Premier League clubs and officials were scrambling for support on Thursday ahead of a totemic vote on the competition’s rules.
At a shareholders’ meeting in central London on Friday, clubs will be asked to adopt small changes to the rules relating to associated party transactions (APTs), where clubs generate income from sources linked to their ownership. If the rules are approved, the competition is unlikely to be materially affected, but the consequences of the simmering conflict between the league and its serial champions, Manchester City, will be substantial.
Related: Premier League to proceed with vote on APT rules despite Villa’s call for postponement
City have declared their opposition to the rule changes – having already submitted the league to arbitration over its APT rules. They lobbied clubs for support, including two league-wide letters from their legal director, Simon Cliff, which challenged the validity of the league’s plans. The league spent weeks negotiating with the clubs over their concerns, citing an independent legal analysis from KC Daniel Jowell to support its case.
The outcome of the vote is considered to be at stake, its importance extending far beyond its direct consequences. If City convinces enough clubs to join them in this vote, the league’s ability to act as an effective regulator will be called into question, just as the hearing into City’s 130 alleged rule violations arrives at its climax.
Friday’s vote will require a two-thirds majority, meaning, instead of abstentions, 14 clubs will vote in favor. With City opposing the changes and Aston Villa this week calling for any amendments to be delayed, five more clubs would be needed to vote against the measures.
A previous vote on APT measures, relating to player loans between shared ownership clubs, was rejected a year ago. City were joined by Newcastle, Chelsea, Sheffield United, Burnley, Nottingham Forest, Everton and Wolves in voting against. The Blades and Burnley were subsequently relegated, and the Guardian understands Wolves are likely to vote in favor of the new rules this time.
The proposed changes follow criticism from an arbitration tribunal last month. The court found that rules which allowed owners to provide interest-free loans to clubs should have been treated as APT agreements, and it was found that clubs had been denied timely access to a basis data from previous agreements when attempting to enter into APT agreements. There have also been criticisms of the speed of the league’s decisions on such deals.
City argued that the tribunal’s criticism damaged the league’s entire APT apparatus. The league says the court approved its broader rules and that, given the proposed changes, they remain strong. Many clubs are tired of internecine conflict and the legal costs associated with it.