CRITICISM of football and the GFA board in recent years has sadly become second nature to yours truly.

The board have taken more kickings than dished out in the X-rated Leeds-Chelsea FA Cup final of 1970.

But six months into their much-vaunted, largely unpopular four-year plan and 72 hours ahead of the open meeting to discuss the early stages of its delivery, it’s time to give the board a bit of credit.

What Mark Le Tissier (pictured)  has achieved in his first half-year of his chairmanship is far more than meets the eye.

On the face of it, little has changed and big, long-standing problems still exist, but behind the scenes the popular former Muratti defender has been working with admirable energy, a cool head and, most importantly, with an improving service team.

Le Tissier’s groundwork should ensure he and his men get a reasonably soft ride when they meet with all the club representatives next week.

He will be the first to admit that not every element of their four-year plan is working smoothly and for the better of the game, but some key parts are, particularly those changes made in the younger reaches of the league structure.

Other elements need more time to assess or tinkered with, one being the league structure and the effects of the one-man, one-club rule.

What we’ve seen so far is far too many players quitting for the social leagues than is good for the GFA and that trend needs to be turned around.

Le Tissier knows that and his board’s olive branch to the social leagues will, I hope, result in them reaffiliating this summer and, after talks, a sufficient number of additional sides will be persuaded to slot into the GFA leagues and enable much-needed promotion and relegation.

That has to be the way forward and it may mean diluting GFA’s policy of one-man, one club.

Worryingly, in the last week I learned of at least two more good, loyal GFA players, planning to quit and head for the social leagues next season simply because they consider they get nowhere near enough games and their club subscription does not provide value for money.

Outside of the GFA those two players can play for two different teams and double the number of games they currently can find in Division Two and also at a snip of the price of their existing club membership.

Sure, the facilities may not be as good, but to many who just want to play a game of football with their mates, the length of the grass and the power of the showers is not an over-riding issue.

GFA lost nearly 200 senior players this season and cannot afford another large reduction.

The umbrella body and the social leagues have it in themselves to solve these issues, but they need to talk, understand each other’s position and work for the betterment of football as a whole.

Colleague Aaron Scoones has been banging on for a while as to his own solution to suit both GFA and the social footballers.

Merge the two leagues together as one and play it on a Sunday – call it the GFA Social League.

Get rid of the ‘one player, one club’ rule, but all players registered in Division One and the Under-21s are not allowed to play in the GFA Sunday League.

Hence all the players that are over 21 and are not good enough to play in Division One can run themselves into the ground, playing twice a weekend, by playing for an established GFA club and a social GFA team.