FA Cup replays are being scrapped next season, ending 150 years of tradition and sparking calls for EFL clubs to be compensated for lost revenue.

The Football Association announced the format change on Thursday morning as it confirmed a new agreement with the Premier League which will increase funding to the grassroots game by up to an extra £33million per season.

The FA’s chief executive Mark Bullingham said the new format – which includes fifth-round ties reverting to weekends after five seasons in midweek, and the final being played on the penultimate weekend of the Premier League season – would strengthen the FA Cup.

Changes to the domestic calendar were inevitable given the expansion of the Champions League from next season, and although replays’ days have appeared numbered for some time, a Football Supporters’ Association poll last summer found 69.5 per cent of fans still saw them as an important part of the FA Cup.

The FSA has relayed the “serious concerns” of fans about the loss of replays to the FA, while the EFL expressed frustration and disappointment over how it has felt sidelined on the detail around such a pivotal calendar decision affecting its clubs, particularly since talks over its own financial settlement with the Premier League stalled earlier this year.

The EFL will now seek to discuss the mechanisms within the new agreement to ensure its clubs do not lose out financially from the loss of replays.

The FA’s statement said the Professional Game Board – which includes four EFL representatives including its chairman Rick Parry – had approved the overall calendar for next season containing the changes.

Sources close to the EFL insist that although there was broad agreement on the calendar at the Professional Game Board level, the EFL had not been privy to discussions around the mechanisms to ensure the changes did not cause its clubs financial detriment.

The sources also insisted it was not true that the EFL’s own board had approved the changes, only that it had been appraised of what was discussed at the Professional Game Board. The timing and content of Thursday’s announcement is understood to have taken the EFL and its clubs by surprise.

The FSA, which has held regular meetings with the FA over the cup’s format, said: “It’s clear today’s announcement about the FA Cup has not gone down well with a lot of fans up and down the country.

“Supporters are concerned that the changes to the FA Cup will further diminish what makes the competition enduringly popular – namely its history, heritage and tradition.

“While we recognise the footballing calendar is coming under impossible strain – due to the increasing bloat of FIFA and UEFA competitions – recent surveys of both our members and National Council revealed serious concerns about loss of replays and the impact that could have on the magic of the competition.

“The FA Cup is the oldest domestic cup competition in the world, an asset of national importance, and we have shared those concerns with the FA as its primary custodians.”

EFL chief executive Trevor Birch said: “Whilst the league had previously been involved in discussions over the future of the calendar, these were predicated on the agreement of a new financial deal with the Premier League for EFL clubs which has not progressed.

“This is frustrating and disappointing given the calendar is a shared asset across football and as we have consistently said a whole game approach is required to find solutions to complex fixture scheduling challenges.

“Our domestic calendar has been put under extreme pressure by the expansion of UEFA competitions and ultimately this represents another lost traditional revenue stream for EFL clubs at a time when the financial gap between the biggest clubs and those further down the pyramid is growing bigger than ever.

“We will now be discussing the implications for EFL clubs and seeking appropriate compensation arrangements.”

The EFL announced on January 24 that it would not make any changes to the format of next season’s Carabao Cup until a new financial deal had been agreed. That leaves open the strong possibility of clashes between that competition and UEFA dates next season.

FA sources have challenged the notion that replays are major revenue earners for lower-league clubs.

Of the 19 third and fourth-round replays in the last 10 years where an EFL side was away to a Premier League team, 12 had an attendance of over 25,000. Only a very small percentage of first and second-round replays over the same period achieved attendances of over 7,000.

While the FA Cup final will not be the last domestic fixture of the season, as was the case for many years, there will not be Premier League matches scheduled on the same day.

The late May Bank Holiday weekend has been ringfenced for the EFL play-offs.

The mid-season break has also been scrapped in order to allow the 2024-25 Premier League season to start in mid-August. It is hoped the longer break will ensure top-flight clubs are able to give their players a consecutive three-week rest.

A lower-league club boss has called for protests over the decision to scrap all FA Cup replays and warned the Premier League will “strangle” the pyramid without a strong independent regulator.

Replays have been abolished from the first round onwards from next season as part of a minimum six-year agreement between the Football Association and the Premier League.

The matches have long been a part of FA Cup tradition – with the first replayed final taking place in 1875 – and have in some cases been highly lucrative for lower-league clubs.

It has long been expected that the expansion of UEFA club competitions would lead to their abolition at least from the third-round stage, but Tranmere vice-chair Nicola Palios fears this move could be the thin end of the wedge.

“The FA and the Premier League have reached an agreement to suit themselves further at the expense of the rest of the football pyramid,” Palios posted on X.

“Bring on the regulator and make sure it has some teeth before the Premier League strangle the pyramid.

“Seven hundred and twenty-nine teams compete in the FA Cup. Why is its format being dictated by the Premier League who represent circa three per cent of them? Why were EFL clubs not given a say? Why is the EPL even dictating whether replays are allowed in rounds they don’t participate in? Protest is needed!”

Next season’s domestic calendar – including the changes to the FA Cup – have been approved by the FA’s Professional Game Board, which includes EFL representation.

The EFL has not yet commented on the matter.

The agreement also includes fifth-round ties reverting to a weekend slot, having been played in midweek for the last five seasons. The FA Cup final will also now be played on the penultimate weekend of the Premier League season.

FA chief executive Mark Bullingham insists the move, which will mean up to an extra £33million for the pyramid, strengthens the FA Cup.

Andy Holt, the chairman of Accrington, wrote on X: “Why would the hapless FA scrap early-round replays that can be lucrative to minnows? A chance to change their financial fortunes? Against EFL clubs? I expect nothing less of Masters and co Premier League buying the game into a format that suits their needs.”

Niall Couper, the chief executive of the Fair Game football reform group, described the move as “short-sighted” and as “another nail in the coffin for the already crumbling football pyramid”.

FA sources have challenged the notion that replays are major revenue earners for lower-league clubs. Of the 19 third and fourth-round replays in the last 10 years where an EFL side was away, 12 had an attendance of over 25,000. Only a very small percentage of first and second-round replays over the same period achieved attendances of over 7,000.

Nevertheless they remained popular among fans, with 69.5 per cent of those taking part in a Football Supporters’ Association survey last summer believing they are an important part of the FA Cup. The FSA, which had been involved in talks with the FA over the FA Cup’s format, has not yet commented.

Freeing up first and second-round replay dates would help to create room for any expansion of the EFL Trophy, which has been under discussion between the Premier League and the EFL. The former is keen to give top-flight clubs’ young stars more opportunities to play in competitive matches.

However, with talks over a new financial settlement between the EFL and the Premier League stalled, it is unclear when – or even if – such an expansion would take place.

The Professional Footballers’ Association said the move highlighted the knock-on impact to domestic football of changes agreed at the international level.

“What football needs is a collective approach to a properly thought-out global fixture calendar – not a fight for available dates,” PFA chief executive Maheta Molango said.

“(The agreement) shows how decisions that are made at an international level have a knock-on impact which affects clubs, and players, throughout the pyramid.

“The current unsustainable approach to the calendar needs to be seen as an issue for every club at every level if we want to continue to protect our domestic competitions.”

FA Cup replays have been abolished as part of a new agreement between the Football Association and the Premier League on the competition’s format and funding.

Here the PA news agency looks at the issue in closer detail.

What has happened?

The FA has agreed to scrap all replays from the first round proper onwards. Replays had already been phased out from the fifth-round stage but will now be ditched completely. The format change will see all fifth-round ties, which have been played in midweek for the last five seasons, revert to weekends while ties in the fourth round, fifth round and quarter-finals will be played exclusively of Premier League ties.

The FA Cup final will be played on the penultimate weekend of Premier League games, but no top-flight matches will be played on the Saturday of that weekend.

The Premier League will provide up to an extra £33million per season to support the pyramid as a result of the agreement, the FA said.

Why has this happened?

The primary driver has been the pressure placed on the domestic calendar by the expansion of UEFA’s club competitions from next season. The new format for the Champions League, for example, features an extra 64 matches next season compared to the current campaign, and spills into January for the first time, a month which had previously been the reserve of domestic football.

But why scrap replays in the first and second rounds, where Premier League teams aren’t involved?

FA sources say that decision has been taken for the sake of consistency in the competition, and to help EFL clubs and those lower down the pyramid resolve their own congestion issues. It is understood the EFL Trophy is another candidate for expansion as Premier League clubs look for further playing opportunities for their young stars, although with talks on a new financial settlement between the Premier League and the EFL having stalled, it is not clear when – or even if – that change will come to pass.

FA sources have also challenged the idea that replays are major revenue earners for lower-league clubs. Of the 19 third and fourth-round replays in the last 10 years where an EFL side was away, 12 had an attendance of over 25,000. Only a very small percentage of first and second-round replays over the same period achieved attendances of over 7,000.

What else has happened?

The mid-season break has been scrapped to allow a mid-August start date for the new Premier League season, which should enable top-flight clubs to ensure all players can get a consecutive three-week break in the summer. The new schedule also allows for the late May Bank Holiday weekend to be ringfenced for the EFL play-offs.

What has the reaction been?

The Football Supporters’ Association has not yet issued any comment on the move, but its survey from last year showed continued strong support for replays, with 69.5 per cent of respondents believing they are an important part of the FA Cup.

Nicola Palios, the vice-chair of League Two side Tranmere, said the FA and the Premier League had reached an agreement “to suit themselves at the expense of the rest of the football pyramid”, and said the new independent regulator would need the power to stop the Premier League “strangling” the lower leagues.

FA chief executive Mark Bullingham said the changes would strengthen the FA Cup while his Premier League counterpart Richard Masters said the changes had been agreed “without compromising the excitement of knockout football”.

The Professional Footballers’ Association chief executive Maheta Molango said the move showed how decisions taken at FIFA and UEFA level had “a knock-on impact which affects clubs, and players, throughout the pyramid”.

“What football needs is a collective approach to a properly thought-out global fixture calendar – not a fight for available dates,” Molango said.

Stronger enforcement on time-wasting goalkeepers was the major development to emerge from the annual meeting of football’s lawmakers as plans to extend sin bin trials to higher levels of the sport were quietly dropped.

Fans could be encouraged to join in countdowns on goalkeepers holding on to the ball too long in proposals approved by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) in Scotland on Saturday.

In competitions taking part in the trial, goalkeepers would be able to hold onto the ball for eight seconds instead of six and the sanction for holding on too long would be a corner or a throw-in in line with the penalty spot, rather than an indirect free-kick.

The plan was one of three trials approved for use in domestic competitions below the top two tiers, with the other two focusing on helping improve player behaviour towards match officials.

But the use of sin bins for dissent will remain at grassroots level for the time being.

FIFA president Gianni Infantino had already ruled out the use of blue cards for temporary dismissals on the eve of the meeting on the banks of Loch Lomond, and did not attend the media conference afterwards before the board headed off to watch St Mirren take on Aberdeen.

The PA news agency understands blue cards had been set to be part of a trial of sin bins at higher levels which were close to publication last month.

But they will not now be extended to higher levels – or to punish tactical fouls – any time soon despite FIFA referees committee chairman Pierluigi Collina claiming in November that discussions were under way about using them in “professional or even high professional football”.

The only developments were two refinements to the current grassroots trials, which will see sin bin yellow cards count towards a potential red card, and players having to wait for the next stoppage before their 10-minute period in the sin bin ends.

Scottish Football Association chief executive Ian Maxwell said: “The sin bin proposal definitely hasn’t gone further backwards.

“We’ve updated the protocol so we will assess how that works in that environment before we decide on what the next steps of those trials would be and if we start to take that further up the football pyramid.”

Football Association chief executive Mark Bullingham added: “If the trials at the lower levels work, of course the conversation continues throughout the pyramid.”

Bullingham admitted the news emerging in February had created a challenge as Premier League managers such as Tottenham’s Ange Postecoglou criticised the plans.

“I don’t think that was ever the intention for the trial to start in the Premier League,” he said.

Two trials linked to player behaviour which were approved were the ability for referees to create zones around themselves which only captains can enter, and for referees to order cooling-off periods where both teams would be required to retreat to their penalty areas.

Plans to tackle time-wasting will see a trial to increase the limit that a goalkeeper can hold on to the ball from six to eight seconds – but actually enforce it. It was recognised that referees are reluctant to give indirect free-kicks in the box, so the punishment could be a corner or a throw-in to the opposition instead.

Bullingham said: “The idea is, once the goalkeeper has got the ball under control, and the referee puts up his hand so that the (last) five seconds gets counted down, you’ll see the crowd respond to that and the other players will.”

The FA chief executive envisages some of the trials could take place in the lower levels of the English Football League or the National League.

“What level we will look at is an open discussion, I’m sure we’ll get that discussion with the relevant leagues,” he added.

Other law changes include the option for competitions to introduce additional permanent concussion substitutions – something which has been trialled in the Premier League since the 2020-21 season. But calls from leagues and players’ unions for temporary subs to allow for head injury assessments were not taken up.

There were no discussions on extending the scope of VAR checks and the only nod to improving the communication between match officials and clubs and supporters over decisions was the move to extend FIFA’s trial where the referee publicly announces their decision and potentially their reasons.

The scheme was in place during last year’s Women’s World Cup and FIFA secretary general Mattias Grafstrom confirmed it will be further trialled at the Olympics this summer.

The committee did not discuss the prospect of broadcasting conversations between referees and video assistants live, or releasing audio on a regular basis.

Maxwell said: “VAR has not been in too long in Scotland and we are working through that process with the rest of football to try to increase that engagement and understanding.”

New diversity data and hiring statistics further highlight the “grass ceiling” facing black footballers, the co-founder of the Black Footballers Partnership has said.

BFP data published earlier this year found black players make up 43 per cent of those active in the Premier League.

However, statistics released by the Football Association on Wednesday show that only 7.4 per cent of people in senior leadership roles at the 53 clubs signed up to its Football Leadership Diversity Code are black, Asian or mixed heritage.

The figure was only slightly higher in team operations (8.9 per cent) and only 10.5 per cent among senior coaches. The clubs also failed to hit any of the code’s eight diversity hiring targets in the 2022-23 season, with the FA accepting the hiring rates are too low to drive the necessary rapid change in representation.

The FA is consulting on a new rule to force clubs to report biannually on their workforce, and BFP co-founder Delroy Corinaldi feels if the game cannot get this right, there could be a future role for the independent regulator in ensuring compliance.

“Black players have been told time and again by the FA that you need to give the code time to work,” Corinaldi told the PA news agency.

“How much time do they want? If the FA can’t deliver, it needs to hold its hand up.

“Black players are nearly 50 per cent of your (playing) workforce. The signal you’re sending to those people is that once you get to your 30s, it’s punditry or leave the game, because there is a real ‘grass ceiling’ the FA is doing little to remove.

“How disheartening and soul-destroying is that?

“This government has said they’re not having diversity as part of its football governance regime. But maybe we need to look at that again. An industry where nearly half the key staff are blocked from promotion is not a functioning one.

“We need to get all the authorities in and we need to get serious about this problem, otherwise it will continue for generation after generation.”

FA chief executive Mark Bullingham admitted in the foreword to this year’s FLDC report that the game was making “slower progress” towards diversifying at the executive, operations and coaching level than had been hoped.

He believes mandating clubs to report workforce data represents a “critical change for football which futureproofs our approach for years to come”.

“There is no silver bullet to solving these challenges and we know that this alone will not drive all of the change we want to see.

“But publishing who we are, measuring that regularly and setting targets that stretch clubs to do better is a big step forward. It will be for clubs to set their own targets based on local factors, but it will help provide a clear statement that football is tackling diversity head-on.”

Football Association chief executive Mark Bullingham has raised the prospect of the game’s lawmakers examining whether audio between referees and VARs should be available live.

Miscommunication between VAR Darren England and referee Simon Hooper led to a Luis Diaz goal for Liverpool at Tottenham being wrongly disallowed last month, leading to further calls for such conversations to be played out in real time.

The incident caused huge controversy, with Reds manager Jurgen Klopp even calling for the match to be replayed.

Broadcasting the conversations between on-field officials and VARs live is currently prohibited under football’s laws.

Bullingham, who is a director at the International Football Association Board (IFAB) which has the power to change the game’s laws, said the organisation had discussed the subject but added: “Generally there is a split in the room over that, and quite often it is between the marketing and commercial people and the referees.

“Our point of view, from the marketing and commercial perspective, would normally be that transparency is a really good thing, and we want fans to have the maximum experience.”

Bullingham said an ongoing FIFA trial where referees announce and explain the outcome of an on-field review is a “step in the right direction” but added: “My personal point of view is I do think (live audio) will continue to be a question over time, because the greater transparency shows how difficult the referee’s job is, and it has worked in other sport.

“There is an understandable nervousness from others that the referee’s job is hard enough as it is. In a tournament you have referees with multiple languages, so it is not as straightforward as some might suggest.

“So I think we are taking a step in the right direction with announcing the decision and explaining why it has been reached. Let’s see if that leads to further progression.”

Bullingham’s Irish FA counterpart and fellow IFAB director Patrick Nelson spoke more cautiously on the VAR decision-making process, adding: “We just need to see more evidence on this at the moment.

“It’s interesting when we look at recent examples but we still need to remember that VAR as an entire concept is relatively in its infancy compared to the game of football and compared to IFAB. There is still more that we can learn.”

The PA news agency understands the IFAB is set to open up the trial of in-stadium announcements by referees beyond FIFA events to other interested competitions.

The IFAB may also look again at the wording of Principle 10 in the VAR protocol, which currently prevents VARs from revisiting a decision once play has restarted and meant the officials could not call play back after the Diaz error.

It could be updated to allow a decision to be revisited where a clear mistake has occurred, and where no significant action has taken place since play restarted.

Bullingham also said he was aware IFAB had been asked to consider widening the scope of VAR to rule on decisions such as corner kick and free-kick awards.

“I think we would be really reluctant to have a game that was stopped a lot more than it currently is, but that will be a proper discussion,” he added.

VAR interventions are currently limited to goals, penalties, straight red cards and mistaken identity.

Plans to honour the Lionesses with a statue outside Wembley Stadium have progressed, Football Association chief Mark Bullingham says.

Bullingham was speaking down the road from the team’s tournament base in Terrigal, New South Wales, three nights before first-time World Cup finalists England will play Spain for the title.

The Lionesses secured their first major trophy at last summer’s European Championships and could add another 13 months later with victory in Sydney on Sunday.

Bullingham said: “In terms of statues it’s something we are looking at post Euros (2022), we’ve made progress on that, and it would be right to have something to commemorate that success outside Wembley.

“We’ve made progress with the discussions but I don’t think we can announce any more than that yet.

“There are many stages you’ve got to get through – we’ve managed to get through the first stage.

“You have to go through various permissions – we’ve gone through that. The next stage is working on the design.”

Who will feature and how remains up in the air, though Bullingham added: “Our starting point was more for plans around a collective but we’ll see what design ideas come up, and you can imagine the iconic images that came out of the Euros.

“There’s some brilliant things which could be produced. Our starting point is that it’s a brilliant team.”

The time-scale for the statue’s erection is also unknown and, said Bullingham, “out of our hands” as the process also involves Brent Council, although he remains optimistic further progress is imminent.

Before the World Cup, England captain Millie Bright tweeted a statement, signed by her team-mates, outlining the players’ disappointment over the fact that an ongoing dispute with the FA over bonus payments and commercial structures had not been solved.

In the statement, the Lionesses promised to “pause discussions, with full intentions of revisiting them following the tournament,” adding, “We collectively feel a strong sense of responsibility to grow the game. And while our focus now switches fully to the tournament ahead, we believe every tackle, pass and goal will contribute to the work we are committed to doing off the pitch”.

FIFA announced its new prize money structure for this World Cup in early June, just under a month before England flew to Australia to begin pre-tournament training and preparation.

An increased prize pot of 110 million US dollars (£84.2m) came after an open letter to FIFA signed by 150 players from 25 national teams called for equal conditions and a guarantee that at least 30 per cent of prize money would be allocated to players.

For the first time, FIFA has earmarked specific amounts for each player, increasing the deeper their team goes in the tournament, though the funds will ultimately still be distributed to federations to then allocate.

Each player on Sunday’s World Cup-winning team is set to receive $270,000 (£211,785), while the runners-up will get $195,000 (£152,813) apiece.

The Lionesses want more than that, with countries including two-time champions the United States offering additional match bonuses.

Bullingham said: “We’re sorting it after the tournament. I think they have a very strong case before, a very strong case after but the reality is, there’s a discussion to be had.

“There wasn’t a lot of time before the tournament, FIFA announced the prize money very late and a completely different model that led to a different type of discussion so it just means there wasn’t a lot of time. It’s more time being an issue rather than anything else.”

The Lionesses’ Euro 2022 triumph captivated the country and drove both spectators and participants to girls’ and women’s football in record numbers, while the Women’s Super League (WSL) and Championship are on target to move out from under the FA umbrella and into an independent club-owned structure next summer.

Bullingham was optimistic about the future of the English women’s game, but pragmatically pointed out commercial investment still lags behind the eye-watering sums funnelled to the men.

He added: “I know people always think if you win a tournament you can flick a switch and you can get multi-million pound deals flying in the door. That isn’t the reality (though) we’d love it to be.”

Football Association chief executive Mark Bullingham would not rule out the possibility that Lionesses boss Sarina Wiegman could one day lead the England men’s team.

The 53-year-old’s stock as a serial winner has risen steadily since securing the European championship trophy with her native Netherlands in 2017, then doing the same with England last summer.

She has now guided England to a first-ever World Cup final, in the process becoming the only manager to do so with two different nations in the women’s showpiece after steering her home country to the same stage four years ago.

Asked if Wiegman could be seen as a potential successor to Gareth Southgate, Bullingham said: “I think it’s a bit disrespectful of the Lionesses to project it as a step up. People always say it is ‘the best man for the job’ or ‘the best Englishman’.

“Why does it have to be a man? I think our answer is always it’s the best person for the job. We think Sarina is doing a great job and hope she continues doing it for a long time.”

Pressed as to whether England was ready to have a woman in the top men’s seat, he added: “I think football is behind other sports in terms of lack of female coaches at the top level, and that has to change.

“Do I think Sarina could do any job in football? Yes, I do. I’m really happy with the job she’s doing and I hope she stays doing that job for a long time. If at some point in the future she decides she wants to move into the men’s game, that would be a really interesting discussion but that’s for her, right?

“I don’t think we should view it as a step up. If she decides at some point in the future to go in a different direction, I think she’s perfectly capable.

“If and when we get a vacancy in either of our senior men’s or women’s manager positions, we would go for the best person for the job, which would be the best person capable of winning matches.”

Wiegman’s current contract runs out in the summer of 2025, which would see her through England’s European title defence, with next summer’s Paris 2024 Olympics a possibility – though not a guarantee – should the new Nations League result in a qualification for Team GB.

The rampant rumour mill has Wiegman shortlisted as a potential candidate to replace United States boss Vlatko Andonovski, who is expected to step down after the double-defending champions were knocked out by Sweden for a worst-ever last-16 finish.

Wiegman has a strong affinity for the United States, where she played for the University of North Carolina Tar Heels and was awed by the infrastructure that already existed around women’s football in late-1980s America.

But asked if the FA would reject an approach should the United States come courting the three-time FIFA Best award winner, Bullingham instantly replied: “100 per cent. It is not about money. We are very, very happy with her and we feel she is happy.

“We’ve seen lots of rumours, and look, she is a special talent. We know that. From our side, she’s obviously contracted through until 2025. We think she’s doing a great job. We’re obviously huge supporters of her and I think hopefully she feels the same way.”

Bullingham said the FA would wait until after Wiegman takes a well-deserved post-tournament holiday before striking up any conversations about extending her stay at St George’s Park.

While Bullingham believes Wiegman could have any job in football, he admitted it could still be some time before an England women’s manager would be compensated equally to his or her men’s counterpart.

He added: “I think over time, I think there’s where you’ve got to get to. If you look at the disparity in the market and the income coming in, that’s why you’ve got a difference.

“I would say that Sarina is, within the market she operates, well-paid. And if you look at the comparison in the men’s game, it’s a different market. I really want those markets to merge, over time, and I think that’s where you’ve got to go, but we’re not there yet.”