Of course they are. . . Pathetic

[Jammy89]

Premier League clubs will vote on an emergency ban on loan signings coming in, from clubs with the same owners.

The temporary ban will reportedly (see below) be followed by a permanent one.

However, this one has been rushed in, so that it will be effective in the January window.

It applies only to loans coming into Premier League clubs from other clubs where there owners have an interest BUT not to loans outgoing from Premier League clubs, to others that their owners have an interest in.


They may as well just have gone the whole way and announce that this ban was solely for loans coming from Saudi Pro League clubs into Premier League clubs, as it is clearly all about Newcastle United and this perceived fear that Premier League clubs have, of what could happen in January 2024.

I have no idea whatsoever whether Newcastle United intended trying to bring in loan signings from any of the four Saudi Pro League clubs that the Saudi Arabia PIF also own a 75 per cent stake in. However, this is all vey embarrassing when Premier League clubs were seemingly quite happy for this to have happened previously.

To be honest, I think it is shocking that they are doing it only in one direction.

Surely if you are going to ban owners with multiple club interests from doing loan deals, it should be both incoming AND outgoing for Premier League clubs.

The likes of Man City, Chelsea and Brighton should be blocked from this dubious practice of moving players out on loan to other clubs where their owners also have an interest. It has gone on far too long.

The Mail report – 8 November 2023:


‘Premier League shareholders will vote on a temporary BAN involving incoming loan signings between clubs with the same owners later this month, meaning Newcastle would not be able to arrange deals for players in Saudi Arabia.

It will need 14 of the 20 top-flight members to agree to pass the fast-tracked proposal on November 21, and this is expected to happen.

That would close the door on Newcastle loaning the likes of Ruben Neves from Saudi Pro League side Al-Hilal, whose Public Investment Fund owners have an 80 per cent stake at St James’ Park.

…Premier League rivals are set to block such a move in time for the January transfer window. There will then be a review of the situation before permanent changes are potentially introduced.

The temporary ban would not apply to permanent transfers, as they are already subject to the Premier League’s ‘associated-party transaction’ checks.

But all multi-club ownership models, such as Manchester City’s City Football Group, would be affected under the changes. Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Brighton, West Ham, Nottingham Forest, Bournemouth, Sheffield United and Crystal Palace have owners with stakes in foreign clubs, while incoming Manchester United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe owns French team Nice.

But, going forward, all transfers – permanent and loan – between clubs with shared ownership could be affected by new rules. There is concern among several clubs over the possible exploitation of multi-club ownership.’
----------------
https://www.themag.co.uk/2023/11/pre...castle-united/
---------------------

I mean, we all knew it was coming but it's pathetically disgusting how it's not even subtly aimed at us.

Been fine for years for clubs to do this, been fine for Watford to sell players to Udinese for massive profit and then loan them back for example.

But the moment we make some comment about Neves. . .

[Zippity]

Fucking Premier League...the hypocrisy and bias is shameless in how obviously it'a directed at us. It's pathetic bullying.

[MidsMagpie]

Strange its only come up now typical jealous worried clubs yet again it will be the usual gang trying to get this voted through.

[Ragatino]

Strange its only come up now typical jealous worried clubs yet again it will be the usual gang trying to get this voted through.

I saw this earlier and decided not to post it as I just believe it's such a non-story.

City, Chelsea, Arsenal all have multi-club / feeder club models.

Personally I don't think we were even entertaining the idea about doing loan deals for Players in Saudi. It's got 'Ashworth misdirect' written all over it to me.

[toptoon]

They’ve seen our injury situation and closed an option we had to ease this problem. I will laugh my socks off if we continue to get good results before our main players are back.
Hopefully we can find a decent loan elsewhere but it’s never easy to find one who can come in and hit the ground running.

[Ragatino]

They’ve seen our injury situation and closed an option we had to ease this problem. I will laugh my socks off if we continue to get good results before our main players are back.
Hopefully we can find a decent loan elsewhere but it’s never easy to find one who can come in and hit the ground running.

We will maintain our standards. We have momentum and great team spirit.

Who from the Saudi league would you genuinely take? Neves is ok, Gabri Vega is cool but other than that they're all over the hill.

Would we really cry if they do block us getting one of these two on loan?

I mean, it's really isn't that big a loss in the grand scheme of things.

Also this vote is a temporary thing and will genuinely not be able to stand up to scrutiny long term.

Let's see how it shacks out.

[HughieG]

These deals are problematic, but the timing here is certainly interesting.

[Nufcian]

We will maintain our standards. We have momentum and great team spirit.

Who from the Saudi league would you genuinely take? Neves is ok, Gabri Vega is cool but other than that they're all over the hill.

Would we really cry if they do block us getting one of these two on loan?

I mean, it's really isn't that big a loss in the grand scheme of things.

Also this vote is a temporary thing and will genuinely not be able to stand up to scrutiny long term.

Let's see how it shacks out.

Limited choice… certainly for now… maybe this is thinking more of years down the line when Saudi are attracting younger/better players… because in the ramp up to a WC in Saudi I’m sure that the league and players will vastly improve… but equally Saudi will NOT want to be farming out their best players because they want the image and quality of their own league over anything we will achieve.

Also… by the time Jan comes around how many players will be back? Any positions we desperately need we can shore up with purchases.

Finally… not sure any quality players who go for the money in Saudi over the quality of EPL and top European leagues are the kind of players Howe would even want to bring in and have mixing with the squad, especially if they are talking about their mega buck wages when we are still paying relatively modest wages to the majority of the squad.

[toptoon]

The ‘strange’ part of this is rushing through a temporary measure (which will be considered further and likely be made permanent later). Why? Why not start considering it properly now and introduce permanently in due course, if that is the decision.

I can only think of one reason why.

[Tutfoster1892]

They are doing everything they can to slow us down..

Thing is it'll be interesting to see if Brighton, Villa, City, (possibly Man U, Chelsea and Everton) vote for the ban.. the first three own other clubs..

That Radtcliffe bloke who wants to buy Man U owns Nice too.. Chelsea owners want to buy other clubs also and Everton are possible being taken over by 777 who also own other clubs..

We shall see the outcome