Posts: 11,950
Threads: 16
Joined: Jun 2018
Reputation:
115
This is the sticky bit though and also why we won’t spend as big this season.:
While clubs in Europe will have to adhere to Uefa's 70%, the other 11 Premier League teams will be permitted to spend upwards of 85% of income on the playing staff and the manager.
The Premier League is trying to protect the competitive balance by allowing those without income from European competition to spend a higher proportion of their earnings.
But Chelsea, Newcastle and Nottingham Forest must continue to comply with the Uefa regulations even though they do not have European football next season.
Posts: 12,429
Threads: 40
Joined: May 2018
Reputation:
67
What if we don't comply though? Do we just get fined again?
Posts: 11,950
Threads: 16
Joined: Jun 2018
Reputation:
115
(30-06-2026, 08:48 PM)Sausage Roll Wrote: What if we don't comply though? Do we just get fined again?
Assume we would get a spending plan and restrictions on signings enforced over a 3 year period? Not sure how it works if we don’t qualify for Europe in that time. We definitely don’t want what Villa have had chucked at them.
Also worth pointing out (think I am correct here) that we would have had to adhere to 70% ratio next season irrespective of if we breached SCR this year or not.
Posts: 10,886
Threads: 56
Joined: Jun 2018
Reputation:
60
(30-06-2026, 08:58 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote: (30-06-2026, 08:48 PM)Sausage Roll Wrote: What if we don't comply though? Do we just get fined again?
Assume we would get a spending plan and restrictions on signings enforced over a 3 year period? Not sure how it works if we don’t qualify for Europe in that time. We definitely don’t want what Villa have had chucked at them.
Also worth pointing out (think I am correct here) that we would have had to adhere to 70% ratio next season irrespective of if we breached SCR this year or not.
I believe the UEFA rules would only be an issue if we got back into Europe.
Posts: 6,811
Threads: 6
Joined: Jun 2018
Reputation:
54
Feel sorry for Villa, seems they keep getting penalised and the only way to comply is to sell players to avoid it, which stops them from really kicking on.
Posts: 12,429
Threads: 40
Joined: May 2018
Reputation:
67
01-07-2026, 11:29 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2026, 11:30 AM by Sausage Roll.)
That BBC article has changed now and doesn't make any reference of us still having to comply with UEFA rules so it seems we *won't* have to comply with the harsher 70% SCR:
"While clubs in Europe will have to adhere to Uefa's 70%, the other 11 Premier League teams will be permitted to spend upwards of 85% of income on the playing staff and the manager.
The Premier League is trying to protect the competitive balance by allowing those without income from European competition to spend a higher proportion of their earnings.
But Chelsea must continue to comply with the Uefa regulations even though they do not have European football next season. This is part of the agreement reached with Uefa last summer.
Forest are not in a multi-year settlement period, while Newcastle's does not relate to squad-cost ratio."
Posts: 4,155
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2018
Reputation:
23
Did seem heavy handed when announced glad it’s been cleared up
Posts: 2,387
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2022
Reputation:
19
Location: Deeside
(30-06-2026, 10:09 PM)Username Wrote: Feel sorry for Villa, seems they keep getting penalised and the only way to comply is to sell players to avoid it, which stops them from really kicking on.
Aye, it also completely closes the door on a team like RB Leipzig or Salzburg ever happening again. It basically says that those teams who have been historically big brands and have income steams from the free running 90s and 00s now are established and everyone else cannot compete, even if you have the cash to do so.
And why?
What are we preventing?
Posts: 355
Threads: 1
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation:
8
Its a great revenue generator for UEFA
Posts: 11,934
Threads: 12
Joined: May 2018
Reputation:
84
Petty point perhaps, but Villa had the opportunity just a few weeks ago to all but certainly relegate one of the clubs they're currently trying to eclipse. And that very same club are now investing heavily in players which Villa now probably consider should, subject to the playing field being level, be viable targets for them. So currently I've got very little sympathy for their plight individually.
Posts: 11,934
Threads: 12
Joined: May 2018
Reputation:
84
Specifically with regard to the premier league and FFP/PSR, you only have to look at the clubs who voted in favour of FFP in 2013 : Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham and Liverpool. They were all trying to encapsulate their positions at the top of the tree as Man City, who voted against, were trying to buy out football. And that very same group of clubs then were at the centre of firstly blocking, and then restricting, Newcastle's new owners from doing what Man City had done a decade earlier and joining their cartel of elite clubs.
The whole thing stinks, it really does.
Posts: 6,811
Threads: 6
Joined: Jun 2018
Reputation:
54
(01-07-2026, 03:04 PM)Paplane Wrote: Petty point perhaps, but Villa had the opportunity just a few weeks ago to all but certainly relegate one of the clubs they're currently trying to eclipse. And that very same club are now investing heavily in players which Villa now probably consider should, subject to the playing field being level, be viable targets for them. So currently I've got very little sympathy for their plight individually.
That’s a fair point but they did it to ensure they could balance the Europa commitments, their decision to field a weaker team was all about their short term desire to secure Champions League football.
With hindsight the game at Chelsea probably did more harm than good to us, and no moral victory can ease that loss.
|
