The Premier League and its clubs were engaged in frenetic lobbying late on Thursday evening, ahead of a “knife-edge” Friday vote on Associated Party Transaction rules being seen as a watershed moment for the competition.
The proposal comes after a legal challenge to the rules by Manchester City, that has resulted in the league pressing ahead with an attempt to swiftly update the regulations. That requires a vote of 14 out of the 20 clubs at Friday’s shareholder meeting in London, and there is currently “a quiet confidence” within the Premier League that they will get exactly that number.
If that is the case, however, it could just end up leading to further litigation from City. It sums up the state of the Premier League right now that either outcome could lead to considerable internal tensions. If City manage to secure a veto, there is a fear the competition’s very authority could be thrown into disarray, potentially opening the way for the wealthiest owners to spend to a far greater degree.
Victory may yet bring another legal war, all in the context of the ongoing case against City over alleged breaches of financial regulations. The split essentially comes between a more traditional or billionaire-owned group of clubs, and those who have state-linked ownerships or multi-club ambitions.
The exact numbers are nevertheless complicated by what any new rules could mean for historic shareholder loans. It is there where there is a belief that the Premier League could win out.
City’s latest argument to the other clubs, backed by Aston Villa, warned that the proposed updates remain unlawful and that it is better to wait until the tribunal panel’s full findings from the June legal case are received. There is nevertheless a concern within some clubs that any such delay could allow rivals to push through sponsorship deals that would otherwise be prohibited.
The Premier League’s response to the furore-causing October decision was to go to its various panels and conduct arduous negotiations with clubs. They consequently settled on three key changes, that amount to modest amendments to the rules but may still allow bigger APT deals.
Although many are putting all of this in the context of the wider hearing against City, the situation is a direct consequence of the Premier League rejecting the club’s new Etihad sponsorship deal as not of fair market value. City consequently brought a legal challenge against that, that saw considerable criticism of the regulations.
Debate has nevertheless raged over whether that panel’s decision backed the overall premise of the rules or, as City strenuously argue, that it caused the entire set of rules to be declared “unlawful”.
The clubs are having a dinner on Thursday night, where discussion is set to continue, albeit in a less tense environment. The most intense emotion could instead be saved for Friday’s meeting.