- Premier League clubs also voted against Wolves’ proposal to ban VAR
- It came after the League held its Annual General Meeting at a luxury Harrogate hotel on Thursday.
- Click here Follow Mail Sport’s Euro 2024 WhatsApp channel for the latest news and updates from Germany
The Premier League has reportedly been unsuccessful in its attempts to close a loophole that allows clubs to use profits from the sale of hotels, training grounds or other tangible assets to comply with financial fair play rules.
Chelsea had sparked outrage in April after the west London club sold a hotel at its Stamford Bridge site to another company owned by the club, in a bid to avoid breaching the Premier’s profit and sustainability (PSR) rules. League.
The consortium, led by Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital, disposed of two ground-side hotels that generated around £75.6m, with the sale reducing the club’s losses from £248.5m to £90.1m after taxes, the club said.
According The Athletic The Premier League on Thursday proposed banning clubs from taking such actions at its Annual General Meeting at the Rudding Park Hotel in Harrogate. It appears that only 11 of the 20 clubs backed his move, less than the two-thirds majority needed to ratify a rules amendment.
The outlet claims that the Premier League had sought to emulate the EFL’s ban on using the sale of tangible assets in a club’s spending calculations. That ban was imposed in 2021 after several clubs sold stadiums and training grounds in a bid to avoid PSR breaches.
The Premier League failed to close a loophole in its PSR rules on Thursday
Chelsea sold hotels at its Stamford Bridge site to avoid breaking Premier League rules
The Millennium and Copthorne hotels were sold to another company owned by the owners.
Former Manchester City financial adviser Stefan Borson also claimed that Chelsea had attempted to exploit the loophole again in May by allegedly trying to sell off their Cobham training ground.
While there was much outrage over Chelsea’s previous hotel sales (with club insiders claiming they had managed to get the deal out of the top flight), the Premier League’s move to ban teams from taking advantage of the loophole had failed, and the clubs voted against the proposed rule. change.
The Athletic claims that member clubs believed “the wording of the ban was too broad”, leading Premier League clubs to vote against the change. The report adds that the language used does not make clear the type of non-football revenue streams that could be used in a club’s profit and sustainability calculations and those that should be avoided.
During the meeting, Premier League teams also disagreed with Wolves’ proposals to abolish VAR, while clubs will also trial two forms of salary cap next season, with executives agreeing to use the Squad Cost Rules of UEFA and the ‘anchoring’ system on a ‘shadow base’.
According to the bbcThe Premier League published a briefing document to all 20 clubs ahead of Thursday’s Annual General Meeting, explaining the reasons why it believes VAR should remain.
They allegedly claimed that 100 more incorrect refereeing decisions would be made per season if clubs voted to remove the technology, adding several other reasons as to why the league feels VAR should stay.
Gary O’Neil’s side have not been the only team to be harmed by the controversial system this season, which was first used in the top flight in 2019. Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta was fined for botching the system after a controversial incident in Newcastle. , while Jurgen Klopp said in May that he would vote to scrap VAR because “referees can’t use it properly.”
The league’s Annual General Meeting took place at the luxurious Rudding Hotel in Harrogate.
Reports also claim that Chelsea attempted to sell off their own training ground in Cobham.
Wolves formally submitted a resolution to the Premier League in May that triggered the vote on whether VAR should remain in place for the 2024-25 season after being on the wrong side of several controversial decisions this season.
But Wolves’ proposals were expected to fail and other clubs in the league voted against the motion, saying they simply wanted the system changed.
A senior source from a rival club told Mail Sport they were in favor of video-assisted refereeing technology but would want assurances on quicker decisions from the PGMOL.
Despite that, Premier League clubs agreed to a new salary cap trial that would begin at the start of the 2024-25 season. The new limit will be part of several new regulations that will replace the much-criticized PSR rules.
The clubs agreed to implement UEFA’s Squad Cost Rules (SCR) and the controversial “anchoring” system on a “shadow” basis.
Former football financial advisor Stefan Borson made these claims on social media on Sunday
Chelsea were revealed to have had the league’s biggest operating loss for the 2022-23 season.
The meeting also came just two days after Manchester City announced they would take legal action against the Premier League over concerns about the league’s rules on associated party transactions (APT), but there was no discussion of the legal battle.
Elsewhere on the agenda, Premier League newcomers Southampton, Leicester and Ipswich would also be confirmed as top-flight clubs during the Annual General Meeting.
