Premiership Clubs Vote In Favour Of Financial Fair Play And Salary Restrictions

By on February 7, 2013

West Ham co-owner David Gold has confirmed that the majority of Premier League clubs have voted in favour in bringing in spending controls including financial fair play and salary restrictions, according to Sky Sports News.

Last week it was reported that four of the League’s biggest clubs, namely Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham and Liverpool, had joined forces to submit a written demand to the FA asking for UEFA’s financial fair play rules to be introduced. The document, which was written on Arsenal headed paper and co-signed by the other three clubs, stated that the existing FFP proposal didn’t go far enough and that greater limitations should be placed on investment from owners and individuals.

It seems the quartet aren’t alone in feeling change is needed after a meeting today of the 20 Premier League clubs saw the majority back some form of financial restrictions, according to Gold:

“The clubs supported change.

“We’ve all voted and it was overwhelmingly supported. Some clubs are a little concerned, but the vast majority voted in favour.

“That will now go to the board for putting into rules, and we’ll vote on that in April.

“It’s not a salary cap, it’s a restraint on over-spending. If clubs increase their revenues then they can increase their spending. We have got restraint, that’s the important thing.” Gold told Sky Sports

14 of the 20 clubs were needed to back the proposals and it seems this figure has been achieved with the Premiership set to become the first top-flight league in Europe to introduce such restrictions.

The full details of what was agreed is expected to be announced on Thursday evening but the Mirror claim it’s expected to be less stringent than UEFA’s financial fair play scheme in that it will allow club owners to cover significant loses, but it is expected to force clubs to restrict how much they are allowed to increase their wage bills by.

The Mirror also claim the proposal discussed today allowed owners to cover losses up to £105m over a three-year period, which is a lot more than the £39m allowed under UEFA’s FFP rules, but at least it’s a positive step in the right direction.

While clubs such as Chelsea or Manchester City may not be fully behind the proposals, for obvious reasons, it’s difficult to deny they should be introduced for the greater good.

What are your thoughts of the introduction of financial restrictions in the Premier League? Get involved in the comments section below.

Best of the web

15 Comments

  1. rh

    February 7, 2013 at 6:32 pm

    Guarantees that Everton, Sunderland, Newcastle will never win the premiership

    • binu

      February 7, 2013 at 6:49 pm

      GUD POINT…….6…….DEY WONT WIN NYTHNG

  2. Mike

    February 7, 2013 at 6:36 pm

    Whats the point of this if owners are allowed t cover huge losses???

  3. Sunnypa de gooners

    February 7, 2013 at 6:57 pm

    I love it very good decision they need to introduce financial fairplay so that the like of chelsea and manchester city will stop spending big and player will be chip so that small club can buy big name player that inprove there club to win trophy.thanks

    • Mike

      February 7, 2013 at 11:25 pm

      What a fool you are. So blinded with envy towards City and Chelsea you ignore the history of your own club. Another typical know nowt hypocrite!

  4. Chris Chorlton

    February 7, 2013 at 7:21 pm

    A desperate attempt by the old guard, with established incomes (after massive debt in some cases)to protect the Status Quo and their own interests.

    They are actually playing into UEFA’s (Blatter’s and Plattini’s)hands, by weakening the EPL, which UEFA fear is becoming the World Super League. Look at how we are already ceasing to dominate the ECL since the shadow of FFP fell on the EPL. Soon there will be only 2 or 3 ECL places to fight for (probably including Celtic in the EPL!)the way things are going. Once the massive revenue of the EPL drops due to dwindling global interest, it will come back to bite the likes of Man UTD who need to feed their massive debt!

  5. Stephen McDonnell

    February 7, 2013 at 7:34 pm

    I totally disagree with this and hope the owners of Man City seek legal advice. I cant believe its lawful to stop owners from spending there money how they please.I can understand stopping clubs from borrowing vast amounts they cant repay hence going bust. All this will do is keep the cartel of Man Utd, Barcelona etc at the top, other ambitious clubs may as well forget it and get used to maybe avoiding relegation. And I totally agree the EPL will go down the pan which will please Platini and his cronies.

    • Mike

      February 7, 2013 at 11:30 pm

      More corruption to enforce the monopoly that City came to challenge. Now no team without a huge stadium and massive revenue streams will NEVER EVER win the league title EVER again.

      A sad day for football, if only people supporting it actually read and understood the proposal. They are blinkered morons who think that another club winning a title instead of them is ‘ruining football’. What is ruining football is this ingrained arrogant sense of entitlement that clubs like United, Arsenal and Liverpool think they have. Not to mention their enforced monopoly under the guise of “fair play”

      Wake up FFS

  6. C James

    February 7, 2013 at 7:37 pm

    Wonder how eufa and pl rules relate to each other – former is tougher, so cl teams will have tighter rules than other pl teams ?

  7. don stena wiser

    February 7, 2013 at 8:23 pm

    This is arrant nonsense! Is it anybody’s fault that stingy and selfish clubs like arsenal and spurs can’t buy quality players when they claim they are making profits yearly. If club owners have money to buy quality players to bolster their clubs why are the likes of arsenal & spurs sitting back and sulking. As far as I am concern, its a game plan aimed at diminishing any major threat from chelsea and real madrid that may have arisen to compete with the self-acclaimed best clubs man utd and barca. Its a total politicizing of the beautiful game football. But I bet you, in no mean time all this weakling-sulking-stingy clubs agitating for this will realize the politics behind this whole episode… RUBBISH

  8. Ebuka orafu

    February 7, 2013 at 10:05 pm

    A good step in right direction, there’ll be chance for small clubs to compite with so called big clubs for signing quality players and wining trophies.

    • Mike

      February 7, 2013 at 11:33 pm

      You have got it twisted you fool. These rules will create an even stronger monopoly than there ever has been. As long as you support United it’s good for football right? After all United have never had a sugar daddy have they, oh and football started in 1992.

      Try understanding what you are talking about before you comment you idiot.

  9. eriss

    February 8, 2013 at 1:17 am

    One nasty thing about you Mike, is that you have become so deluded and so arrogant that you think you understand this rule more than any one else. Is it not enough to think of how stupid it is for a going concern like a football club to run continuously without breaking even, And only rely on sugar daddies purses? You arrogant FOOL.

    • jay

      February 8, 2013 at 5:16 am

      Agreed, that guy mike is a douchebag, commented on every persons comment and called them a fool, when he isn’t making any sense, the epl is a powerhouse league because of the average talent, not the big names, but many of the reoccuring clubs that win the league and move to European tourneys have a lot of spending, this will help smaller squads, that’s why the two main teams opposed to this are man city and chelsea, two teams with a crazy amount of spending…. It’s not a perfect solution for the problem but its a start

  10. DagunD

    February 8, 2013 at 6:45 am

    The END shall JUSTIFY the MEANS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *