League Revenue-Sharing Board Examiner — Professional Football

The mandate

Central broadcast and sponsorship income is allocated through fixed, performance, audience, participation and solidarity components, with exceptional adjustments for postponed fixtures and disciplinary decisions. Clubs challenge data cut-offs and deductions after distributions are announced, while commission papers summarise the formula without showing source rights, calculation lineage or precedent. Directors want credible challenge before the next annual settlement.

Three adviser days each month cover allocation-file review, one club or rights-holder evidence session and chair preparation; six Madrid commission meetings and four club reviews are included. The examiner will focus on material, judgemental and precedent-setting cases, not recalculate every payment. A question on an exceptional deduction or fixture event must receive an evidence request within two Spanish business days.

The appointment lasts ten months and ends after annual settlement, publication of the allocation bridge and one appeals-cycle review. A maximum two-month extension requires a named unresolved rights receipt or formally lodged appeal, renewed conflict screening and recorded chair approval. Unused days lapse and cannot be converted into commercial negotiation or club consultancy.

The examiner has no line authority, executive responsibility, rights-sales mandate, club-management role, accounting-signing right, audit function, disciplinary power or allocation vote. League management produces calculations; Legal interprets rules; competition and integrity bodies decide events; the commission approves distributions. The examiner can challenge completeness and consistency but cannot decide a club entitlement.

Relationships involving clubs, owners, broadcasters, sponsors, betting firms, data providers, agents, law firms, auditors or competing competitions must be disclosed. Prior work on a disputed rights contract or club allocation creates case-specific recusal. Compensation cannot depend on a distribution, appeal, disciplinary outcome, rights value or extension, and confidential club data may not support outside advice.

Why the board wants this voice

League teams know the formula and clubs know their own evidence, but both have economic stakes in interpretation and timing. External auditors test reported amounts without governing sporting precedents. An independent sports-finance operator can help commissioners examine lineage, consistency and exceptional cases while leaving commercial, legal, sporting and approval powers untouched.

What you will own

• Challenge allocation lineage from executed media and sponsorship rights through receipt, pool definition, formula and club settlement.
• Test performance, audience, participation, solidarity, deduction and exceptional-event data for cut-off, consistency and approved source.
• Compare postponed, abandoned, disciplinary, promoted, relegated and insolvency cases against documented rule and earlier precedent.
• Examine cash timing, currency, withholding, disputed receivable and reserve treatment separately from economic allocation.
• Frame evidence questions for clubs, broadcasters, sponsors, data providers, management, Legal and competition officials.
• Assess whether published bridges explain formula, adjustments, uncertainty and governance without exposing protected commercial information.
• Give the commission a case docket, precedent map, conflict record, unresolved evidence and post-settlement review agenda.

Candidate qualifications

• Led league, club, media-rights or sports-governance finance involving material central distributions and contested allocations.
• Understands fixed, performance, audience, participation and solidarity mechanics plus exceptional fixture and disciplinary events.
• Traced rights receipts and source data into club settlements across currency, withholding, reserve and cash timing.
• Challenged influential clubs and commercial partners while preserving legal, sporting, integrity and commission boundaries.
• Presented transparent allocation bridges to governing bodies without becoming formula operator, auditor or appeals adjudicator.
• Managed conflicts involving owners, broadcasters, sponsors, betting, agents, data firms and competing competitions.

Non-negotiables

• Can attend all six Madrid sessions and complete four authorised club evidence reviews during ten months.
• Will disclose every club, owner, broadcaster, sponsor, betting, agent, data, legal and audit relationship.
• Brings central sports revenue-allocation governance; general media or club FP&A alone is insufficient.
• Accepts no commercial, legal, sporting, disciplinary, accounting, audit, executive or allocation authority.

1. 49 words maximum. Describe an exceptional sporting event that changed a central revenue allocation.
2. 49 words maximum. Which current club, rights-holder, sponsor or data relationship could require your recusal?
3. 49 words maximum. What source-to-settlement evidence would you require before annual allocation approval?