Former Crystal Palace owner Simon Jordan has dismissed suggestions that the upcoming Premier League vote to adjust loan rules, potentially affecting Newcastle United’s move for Ruben Neves, is driven by a conspiracy against the Magpies. The proposed changes come amid reports of Newcastle’s interest in signing the Al-Hilal midfielder in January. Both Newcastle and Al-Hilal are owned by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund.
While rival executives deny that the vote is specifically targeted at blocking Newcastle’s move for Neves, some within the Toon Army view the timing of the vote with suspicion. Jordan, however, disagrees with the notion of a conspiracy by elite Premier League clubs against Newcastle’s progress. Instead, he suggests that the move is likely aimed at addressing the increasing influence of the Saudi Pro League, evident in the recent transfers of several top-flight stars to the league.
Simon Jordan, speaking on talkSPORT, has expressed his belief that the proposed Premier League vote to adjust loan rules is not specifically targeted at Newcastle United but is rather a response to the growing influence of Saudi football. He suggests that the timing is coincidental and that the rise of the Saudi Pro League, which has become an attractive destination for players, has prompted the need for the Premier League to address and regulate such movements.
“I don’t think it’s anything to do with Newcastle, I think it’s to do with the rise of Saudi. It just happens to be a timing issue where Saudi have become a pro football league where people can dump their players in left, right and centre, and create opportunities for them to get out of a particular problem,” Jordan stated. He dismisses the idea that the vote is a targeted response to Newcastle’s interest in Ruben Neves, emphasizing that it’s a broader concern related to the increased activity involving Saudi football.
Newcastle is likely to seek an alternative midfielder in the upcoming mid-season transfer window due to Sandro Tonali’s gambling ban. However, their options are constrained by Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations. There is growing concern about the prolonged allowance of issues related to multi-club ownership. The current vote is seen as an attempt to prevent a potential FFP loophole from emerging in light of the lucrative opportunities in the Saudi Pro League.
Jordan, a presenter on talkSPORT, criticizes the argument surrounding multi-club ownership, considering it flawed and irrelevant. He believes that UEFA has allowed this situation to persist, citing the RB (Red Bull) case as a precedent. The argument about competitiveness and jeopardy, according to Jordan, has been dismissed by those proposing that clubs they acquire do not participate in the same tournaments. Additionally, the debate focuses on preventing potential abuses of financial governance, such as transferring players to Saudi Arabia to remove them from balance sheets and then loaning them back to clubs in the home country to circumvent FFP restrictions.
Leave a Reply