Triesman last month said he had nothing to do with removing a clause in Capello's contract that allowed the Italian to stay until 2012.

But Richards told a Parliamentary inquiry this morning that Triesman had made the decision, which the FA admitted last week had been a "mistake" because it should have been passed by the FA board.

At the culture, media and sport committee, Richards and league chief executive Richard Scudamore also rejected claims made by Triesman that Richards "aggressively" blocked reform and insisted their new rules are even tougher on club debt that UEFA's.

In relation to the Capello issue, Richards told MPs that he was informed at a meeting in April last year that Triesman had agreed Capello could stay until 2012 - the FA chairman then resigned the following month.

Richards said: "It was the first time I had heard of that, it had been pre-agreed with the chairman.

"Unfortunately I had to pick up the pieces from that and had to bear the brunt of the blame.

"I wouldn't take decision like that on my own - I have always been one to consult."

In February, Triesman told the inquiry Richards used aggressive tactics to bully others in the game into blocking the FA's efforts to change - but the Premier League chairman said today he was hurt by such accusations.

He said: "That statement by Lord Triesman really saddened me. I have never bullied anyone. To think the Premier League chairman can block nine others [FA board members] is ridiculous.

"To be called a bully, that really hurt - for 12 years I have one of the chairman of the NSPCC and have helped raised half a billion pounds for children who are victims of bullying."

Richards and Scudamore also said the entire FA board had rejected Triesman's plans for football reform - including monitoring of club finances - being submitted to the Government because they had been sprung on them rather than any consultation having taken place.

Scudamore also admitted he had been "affronted" after Triesman had gone public with his criticism of Premier League clubs' debt.

"When you are really proud of something my view is not to criticise it quite so directly," said Scudamore, who added that new rules on finances made club owners have to prove that any levels of debt were sustainable.

"Our rules are tighter on this than UEFA's licensing. It is about the amount of debt and is it a risk. Our role is to make sure that clubs stay in business."

Scudamore added that he was cautiously supportive of UEFA's new rules that clubs should break even rather than spend beyond their means but still had some reservations.

"There are some doubts about what it will achieve. It may lock in the natural order where those clubs with extremely large revenues are the ones who can have big expenses," said Scudamore.

"That would stop the local businessman-made-good investing in his local team."

Asked about the introduction of a winter break, Richards and Scudamore also said it was down to UEFA and FIFA to make space in the fixture calendar because the Premier League, FA Cup and Carling Cup competitions had all reduced the number of match days in the last 20 years.

"We have to look to our friends at UEFA and FIFA," said Scudamore. "UEFA used to have 13 match days now they want 21. FIFA used to have nine or 10 international dates and now it is averaging 12. Somebody has to give something up.

"If we had 18 teams [instead of 20] it would mean going from 380 events to 306 and there is no way we would do that in terms of public interest and fan interest."

(reopens)

Scudamore revealed that 19 out of the 20 Premier League teams had applied for UEFA licences this season - it is understood that only Blackpool did not do so.

He also insisted that the football creditors' rule, where clubs have to settle debts with other clubs and players, prevents "chaos".

"We will defend it on the basis of the chaos that will ensue if we don't have it," he said. "It is essential that clubs complete their fixture list for a season."

Triesman insisted he did not renegotiate Capello's contract and did not even see it.

"He was employed before I arrived and the discussion of the contract in detail took place before I arrived," Triesman told Sky Sports News.

"I certainly would have had it in front of me at any time I believed we were renegotiating a contract because I don't think you can do it without the documents. It just tells you that was not what was happening, you can't do it without the documents and really looking at the detail, that is essential.

"Had I had other reasons before that point to see it, of course I would have got hold of it and seen it.

"But there was no reason for me to doubt that he was performing to the terms of the contract that he had signed. In fact we were doing rather well, weren't we?"

He added: "There was no renegotiation and I suspect if we'd come back with at least a modicum of glory from South Africa I would have liked to meet the person who would have raised the issue."

Triesman also accused Richards of lacking civility.

He said: "When you are dealing with people in private rather than in major meetings it's extremely important to deal with them in a civil way, that you're not overly forceful. I don't believe you can make the right decisions where one party feels they have got to put things with such vehemence that it is impossible for other people to get a word in edgeways.

"Incidentally - and I mean I don't get bullied - I think there are proper standards for dealing with people.

"The Premier League ought to be judged in terms of its success and they have been phenomenally successful. They should conduct themselves with the height of civility. I make that point because, in public life, that is the expectation people have of all of us.

"Having an argument with anybody really, I think it should be a civilised argument."

Asked if Richards was a bully, he added: "I think his style is too assertive to represent a proper balance in an argument."