Advertisement
The Premier League needed 14 out of 20 clubs to vote for the ban. Alamy Stock Photo
Vote

Premier League fails in bid to block loans between associated clubs

The vote means Saudi-owned Newcastle will be able to bring in Ruben Neves from Al-Hilal should they so wish.

THE PREMIER LEAGUE has been defeated in its bid to ban loan transfers between associated party clubs in January.

The move was designed to prevent a club like Newcastle loaning a player from another club owned by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund – they have been linked with a temporary switch for Ruben Neves from Saudi club Al-Hilal.

The Premier League needed 14 out of 20 clubs to vote for the ban at the shareholders’ meeting in London on Tuesday afternoon.

But the PA news agency understands the vote finished 13-7 in favour of a ban, short of the threshold to push the motion through.

Injury-hit Newcastle will now, if they wish, be able to bring in former Wolves midfielder Neves on loan to replace Sandro Tonali following his 10-month ban for breaking rules on gambling.

Similarly, Manchester City would be able to loan players from other clubs owned by the City Football Group.

In another blow to the Premier League, the clubs were unable to approve the terms of the so-called ‘New Deal’, a £900 million (€1,033,780,500) settlement between it and clubs in the English Football League.

The Premier League had hoped to confirm the package at Tuesday’s meeting, but it is understood no vote took place.

Despite a three-hour discussion there remains a sticking point surrounding new cost control measures for both Premier League and EFL clubs.

The Premier League wants the matter resolved before the new independent regulator in English football is put in place.

Author
Press Association
Your Voice
Readers Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

    Leave a commentcancel