The Political Economy of Football V2

Posts

City chair has diplomatic immunity

Manchester City’s Emirati chair was granted diplomatic immunity six years ago in a move that could complicate any legal action resulting from findings that the Premier League club artificially inflated its finances by more than £900mn. Khaldoon al-Mubarak, a senior Abu Dhabi official who has chaired City since 2008, was placed on the UK’s official list of approved diplomats in 2020. This automatically confers immunity from any criminal investigation and in most cases shields the person from civil proceedings on UK soil. City strongly denies the charges made against it and will appeal against the decision. The findings, if upheld, could open the door to further legal proceedings, which has been a source of concern for City, according to two people familiar with the situation. This could include civil action from other Premier League clubs that believe they have lost out on the pitch as a result of City’s actions. There is also the potential for criminal investigations...

Is competition law the ghost at the Manchester City feast?

In all the discussion of the possible consequences of the findings against Manchester City by the Premier League, it interests me that there has been no reference to competition law. I am not a lawyer, but I have studied competition policy in various jurisdictions over the year (principally the UK, US, Canada and the EU). I have written up the results of interviews and documentary searches in various publications (including ones on football) and no one has said my interpretations are invalid. Governance arrangements in football ran foul of EU competition policy. After some heavy lobbying by Tony Blair among others, a settlement was eventually reached. One consequence was the introduction of windows for transfers. Britain is no longer in the EU, but we have our own quite stringent competition policy. Largely created in its present form under New Labour, it drew on American anti-trust legislation but had to be compatible with EU policy...

Let owners spend as much as they want argues FT writer

Simon Kuper is an outstanding football journalist who has co-authored one of the best books on the economics of football. So it is interesting to read his controversial views on the Manchester City affair in the Financial Times. He is not saying that City should not be sanctioned if, at the end of the process, it is established that they have broken the Premier League's rules. But he does think the 'misguided' rules should themselves be scrapped. 'Owners should be free to spend their own money on football. Their funding has made the Premier League better and more competitive. English football has a different problem: brutal regimes and people owning clubs. The English game has been uniquely successful at attracting foreign buyers. Foreigners own the vast majority of Premier League clubs. Some — notably Sheikh Mansour and the Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, who owned Chelsea until 2022 — put their own money into football, especially in the era befo...

Manchester City fallout puts strain on UK-UAE relations

As Iranian drones and missiles menaced Abu Dhabi and Dubai this spring, British warplanes roared across the Arabian Peninsula to fend them off alongside United Arab Emirates forces. The UAE saw the US-Israeli war against Iran as a moment of crisis that revealed which of its allies could be relied upon. As Typhoon fighter jets flew across its skies, the view in Abu Dhabi was that the UK had stepped up after years of frosty relations. But those diplomatic ties are being tested afresh by the Premier League’s ruling against Manchester City after a long-running investigation fuelled friction between the two countries. The club, owned by a member of the Abu Dhabi royal family since 2008, has reportedly been found guilty on 114 of 115 charges relating to breaches of its financial rules. The decision, if upheld on appeal, could result in punishments ranging from substantial fines and points deductions to expulsion from the Premier League or being forced to pay other cl...

Is £200m too much to ask for Leicester City?

It is now five months since Leicester City was put on the market with a £200m price tag. Sam Rush, the CEO of consultancy General Sports told The Football League Paper, '£200m in League One is unheard of. But of course Leicester are not your typical League One club. 'Few clubs have secured that valuation in the Championship though there are clubs at that level who will and have valued themselves at more. For example, Ipswich Town concluded a deal last year in excess of the Leicester asking price.' 'What I would say in this specific case is that Leicester are in a superb club. They're in a really challenging place at the moment. But what any buyer needs to assess is, is the current place temporary? Because whilst £200m is not sustainable for a club that stays in League One, it is extremely cheap for a club in the Premier League.' 'Of course, buying a club is the simple bit. Running it is a different kettle of fish, especially in the Championship where ...

O's take step forward in stadium search

Leyton Orient have taken a step forward in their bid to find a new home to replace Brisbane Road where they have been for 80 years. They need to relocate within the London borough of Waltham Forest and have signed a Development Performance Agreement with the council. The club are still working with the council on potential sites. The club hops to be in the new stadium for its 150th anniversary in 2031. The club wants to be able to compete sustainably at Championship level and considers that it cannot achieve this goal at Brisbane Road where there are physical and commercial constraints.