The moderniser bows to the immovable

Only two months after taking over as chief executive of the Football Association, Adam Crozier launched a "Vision Statement" for the organisation – something he had been surprised to learn it did not already possess. His strategic plan, "standard at most companies", contained such forward-looking proposals as compulsory licensing of managers and coaches, a Financial Compliance Unit, improved relations with supporters and the transformation of women's football.

The Premier League protested that "we were not consulted as thoroughly as we would have liked" and there was understood to be anger among the League's four representatives on the FA board: Ken Bates, David Dein, Peter Ridsdale and Dave Richards.

In an article that week in The Independent, David Conn perceptively predicted: "The power of the Premier League, installed now at the heart of FA decision-making and inhabiting a different financial universe from the rest of the game, is an inescapable obstacle which Crozier will inevitably have to negotiate. His honeymoon period is certain to dissolve into battles with the game's commercial vested interests."

The new man could hardly say he had not been warned; but last week the decisive battle was lost and now he is looking for a new job.

Significantly, it was Bates, the one member of the above mentioned quartet no longer on the FA board (Blackburn Rovers' Robert Coar has replaced him), who led the charge. The abrasive Chelsea chairman had initially supported Geoff Thompson, the FA chairman, and his appointee Crozier when they replaced Keith Wiseman and Graham Kelly respectively three years ago. In the open-necked new chief executive, Bates ("some people dream, I achieve") might even have seen a younger version of himself. He applauded Crozier's determination to modernise the FA for as long as he remained in step with the new, streamlined board, but grew increasingly antagonistic once it was felt that the Scot was taking too much upon himself.

It did not help the relationship, of course, that Crozier should be instrumental in sacking Bates from the Wembley Stadium project. Bates prefers to choose the appointment of David Sheepshanks of Ipswich Town to chair a committee of inquiry into the future of football as a turning point. Board members refused to have anything to do with it, and when Crozier asked Bates what he was supposed to tell Sheepshanks, the reply was: "Tell him you've exceeded your authority – again."

Over the past few months this became a recurring accusation over issues great and small: the commissioning of a Mori poll, an increase in staff and wages (much less, proportionally, than the association's huge increase in income) and then conflict with leading clubs over image rights and payments to England players.

More recently, the six Premiership and Football League members of the FA Board decided it was time to push for the establishment of a Professional Game Board, with greater control over matters relating to professional football (the FA, for instance, still control discipline). By gaining some support from the representatives of the National (amateur) Game Board, they were able to win an 8-3 majority.

This coincided with a publicity onslaught as, about 10 days ago, the amount of anti-Crozier material in the press suddenly began to increase. Bates' main journalistic confidant, Harry Harris, had a story in the Daily Express every day citing criticisms of the chief executive, while others confidently reported that he would be told to behave in a less autocratic fashion or face the sack.

Last Monday Bates came out openly and announced that Crozier was "hopelessly out of control" and "must be more accountable or must go". Either that, or Thompson would have to, for failing to control him. The FA chairman, faced with a re-election vote next year, soon got the message.

Ridsdale had remained unusually quiet, but by last Tuesday Dein was also prepared to raise his head above the parapet. As the Arsenal party prepared to leave Luton airport for their Champions' League tie in Dortmund, Dein let it be known that he was prepared to grant an interview on the subject to the London Evening Standard. Picking his words so carefully that they sounded almost like a prepared statement, he told their football correspondent: "It's clear Adam Crozier and his team have been responsible for the modernisation of the FA. But it's also evident he's seen by some to have exceeded the speed limit and caused casualties en route."

There have, however, been one or two dissenting voices, and more may make themselves heard this week. Sheepshanks suggests in the programme for this afternoon'sIpswich match against Crystal Palace that the FA board need some independent directors without vested interests, declaring: "It would appear that he [Crozier] was unable to access sufficient independent guidance and wise counsel as a chief executive might expect from a traditional company chairman and board."

Sheepshanks, beaten by Thompson to the FA chair three years ago, continues: "It does not sit well with me that the game has lost one of its brightest assets in such a power struggle. Adam Crozier, to his credit, has played his full part in modernising and transforming the image of the Football Association. He may stand accused of exceeding his authority at times, but the question remains open as to whether he ever received appropriate and clear direction."

Exceeding his authority; and the speed limit. Crozier's successor would be well advised to have a bright yellow speed camera installed in his office at Soho Square.