Ithought it was brilliant, if a little incongruous, seeing the Hollywood A-listers Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney turn up at Maidenhead United’s ground last month, to watch their first game as the new owners of Wrexham AFC. They surprised everyone last year when their offer to buy the north Wales club was approved. Now Covid travel rules have been relaxed, they have finally had a chance to see their beloved Red Dragons in person. As the owners of another National League club, Grimsby Town FC, Andrew Pettit and I are hoping some of that glitz and glamour will permanently rub off on us when we visit the Racecourse Ground in January. I’m personally delighted about the competitive nature of the National League this year, with a number of “big” clubs vying for promotion out of what is the fifth tier of English football. The gamble which the Deadpool and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia stars are taking in the National League, asking fans to “dream big” and think of the Premier League as a target, is not dissimilar to what is happening with the 24 teams in the Championship. A number of clubs are looking to benefactors to sustain financial losses while helping them win promotion – all the while knowing that only three clubs can be successful. The analogy with the Championship breaks down quickly though. No one buys into a club in the National League motivated by financial returns: it has to be about taking the club and community on a journey, and for that I admire what is happening at clubs like Wrexham and Stockport County. Both clubs have owners who are taking significant financial and reputational risks to awaken “sleeping giants”: in Stockport’s case, they were bought by property entrepreneur Mark Stott in January 2020. I believe they want the best for the clubs and communities; these are not the kind of opaque international investors who use brokers to get them through the owners’ and directors’ test on moral and financial suitability. What worries me is the growing financial inequality that is becoming embedded in English football. Grimsby Town will make a significant loss this year. While budgets at our level are not officially declared, we know we are “competitive” – and we know that four or five of our peers are spending significantly more than us to get into the Football League. While we can boast nearly full-house attendances and improved performances at Grimsby, we are investing in the long-term infrastructure and culture of the club, and as a result it’s likely our financial losses will be worse next year. The second year after you drop out of the league, you lose all support payments from the EFL. For most owners at this level there is an acceptance that the payoffs lie somewhere other than the balance sheet: most are more interested in helping our community redefine its future. That inequality should exist in football or society at large is neither controversial, nor problematic in itself. Natural endowments and capabilities mean advantages play out in all walks of life. The issue I and many others have with inequality is when it is patently unfair. While I love the excitement that glamorous owners bring to football, there needs to be strong financial parameters enforced around lower-league clubs, particularly around the pay structures and bonuses for each division. Clubs being able to underwrite big losses is a gamble that often does not pay off over time. It also creates unrealistic expectations among fans of clubs about the kinds of players they can attract, and leads to wage inflation for the whole league. This kind of market distortion is bad for the football pyramid as a whole. The free market is a myth. All systems need operating boundaries with checks and balances if we want a market to be healthy and competitive. Outside football, in recent decades we have seen companies abandon working-class communities in places like Grimsby in favour of cheaper labour overseas. In football we see a similar kind of process, as super-rich individuals use brute force to achieve success by underwriting losses. Even if those individuals are acting honourably, which many are, it distorts the market for everyone. And crucially, when it doesn’t work it leaves the kind of disastrous mess we have seen at Bury, Wigan Athletic and Macclesfield Town in recent years. This is why Grimsby Town are proud to be members of the Fair Game alliance, being led by Niall Couper from AFC Wimbledon, and I’m really looking forward to the fan-led review they are publishing soon. Even the former Conservative sports minister Tracey Crouch seemed to understand the need to rethink the value of a football club. “Football clubs are not ordinary businesses,” she said in her interim findings. “They play a critical social, civic and cultural role in their local communities. They need to be protected – sometimes from their owners, who are, after all, simply the current custodians of a community asset.” I’m hoping that we see recommendations in the fan-led review that would help cement the sustainable ownership of clubs as community assets. First, we need a massive upgrade of the evidently weak owners’ and directors’ test. There should be a legal commitment to enshrine their commitments to fans and the local community. Second, we need to incentivise responsible financial conduct throughout the football pyramid, and distribute finances based on a new fairness and sustainability index. Some of the massive amounts of revenue generated in the Premier League should go to those clubs that score highly on the index – clubs that are committed to financial sustainability, have good governance and believe in real fan and community engagement. With the profile our game has, English football could and should be showing real leadership: in how we create not only a fairer sport, but a fairer society. Jason Stockwood is a technology entrepreneur, fellow at Oxford University and chairman of Grimsby Town FC