DId they have to fall in line or was it by choice. With it being voted by the clubs now its just a question of when it comes in. Chelsea have to sell before june to comply with PSR but will be ok under FFP. If this is changed before june its a real kick in the teeth for everton and forest as chelsea fall under PSR for 2023 and even more so since Everton would have been compliant under FFP.
As far as i know and there might be someone more clued up than me but the PL chose to put this to the vote because of the outdated flaws in PSR. Like the losses being the same for 10 years. Yeah like players wages and fees havent increased in 10 years.
If this changes before june and chelsea suddenly have no PSR accountability then everton and forest should go for the premier leagues throat through the courts.
As has been said many times until we have sight of the 22/23 numbers we have no idea of the three year impact for the majority of clubs. We have a rough idea about Everton already and almost certainly once Forests case is published we will know a fair amount about their numbers but that’s about it.
Chelsea’s problem is out there and based just on the statutory accounts it’s easy to see why some have said that there will be an issue once the 23/24 accounts are out. But again and as has been said on many occasions it’s the PSR numbers that matter.
When it comes to squadcosts going forward it will factor in four things :
1) Squad wages ( which includes head coach)
2) Amortisation
3) Impairment ( Some of the sums impaired over the last 3 years were discounted due to COVID)
4) Agent fees
1) It is suggested that the average squad costs fall between 70% & 95% of the sums recorded in accounts in respect of wages. The size of some clubs operations outside the first team squad is sizeable some however have out sourced many functions such as catering, security and retail. So spend small sums on youth, ladies football or indeed community projects some spend big. So assumptions based on the wage costs of the first team squad in the accounts could be massively off either way
2) Basically speaks for itself but amortisation doesn’t just include transfer fees
3) Impairment does advance the sums due still to be amortised . In other words hurt today saves greater pain tomorrow
4) Something that doesn’t deserve even a paragraph in most clubs accounts but not an insignificant sum. For instance in 22/23 Chelsea paid £43.1 million to agent Everton £13.5 million
Will the proposed changes if implemented to include the 23/24 numbers make a difference to Chelsea ? That’s a real possibility but I would imagine that the number of clubs would possibly have been / will be charged if the current PSR rules remain in place will be significant and sorry unless the rules are changed I would fully expect Everton and Forest to be close to if not highly likely to face even further charges
