception, the ISL operated under a closed commercial structure. Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL) ran the league under a long-term agreement with AIFF, controlling commercial rights, broadcast negotiations, and league operations while guaranteeing fixed annual income to the federation and clubs.
That certainty no longer exists.
With the MRA coming to an end and no new commercial partner locked in, central revenue the financial lifeline of ISL clubs has effectively vanished. Clubs are still paying player salaries and operational costs despite not knowing when the season will start or what revenues will look like. Sponsors are hesitant, broadcasters remain non-committal, and the league’s calendar uncertainty has begun impacting player contracts and grassroots planning.
In this environment, club owners have pushed for a governance shift that gives them direct control over league operations rather than remaining dependent on a third-party commercial operator.
What the Premier League Model Actually Is
The English Premier League is often described as club-owned, but its structure is more nuanced. The league is a private company limited by shares, owned equally by its 20 member clubs. Each club holds one share and one vote, regardless of size or revenue.
Read Articles Without Ads On Your IndiaSportsHub App. Download Now And Stay Updated
Major decisions including commercial deals, rule changes, and governance reforms require a two-thirds majority (14 out of 20 clubs). This system ensures no single club or small cartel can dominate the league’s direction. The Football Association (FA), England’s governing body, does not own the league but retains a special share that allows oversight on issues impacting the wider football ecosystem .
Crucially, the Premier League’s success is built on clubs accepting commercial risk in exchange for control — a principle that represents a sharp departure from how Indian football has traditionally been run.
Why ISL Clubs Want a Similar Structure
ISL clubs are now advocating for a club-led commercial entity where teams collectively own and operate the league, rather than relying on a centralized rights holder. The motivation is threefold:
Operational certainty: Clubs want clarity on league timelines, calendars, and regulations without waiting for commercial agreements to be finalized.
Revenue responsibility: With no guaranteed central income, clubs prefer direct involvement in shaping commercial strategy, sponsorship models, and broadcast negotiations.
Long-term governance stability: A collective decision-making framework reduces the risk of sudden policy changes that often accompany shifts in administration or commercial partners.
This proposal mirrors the Premier League’s core governance philosophy decentralized ownership with collective accountability.
Read Articles Without Ads On Your IndiaSportsHub App. Download Now And Stay Updated
AIFF’s historical stance has been clear: the federation insists that the top-tier league must remain under its ownership or direct control. Previous club-led proposals were rejected because they required AIFF to relinquish control while still guaranteeing the federation annual financial support.
This is where the Premier League comparison exposes a fundamental mismatch.
In England, the FA does not extract guaranteed revenue from the Premier League. Its role is regulatory, not commercial. Indian football, however, still expects the federation to be financially dependent on the top league — a model that limits autonomy and distorts governance incentives.
For a joint leadership structure to work, AIFF would need to transition into a clear regulatory role, focusing on:
- Integrity and club licensing
- Ownership and financial oversight
- Alignment with FIFA and AFC regulations
This separation of roles is central to how elite leagues function globally.
Revenue: The Biggest Structural Gap
While governance models are transferable on paper, economic realities are not. The Premier League distributes billions in broadcast revenue annually, creating a financial floor that protects all clubs regardless of performance. ISL, by contrast, currently operates in a low-revenue environment with limited international broadcast value.
Implementing a Premier League-style system without guaranteed central revenues risks destabilising weaker clubs. That is why any governance shift must be accompanied by a new long-term broadcast and commercial deal, equitable revenue sharing skewed toward stability rather than merit and cost controls to prevent unsustainable spending
Without this foundation, club ownership of governance becomes symbolic rather than functional.
Promotion, Relegation, and Commercial Risk
Promotion and relegation mandated by the AIFF Constitution and Supreme Court directives remains the most contentious issue.
In England, relegation is cushioned by massive parachute payments funded by broadcast wealth . India has no such safety net. Introducing high-stakes relegation without financial protection could trigger economic collapse for clubs operating on thin margins. This is why clubs are pressing for a phased approach, with financial safeguards embedded before sporting meritocracy is fully enforced.
What the December 20 AGM Could Decide
The AGM is unlikely to produce final answers, but it may set the direction of travel. Key outcomes under discussion include:
- Formation of a club-led league entity with AIFF representation
- Temporary governance mechanisms to allow the league to start
- Framework principles for shared decision-making
- Renewed mandate to close commercial negotiations urgently
The immediate goal is clear: get the ISL on the field. The larger objective is more ambitious — transforming Indian football governance from dependence to sustainability.
Read Articles Without Ads On Your IndiaSportsHub App. Download Now And Stay Updated
Indian football has long wrestled with fragmented authority and short-term fixes. Exploring a Premier League-style joint leadership is not about imitation, but adaptation. It reflects a recognition that commercial certainty, club accountability, and regulatory clarity must coexist for the sport to grow.
Click for more details
Whether stakeholders can align interests quickly enough will define not just the 2025 season, but the future structure of Indian football itself. What is clear is this: the old model has run its course. The next one must be built collectively, transparently, and with eyes firmly on sustainability rather than control.
