Online Reporter
AN English Premier League proposal to introduce a controversial salary cap will be legally challenged by some clubs, according to the head of the Professional Footballers’ Association, who warned it “cannot be imposed unilaterally”.
Top-flight clubs will meet next week and are set to vote on whether to replace the existing profit and sustainability rules (PSR) that limit financial losses.
An alternative top-to-bottom anchoring model (TBA) would restrict the amount a club can spend on player wages, agents and transfer fees to five times the income earned from broadcasting and prize money by the bottom club in the league.
If approved, a cap would be imposed on clubs’ spending, regardless of their own income.
PFA chief executive Maheta Molango said the players’ union is opposed to such a move and claimed it “would not withstand any legal challenge”.
He told the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme: “We have a tendency in football to think that we’re above the law, but football is not above the law, and unfortunately the reality is you cannot artificially cap someone’s ability to make a living.
“The league knows themselves that even before the PFA does it, there will be clubs within their own room that would also legally challenge that measure, and the only ones who’ll end up winning are the lawyers.
“There are ways to agree on things around financial sustainability, but this cannot be imposed unilaterally.
“This needs to be negotiated with the right people and there are some mechanisms that need to be respected.”
In response the Premier League said: “We disagree with the PFA’s views regarding the proposed financial rules and the extensive consultation process we have been conducting.
“The PFA has had numerous opportunities since March 2024 to provide feedback on, and shape, the proposals . . . Where the League has received feedback . . . including the PFA, we have considered it carefully and, where appropriate, incorporated it into formulating the draft rules.”
“It is [our] objective to maintain the Premier League’s value, competitive balance and ensure clubs operate in a financially sustainable way.”
What is the current situation?
TBA is being trialled by the Premier League, alongside a squad cost ratio (SCR) system of financial control that allows clubs to spend a percentage of their total revenues on squad-related costs.
On November 21 its clubs will vote on whether to adopt either or both models, and replace PSR that allow losses of £105m over a three-year reporting cycle.
In February clubs chose to continue with PSR, but it has been criticised by some for limiting their ability to invest.
Nine of the Premier League’s 20 clubs must comply with Uefa’s SCR rules as a result of qualifying for Europe, and some believe it makes sense to align the regulations.
In order to encourage financial sustainability, Uefa permits participants in its competitions to spend up to 70 percent of their revenues on their squads, while the Premier League has said it would allow 85 percent.
BBC Sport has been told that a number of clubs would vote for SCR to be implemented only if it was accompanied by anchoring, so that those with the largest revenues did not get too far ahead of the rest and competitive balance was protected.
Last year 16 clubs voted to conduct detailed analysis of TBA, with only Manchester United, Manchester City and Aston Villa voting against. All three were known to be concerned that being pinned to the revenue of the league’s bottom-placed club would risk putting them at a disadvantage compared to some of their European rivals, who only have to adhere to SCR rules.
At the time United co-owner Jim Ratcliffe said anchoring would “inhibit the top clubs in the Premier League, and the last thing you want is for the top clubs in the Premier League not to be able to compete with Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Paris St-Germain — that’s absurd”. — BBC Sport.
