by For a competition defined by its drama, the proceedings at a Premier League shareholders’ meeting are quite obscure. A function suite at a posh central London hotel, a group of executives (mostly men) discreetly ducking in and out, an advertisement that may require a minor amendment to the rulebook. Jamie Carragher v Gary Neville will hardly be on Monday Night Football.
But this week’s gathering at the Churchill hotel in Marylebone has managed to raise expectations. It was a meeting whose result suggests not only a divided competition, but one that may struggle to cope with the challenges it faces.
Related: How long can the Premier League stay intact? | Jonathan Wilson
On Tuesday Premier League clubs voted against a proposal to temporarily ban player loans between clubs with the same ownership. They also voted against stricter rules on clubs doing sponsorship deals with companies with ownership links. Both changes were proposed by the Premier League and rejected. This does not happen often at all.
The meeting also ended without a solution to what is known as the New Deal for football. For the past two years, the Premier League has been under pressure from the government to give the EFL more money to help with the financial stress on many clubs in the league. That money has yet to materialise, with the Premier League preferring a wider deal that restructures several aspects of the English game, from spending controls to the structure of the Bristol Street Motor Cup.
Expectations were raised (including within the Premier League) that the bid would be completed this week. Instead, there were three hours of discussion on the matter in which each club expressed their views and some said that the proposals were not workable for them. The same recommendations have been mentioned, in some form, for over a year.
On two important issues, the Premier League could not agree on its various members. It happens. But this is not a good time for the league to look broken. On December 21 the game expects a ruling from the European Court of Justice on whether approval from a governing body needs to be established for new competitions such as the European Super League (ESL). Closer to home, the bill for an independent football regulator is expected before parliament. Both could have a significant impact on the way the league performs.
Six members of the Premier League agreed to join the ESL two years ago. They have since publicly apologized and agreed to charters that promise them the status quo. The remnants of the ESL project also seem laughable. But the threat of breakaway competition, in some form, has not disappeared. If it returns, clubs that jumped ship in 2021 will be invited to rejoin.
He has always kept the big six on the sidelines for one of the Premier League’s key managerial jobs, which Richard Masters inherited in November 2019, four months before Covid suspended the football season. But this group is not the only faction that Masters has to contend with. The vote on related party loans saw eight rejects who all had one thing in common: they were or are likely to be part of a multi-club ownership group. A trend that has swept through European football over the past five years, ownership of multiple clubs has become popular with American investors, with American investors holding stakes in almost half of the league’s clubs.
Meanwhile, three of the league’s clubs have Gulf owners, two of which are owned by sovereign wealth funds (two of which are also part of multi-club groups). As always, there are a number of smaller clubs whose priorities are shaped by the possibility of making the relegation. Another faction, the British enterprise owner, has recently appeared, however. Led by Steve Parish of Crystal Palace, they are resistant to the influence of the big six and changes that would result in money flowing from the top flight down the pyramid. This group has become increasingly assertive over the past three years.
The Premier League’s voting structure – with any motion requiring the consent of 14 of 20 clubs to pass – has in the past enabled the competition to stop the big six from getting their way, but required the remaining 14 act together. This week’s votes suggest that this structure can no longer be relied upon. Lack of agreement regarding a contract with the EFL, In the meantime, clubs suggest that the direction of the series of executives is not particularly influential, nor the tips of the government, which has a long threat to forward the issue of redistribution to the regulator in the event that an agreement is not reached.
Clubs in the EFL are looking at the apparent breakdowns in the league and trying to do better than waiting for the regulator to sort things out (they also really need the money). Government ministers are also looking at the final wording of the bill for governor at the same time as they are deciding. Should it have the least exposure to light or should it be more intrusive? Up to this point the Premier has failed to make the case persuasively. Over time, he could be sending the signal that he doesn’t know which direction he wants to take at all.
