Yahoo Sports Pyramid rescue package on hold as Premier League clubs argue over payment share
The Premier League has paused discussions with the English Football League over its long-awaited £130 million-a-year pyramid rescue package because of ongoing divisions between top-tier clubs.
Recent meetings between the 20 top-tier shareholders have repeatedly failed to reach consensus over a final agreement which would have seen the first cheques handed over within weeks. Telegraph Sport detailed last month how one major point of contention had been the so-called Big Six disagreeing with rivals over whether the top clubs will be contributing enough to the bill.
Clubs had voted remotely on various proposals in the week or so before Christmas, but with no sign of imminent breakthrough, the league’s chief executive, Richard Masters, told clubs privately he will “pause further discussions with the EFL for the time being”.
Further delays leave the league vulnerable to fresh criticism from both EFL clubs and Government as a new regulator for the game looms.
However, there remains hope within the Premier League that final differences of opinion can be resolved, with an agreement announced by the end of January.
Telegraph Sport detailed a year ago how smaller clubs wanted the richest teams to accept a greater share of costs, potentially through a transfer tax.
A transfer levy of sorts in addition to the traditional formula of relating contributions strictly to prize money appeared likely, but recent votes suggest there was little hope of the overall deal reaching a majority of 14 clubs voting in favour.
Several smaller clubs complain a sliding scale payment system based on merit alone would leave them paying a much higher proportion of their revenue into the solidarity pot.
Manchester City, for instance, could be paying as little two per cent of their revenue, which could equate to around £15 million. That figure is dwarfed by club revenues soaring to a record £712.8 million this year, almost £100 million more than the season before.
United, City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur have often been at odds with the other clubs over how the new solidarity system should be paid for.
Last year they were outvoted after initially proposing those playing in Europe should not have to contribute more, and each club’s contribution should strictly mirror their Premier League income.
Small and medium-sized clubs successfully argued then for income from Europe, particularly the Champions League, to be part of the equation. But there is still a feeling that the wealthiest teams should be paying more.
