Hong Kong’s former football chief has slammed the government audit report into workings of the local governing body, saying it was “badly written and factually incorrect” and a “sad indictment” if it was discouraging quality candidates from joining its ranks. Mark Sutcliffe, the Hong Kong Football Association’s (HKFA) chief executive from 2012-18, said the government’s Audit Commission report unfairly tarnished the organisation’s reputation. He was responding to a Post report that the HKFA had yet to fill its chief executive position – which has been vacant for seven months – after all six candidates failed to make the grade. The HKFA has launched a fresh recruitment drive, with chairman Pui Kwan-kay blaming the April report and a series of public hearings at the Legislative Council as reasons for turning away potential candidates. Said Sutcliffe: “The negative publicity associated with the Audit Commission report is not helpful. But I do not understand why the HKFA did not challenge the findings more rigorously. “The report was badly written, factually incorrect and misrepresentative. It was clearly written by someone with no knowledge of football or sports governance. “The report was about as far from the truth as you could possibly get and it’s a sad indictment if it is now hampering the search for a new chief executive.” Hong Kong FA criticised for making ‘little progress’ since 2011 The chief executive position was a new initiative under the government’s Project Phoenix programme, launched in 2011 to revamp Hong Kong football at all levels. The top position offered an annual salary package of more than HK$4 million when Gordon McKie was appointed as the association’s first ever chief executive. The Scot, however, left the post after six months before Sutcliffe took over. Last year, the government decided to reduce the annual salary package to over HK$2 million after renewing financial support to the association for another five years. The government said they were let down by the overall performance of the association administration headed by the chief executive. All three previous chief executives were from overseas, but the new candidate is likely to be local with the job description requiring fluency in Chinese and English. Sutcliffe, though, disagreed with this requirement. “The requirement for the candidate is to be fluent in Cantonese and English and this is significantly reducing the pool of potential candidates,” he said. “Of course, it would be better if the person appointed is bilingual but is that more important than a sound knowledge of football administration?” Sutcliffe said the association had done plenty of good work over the past couple of years but has been given little recognition. “It was really disappointing the association got no credit for all of the excellent work being done by countless people,” he said. “What about the establishment of the Premier League, the building of the Football Training Centre in Tseung Kwan O, the two draws made by the Hong Kong team against China in the World Cup qualifiers, plus clubs playing in the AFC Champions League, the integration of girls and women’s football, the football curriculum, the expansion of youth development programmes and the creation of a referees department? “The FA secretariat was more than capable of managing the organisation and developing football. All that was required from the board of directors was a light touch.” Sutcliffe, who returned to England where he is doing consultancy work, said he enjoyed his days as the organisation’s administrative head, despite the difficulties. “I loved my time as the CEO of the HKFA,” he said. “It was a privilege and a pleasure. I’m proud of what was achieved. I hope that the right candidate can be found, but more importantly that he or she will be allowed to get on with the job unencumbered by football politics. “It’s also why I was so disappointed to read the Audit Commission report and to see the lame response of the HKFA to the unjust criticism. I really believe that we were making good progress. The report and response to it were just not accurate or balanced.”