Man City fail in bid to prevent spending cap as Premier League clubs agree to ‘anchoring’

Will Ford
Pep Guardiola Man City Khaldoon Al Mubarak
Man City were one of three clubs to vote against the new spending cap.

Premier League clubs have agreed in principle to spending cap ‘anchoring’ despite pushback from the Professional Footballers’ Association.

Clubs reportedly voted on Monday to progress to the final stages of a legal and economic analysis of ‘anchoring’ – which will potentially limit expenditure such as player wages, plus agents’ fees and transfer amortisation costs, to a multiple of the central Premier League revenues going to the bottom club.

Man City among trio opposed

The intention of anchoring is to keep the league competitive by preventing the richest clubs dominating.

The drafting of rules around the principle will now also take place, with a view to a further vote at the league’s annual general meeting in June.

Sources close to Manchester United had indicated prior to the meeting they would oppose it and it was reported Manchester City and Aston Villa also voted against, with Chelsea abstaining.

PFA against ‘hard’ cap

The legal analysis is likely to involve discussions with the PFA, and a spokesperson for the union said on Monday: “We will obviously wait to see further details of these specific proposals, but we have always been clear that we would oppose any measure that would place a ‘hard’ cap on player wages.

“There is an established process in place to ensure that proposals like this, which would directly impact our members, must be properly consulted on.”

It’s claimed that the agreement in principle will anchor club spending to around five times the TV revenue of bottom club.

Clubs have already agreed to sign up to new protocols to replace the existing Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) that have seen both Everton and Nottingham Forest hit with points deductions this season.

One of the proposals to replace those FFP rules is a ‘luxury tax’, where those clubs who overspend will have a financial punishment which would increase the more they splash the cash.