One Rule for One, Another Rule for Another | OneFootball

In January 2024, in front of a select committee for the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS), Premier League chief executive Richard Masters slipped up.

While speaking about the punishments handed the way of Everton, and, subsequently, Nottingham Forest, for breaches of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Regulations (PSR), and why those cases were being wrapped up so quickly compared to the ones involving Chelsea and Manchester City.

“The standard directions are for everybody,” said Masters. “They’re not just for small clubs. If anybody was found to be in breach, and put forward a PSR calculation that was found to be in breach, and put forward a PSR calculation that was above the threshold, they’d be doing exactly the same thing on exactly the same timeframe.”

The slip-up came with one key phrase: “Small clubs”.

Keep in mind, Everton are nine-time English champions. Nottingham Forest have won two European Cups. “Small clubs” they are not.

And what really stung at the time, and really stings now, is that under the lid, it is clear that Masters and his fellows on the Premier League board do have a two-tier system. He was all but telling us: one for “small clubs”, and one for the other, presumably, “bigger clubs”.

If you want any evidence, just look at this week, and the ludicrously lenient punishment dished out to Chelsea.

Let’s add a bit of context here. If you want further detail from real experts, then this article from Stefan Borson (@slbsn) is well worth a read, while Kieran Maguire’s Price Of Football podcast is also a worthy listen.

Essentially, in 2022, when Clearlake Capital bought Chelsea, they spotted some inappropriate payments that were made to unlicensed representatives and agents that were made by the club, during Roman Abramovich’s ownership, across a period of seven years.

Clearlake held back £150M of the agreed asking price for what it called “unforeseen liabilities”, and reported these findings to Uefa, the Premier League and the Football Association (FA).

That was almost four years ago.

In July 2023, Uefa issued Chelsea with an £8.6M fine. A slap on the wrist, but all was dealt with swiftly. However, the Premier League and FA cases dragged on, and on, and on…

And in that time, of course, the Premier League board showed that the PSR had some teeth. They asked for the strictest possible punishment for Everton after their 2021-22 breach, with the Toffees handed a ridiculous 10-point deduction by an Independent Commission. That was subsequently reduced to 6 points on appeal, but it was clearly laid out in legal precedent that a PSR breach equated to a sporting advantage, and therefore, a sporting sanction was the only possible punishment.

In fact, the first Everton case went as far as to establish that “A financial penalty for a club that enjoys the support of a wealthy owner is not a sufficient penalty” and that “the requirements of deterrence, vindication of compliant clubs, and the protection of the integrity of the sport demand a sporting sanction in the form of a points deduction.”

Forget why Everton breached, or how — indeed, the club were informed they should have foreseen a war in Ukraine, which tied up the cash flow of its majority shareholder — they had overspent on the squad while trying to build a new stadium, and for that they must be punished.

A couple of months later, Nottingham Forest were hit with a 4-point deduction, despite breaching the PSR threshold by more than Everton, and the Toffees were then hit with another deduction (this time of 2 points) for breaching the rules in 2022-23.

All that is in the past, but what those cases did do is set a precedent.

Yet, of course, the Premier League board has managed to find a way around that precedent in the Chelsea case, so as to not punish one of the “in” crowd.

It is entirely predictable, of course. This is the same Premier League board that did nothing to prevent Chelsea selling property to themselves in order to keep within PSR limits, and so that has in turn allowed other clubs to do the same. If they could, one feels the Premier League board would probably stop “smaller clubs” from treading the same path, but they wouldn’t have a leg to stand on from a legal perspective.

But the mental arithmetic the Premier League board has gone to, after an investigation spanning the best part of four years, to not hand Chelsea a sporting sanction, is extraordinary.

Between 2011 and 2018, Chelsea made at least 36 payments, all of which were off-book, totalling upto £47.5M, through offshore entities associated with their previous owner, Abramovich. Around half of that went to unauthorised player representatives.

While there is zero blame to be attached to the players involved (and some player names have been redacted), some of the names in the case are: David Luiz, Eden Hazard, Ramires, Willian, Andre Schurrle, Samuel Eto’o and Nemanja Matic.

Yet the Premier League board has come to the conclusion that spending money in an unauthorised way in order to sign these players, did not constitute a sporting advantage. Let’s just gloss over that Hazard went on to become a Premier League great, or that Chelsea won several Premier League titles during the time these indiscretions were taking place.

The Premier League’s statement, which is incredibly detailed as they attempt to explain away their failings, incompetency and cowardice, claims that, as these payments — if they were made on-book — would not have resulted in Chelsea breaching the PSR limit, then there could be no sporting advantage derived, and therefore a sporting sanction (a points deduction) could not be applied.

There was also significant weight given to mitigating factors, such as Clearlake’s self-reporting and their co-operation throughout the case.

Instead, a £10.75M fine (reduced from £20M due to Chelsea’s co-operation), a 9-month academy transfer ban and a suspended first-team transfer ban, lasting 1 year, was Chelsea’s meagre punishment.

And of course, mitigation should be applied, but only when done so fairly. Neither Forest nor Everton received anywhere close to as much leniency. Not with the level of punishment, and certainly not with the level of weight given to the mitigating factors.

When Everton fans held up “Premier League — Corrupt” posters in November 2023, eyes were rolled by neutral fans. Pundits scoffed at the fans. Patted them on the head for their spirit but insisted this is the way it must be. The club had been cheeky and must be put on the naughty step.

One now hopes some of those pundits have the humility to admit they were wrong. The Premier League board has no interest in truly punishing the “biggest” clubs. They will go through the process, and take far too long to do it, and in the end, they’ll find a way to protect those clubs.

Fittingly, Chelsea are the next visitors to Hill Dickinson Stadium, and if there wasn’t already enough riding on this game for Everton, this latest injustice should only add fuel to the fire.

Chelsea, for all the millions they have spent, either legally or illegally, over the years, are not a team to be feared. And a bit of righteous anger could go a long way for Everton come Saturday.

//

Reader Comments (10)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer ()

Dale Self 2 Posted 18/03/2026 at 12:53:17

I will be celebrating Chelsea and Man City setbacks as though they are Red Shite Lite. Both could find themselves in decline, like Spurs.

The results this season may be strange for a reason. Smaller clubs are figuring out how to assemble competitive squads. Bloated squads can't keep all of their players happy. Meanwhile, expectations will be weighty as bigger clubs pick off lower-table talent.

It hasn't worked so far. We need to dig in and directly accelerate their demise, every chance we get. All of the lower-table teams should.

3 Posted 18/03/2026 at 13:18:35

I don't think it's about feeling sorry for ourselves one bit, Paul, when we are simply highlighting the actions of a very corrupt organisation.

We did get on with it, we overcame a drastic draconian penalty, which came after 3 years of not being able to spend much money on players, meaning we had already really weakened our squad.

How we survived is a mystery... If Chelsea end up qualifying for the Champions League this season, then their fine will have already been quashed because of the money they will automatically receive.

Let's see how the season plays out first, but it will be interesting to see how any club that loses out of qualifying for the Champions League instead of Chelsea,reacts after this very lenient penalty, comparing it to other clubs who suffered much greater penalties.

Mike Powell 6 Posted 18/03/2026 at 13:46:53

Let's hope we beat the cheats on Saturday.

But they will most probably get lots of help from the ref and VAR... COYB NSNO

Ian Wilkins 7 Posted 18/03/2026 at 14:13:51

I'm not feeling sorry for Everton.

We overcame a disproportionate and vengeful penalty which owed more to trying to resist a football regulator than any concept of justice or fairness.

Premier League willingness, through negligible fines, to sanction fraud and corruption (guilt admitted, not in question) from ‘Top 6' football clubs, fuels the concept of Premier League corruption.

It sustains a hierarchy of financially elite clubs and anti-competitiveness.

In simple terms, it sustains a non-level playing field and puts the potential of other teams winning trophies further and further away.

You reach the point of saying, ‘What is the point?'

Raymond Halsall 8 Posted 18/03/2026 at 14:15:45

paul if one of you family was injused or worse in an accident or assult and the person responsible got a fine as their family had status and money, when a very similar situation happened previouse and the person responsible recieved 10 years in prison, you would not be happy.All we want is fare justice for everyone. Never going to happen.

Tony Abrahams 10 Posted 18/03/2026 at 14:47:17

You can do one of three things imo Paul. Accept the decision and just move on whilst keeping your mouth shut. Highlight the inconsistency which definitely borders on corruption, or maybe just walk away from the game altogether.

I don’t mind keeping my mouth shut, in the right circumstances, I honestly feel that I haven’t got long left wanting to watch football at the highest level, but maybe this has got a lot to do with the inconsistency that I think I witness on quite a very regular basis, whenever I watch football nowadays?

If this is the case I don’t know wether it’s better for me to just keep my mouth shut, walk away, or maybe try and highlight the obvious corruption because it’s very sad watching the way the game I love (I can’t make up my m, if it’s the game I used to love) eating itself up from within.