clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Temporary ban on incoming multi-club loans does not pass Premier League vote — reports

Silly process, silly games

If you buy something from an SB Nation link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.

Manchester United v Luton Town - Premier League Photo by Visionhaus/Getty Images

A ban that would’ve prevented Premier League teams from taking players on loan from other clubs within their respective multi-club networks has failed, by a count of either 13-7 or 12-8, depending on which report you read, and when. The count was first reported as 13-7 by The Times, then updated to 12-8. Not that it matters, because the resolution needed a two-thirds majority to pass, i.e. 14 clubs.

The dissenting seven, according to the aforementioned reports, were Newcastle United (duh), Sheffield United, Manchester City, Chelsea, Everton, Wolves, and Nottingham Forest. Burnley were then added to that list as the eighth club.

Eleven of the twenty clubs in the Premier League are currently part of a multi-club scheme (or have shared ownership, officially, with another club somewhere else) — Aston Villa, Arsenal, Bournemouth, Crystal Palace, West Ham, and Brighton voted for the ban despite that — but obviously the only team really in danger of gaining a competitive advantage from loaning in a player (for cheap) this January are Newcastle, who could theoretically dip into the PIF-owned stable of talent in the Saudi Professional League. At least in theory.

It sounds like one of the reasons this vote failed was the haphazard approach taken in crafting the resolution, which would’ve applied to just this January. The other big one is simply that the Premier League clubs themselves cannot be expected to self-police this issue without bias and self-interest. It’s all a bit Love Island (Games).

The issue is expected to be properly addressed in the near future — including other related matters, like (front-of-shirt) sponsorships and other financial loopholes — though it seems unlikely that a majority of clubs would vote in favor of this. They’re not going to risk even cracking the door open on any rules that might have a negative effect on such things. It would be essentially biting the hand that feeds, with that hand being their own. Multi-club is the future, and the only way to stop it would be from an external source.

Sign up for the newsletter Sign up for the We Ain't Got No History Daily Roundup newsletter!

A daily roundup of Chelsea news from We Ain't Got No History