Premier League chief executive Richard Masters is facing growing criticism from a leading group of clubs who have united in opposition to his leadership on certain issues. In the last meeting between the 20 teams that make up the highest category in England, an inappropriate division of opinions appeared waiting for the management leadership to clarify the case of Manchester City and its more than 100 violated rules.
As reported by English outlet Mail Sport, the chaos began when seven of the clubs that refused to support the introduction of new rules on transactions between associated parties were also among the eight that voted against proposals to ban transfers to loan last November. This generated great concern on the part of the executive branch about the appearance of a so-called “group of rebels.”
Manchester City, Newcastle, Chelsea, Everton, Nottingham Forest and Sheffield United stood up to the Premier League in the tense shareholders meeting that took place last Friday, while Crystal Palace and Burnley abstained. The motion to tighten economic rules passed by the narrowest possible margin, with two-thirds of the 18 votes cast in favour, but the dispute may flare up as the Cityzens threaten legal action against the league alleging the restrictions breach the competition law.
In addition to this week’s vote, there is considerable discontent among clubs over the position of organizing officials on a number of key issues, including the application of profit and sustainability rules, proposed changes to the loan system and the financial deal to be offered to the EFL as part of the New Deal. Premier League clubs have never been so divided in the competition’s 32-year history as there are also disagreements over their future television rights and digital strategies.
But the main point of discussion behind closed doors is the doubt of when the sanction against Manchester City will be made official, having 115 charges by the Premier League since February 2023. As reported by Daily Mail, the club flatly denies the penalties that have a date between 2009 and 2018. In a statement, the Football Association explained that a requirement was missing for the ruling to come out since there was a lack of “accurate financial information that offers a true and fair view of the financial situation of the club”, in particular its “income”. , “sponsorship income” and “operating costs”.
As a recent precedent, Everton was punished with a 10-point deduction from the Premier League after being found guilty of violating only one regulation on Financial Fair Play and is in the appeal process. The portal stated that the matter will be resolved by an independent panel, with a trial “initially scheduled for late fall 2024” and “statements from witnesses” are currently being taken and will be “until next spring.” This punishment to Everton posed a worrying situation for the Citizens, and even many media outlets in that country speculated about a possible relegation for the team that won five of the last six Premier Leagues, in addition to the last Champions League, becoming one of the casts most powerful on the planet.
Richard Masters explained that “a date was set” for the City case, but refused to mark that day on the calendar. It is suspected that there could be a verdict in mid-2025, but there could be delays especially with the probable appeals of both parties. Unlike the case with UEFA, in which a two-year Champions League ban was overturned, Manchester could take its case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
#Tension #Premier #League #due #punishment #Manchester #City #Diario #Página
