Why should anyone believe FAM will really change after Sept 17?

Malaysian football has seen plenty of new beginnings.

This one comes with a particularly familiar cast.

The Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) goes to the polls tomorrow to elect a president and a new executive committee, seven months after its entire 17-member leadership stepped down following an AFC governance review.

The statutes have been rewritten, the executive committee cut to 11 members, clubs given a greater formal voice and eligibility rules tightened.

On paper, the machinery looks different.

Then comes the candidate list.

Of the 28 candidates whose eligibility and intention to contest have been confirmed, 17 have established FAM connections, including 12 who served on the executive committee that resigned en masse in January.

Only 11 are newcomers who have never sat on FAM’s executive board.

That sits uneasily with an election being presented as the start of a new era.

So why should anyone believe FAM will really change when so much of the old FAM is still seeking a seat at the table?

FAM’s credibility was damaged by a governance failure. Its response was to replace the leadership, submit to an external review and rewrite the rules.

Now a significant proportion of the people from that previous administration are seeking office again.

So what, precisely, is the election supposed to demonstrate?

The answer cannot simply be that the rules have changed.

Rules matter, but rules do not govern football. People do.

That makes this election more than a contest between Ab Ghani Hassan and Shahril Mokhtar for the presidency.

Both come with administrative credentials. Ghani heads the Malaysian Football League, while Shahril is deputy president of the Football Association of Selangor.

Their supporters can make the case for their experience, programmes and ability to lead.

But whoever wins inherits a problem much larger than the presidency.

FAM needs credibility.

That became painfully clear last year when Fifa sanctioned FAM over falsified documentation used in the registration of seven foreign-born players.

Fifa fined the association about RM1.9 million and banned the players for 12 months. The Court of Arbitration for Sport later upheld the disciplinary consequences.

The finding went beyond an administrative lapse. Fifa said using fraudulent documentation to make a player eligible to compete amounted to cheating and damaged trust in the fairness of football.

That trust is now central to Malaysian football’s recovery.

Changing the furniture will not restore it.

The January mass resignation was supposed to mark a decisive break. FAM said the executive committee’s departure would protect the association’s integrity and reputation, allow investigations and internal processes to proceed without interference, and help restore public confidence.

Those were serious words.

Seven months later, some of the same people are seeking office again.

There is nothing inherently improper about an experienced administrator standing for election.

Previous service should not become a lifetime ban from public office. Nor should every former office-bearer carry personal responsibility for every failure during a collective tenure.

But an organisation emerging from a governance crisis cannot expect the public to ignore the symbolism.

If the mass resignation was part of the process of rebuilding confidence, what does it say when much of the same political ecosystem reappears at the next election?

This is not about personalities but about institutional memory.

For months, FAM has responded to pressure from outside, first with Fifa sanctions, then an AFC governance review and finally a rewrite of its statutes shaped by the continental body.

Now the association has to show that it can govern differently without waiting for another crisis, another audit or another international intervention to tell it what needs fixing.

The new statutes give FAM useful tools. A smaller executive committee should make responsibility clearer. Greater representation for professional clubs could broaden decision-making. Tighter eligibility rules should raise the standard for those seeking office.

But no statute can guarantee good governance.

A carefully rewritten rulebook can still sit in the hands of people comfortable with old habits.

That is why the composition of the new executive committee matters as much as the identity of the president.

Will members challenge decisions when they should? Will they insist on proper documentation? Will they accept scrutiny? Will they put the association’s interests ahead of personal, state or club loyalties?

And will anyone tell a powerful colleague when something is wrong?

The public, meanwhile, is not obliged to regard Sept 17 as a cure.

For many supporters, this will be another event inside a football administration that has spent too long asking for patience.

The national team continues to deal with the fallout from the naturalisation scandal, Fifa’s sanctions remain in force and Malaysian football is still trying to repair a reputation damaged far beyond its own borders.

A new president cannot erase that with a victory speech.

Nor can a new executive committee demand confidence simply because affiliates have elected it.

Confidence will return only when FAM makes decisions that withstand scrutiny and accepts accountability when things go wrong.

That means looking beyond the campaign.

The real measure will be whether the new leadership strengthens internal controls, demands proper governance and gives newcomers room to challenge established thinking.

It will also be whether returning administrators recognise that experience has value only when it comes with the willingness to confront what went wrong.

An election can change who occupies the room without changing what happens inside it. That is why the return of so many familiar figures deserves scrutiny.

After everything Malaysian football has been through, FAM is asking the public to believe that a new structure will deliver a different culture while many of the people from the old structure are asking for another turn at running it.

The question is no longer whether FAM can announce a new beginning. It is whether anyone outside the room has enough reason to believe it.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.