Rival clubs “annoyed” at Chelsea’s PSR trading – but Blues’ £19m spend doesn’t add up

Chelsea and several other clubs are conducting some interesting inter-Premier League league this week, raising questions about what moves are being made for PSR purposes.

The deadline for this year’s accounting period comes next week, and there are raised eyebrows around the league about some inflated transfer values getting made into concrete deals.

Chelsea have just signed Aston Villa’s Omari Kellyman for £20m and sold Ian Maatsen to the same club for £37.5m.

Clever rule bending

Let’s let Dan Roan of the BBC explain the whole situation:

Lesser-known academy products Tim Iroegbunam and Lewis Dobbin were exchanged in separate deals between Everton and Villa for a reported £9m each… Before both potential deals abruptly ended on Monday, Everton were also said to be interested in Newcastle United’s highly rated Gambian teenager Yankuba Minteh – with Newcastle reported to be signing striker Dominic Calvert-Lewin from Everton.

But it wasn’t 1 September, it was a normal Saturday in June. And one thing all four of these busy clubs have in common? Concerns over their Premier League ‘Profit and Sustainability’ (PSR) position as they approach the 30 June accounting deadline.

This flurry of transfer activity immediately drew scepticism, but has also annoyed some rival clubs.

And BBC Sport knows of at least one club that is so concerned it intends to raise the matter with the Premier League.

No-one is breaking the rules, but questions have been raised over valuations, the use of young players, and whether this has highlighted a loophole in the league’s PSR system which can be used to limit losses.

We couldn’t have put it better ourselves. It doesn’t seem like the rules have been broken, just exploited. Much like with some of the other dealings that have come to light in recent months, it seem Chelsea’s ownership have been very clever in how they’ve worked out what they can do within the law and within the rules as they exist.

The morality is another question, and the is certainly a sense that this could be the tip of a bigger iceberg. It doesn’t seem to make sense from the surface. Chelsea looked likely to get £35m for Maatsen from somewhere anyway. The idea they overpaid for Kellyman to get Villa to overpay for Maatsen doesn’t add up then.

Tags Ian Maatsen

1 Comment

  1. Sorry, but what does “morality” have to do with any of this??? The league sets and enforces the rules. The clubs are obliged to find every advantage they can without breaking the rules. It’s really that simple. And any club not looking for an edge is liable to find themselves sliding down the table, so the imperatives are the imperatives and it’s more than a little naive to think “morality” enters into the equation.

Comments are closed

Chelsea News