22-04-2025
Relegation clauses are killing hopes of promoted clubs
When Burnley were last promoted to the Premier League in 2023, they splashed out on Zeki Amdouni, an attacking midfielder from Basel priced at €18.6million. Going down, their big investment was making a loan deal for Mike Trésor, an attacking midfielder from Genk, permanent. He was priced at €18million. So two competitions, a world apart, and a price difference of only €600,000.
And it is unlikely to be that different this time, either. Without wishing to rain on Burnley's promotion party, the fight against relegation starts now, or the day the transfer window opens, and much of it is to do with salaries. Amdouni — on loan at Benfica this season — and Trésor fit a certain profile. They are players from unexceptional leagues in Europe who would take a gamble on coming to the Premier League in the hope it could provide a career stepping stone. Amdouni is now a Champions League footballer with a good shot at becoming a Portuguese title winner. In his case, it worked.
It doesn't always work for Burnley, though, as this yo-yoing indicates. With another three promoted clubs going straight down again this season, one of the main contributing factors is a policy widely agreed to be best practice and good housekeeping by devotees of football's new financial religion: relegation clauses in players' contracts. Essential, we are told. Smart, realistic and — amen — sustainable. Luton Town's players dropped down to £15,000 a week when they were relegated last season; Burnley's went to roughly £20,000. And that, it is argued, keeps the ship stable. Yet it also makes relegation close to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Say you are a Premier League player at a mid to low-ranking club. Brentford, Crystal Palace, West Ham United, Everton. Not the star, not an outcast. Someone who gets in most weeks, on the bench for some. A steady Eddie. The sort of player a newly promoted club needs to compete: been around the block, bit of experience — chances are you'll be earning in the region of £50,000 a week. Then a club such as Burnley or Sheffield United come in for you. And the money, with Premier League status, would be roughly the same. Yet there's a catch. In the event of relegation, that £50,000 becomes £20,000 in the Championship. That's a bad deal. That's a £30,000-a-week bet — so £1.56million over the year — that a promoted club will stay up. And ten of the past 15 haven't. So you stay where you are, or you move sideways, because there is less risk.
But, occasionally, there's a third option. The odd Championship club, such as Nottingham Forest under Evangelos Marinakis, gamble. Forest did not insert punitive relegation clauses into the contracts when they built their squad for the Premier League. Marinakis went against all the conservative instincts of modern football management. He was criticised, hit with points deductions; his methods were held up as everything that is wrong with the worst wanton owners.
And now? Forest may well be playing Champions League football next season. One of the reasons they could attract players with reasonable first-team experience from Manchester United, Newcastle United and Chelsea on arriving in the Premier League was that relegation would have minimal impact on salaries. There would be a cut, but in the region of 10 per cent.
Marinakis thought good players would keep Forest up and if they did not, he reasoned he would be able to sell. We'll never know if he was right. The Premier League did their best to discourage ambition and investment, but Forest appear to be having the last laugh now. Good for them, and no thanks to Richard Masters.
Leicester City also did not have severe relegation clauses but Profitability and Sustainability Rules did for them and now, with relegation, salaries will drop by a minimum of 35 per cent, and more if the club do not return immediately. It will be much harder to come back this time.
As for Leeds United, one of the reasons they could attract Jayden Bogle and Joe Rodon last summer was because, even in the Championship, they presented a better option than a promoted club with costly strings attached. Rodon could have gone to Southampton but, in the end, chose wisely. Leeds are not in the habit of inserting big relegation clauses into contracts, so expect that to be reflected in the business they can do this summer too. Of the promoted clubs, Leeds are most likely to be able to buck a depressing recent trend.
And some will be angered by this. They have bought into football as a form of sweaty accountancy in which clean balance sheets are the goal and men such as Marinakis the enemy; as if Leicester needed to be protected from owners who had helped deliver the greatest season in English football history; as if it does not matter if the three that go up go straight back down again in perpetuity, so long as nobody loses money.
But that's not what football is about. What Burnley have done to here under Scott Parker is fantastic, but if they approach next season with the same financial caution it is going to be incredibly tough to avoid a predictable fate. It was Norwich City's plan to be in the top 26 clubs in the country. Either in the Premier League, or in the play-offs, and contracts were adjusted accordingly. Norwich are now 14th in tier two; Luton may pass straight through to League One. There is more to the survival game than only the numbers; Marinakis's instincts were right.
Slot is right not to punish Alexander-Arnold
It is utterly preposterous, the notion that Liverpool should stop picking Trent Alexander-Arnold until he makes a public announcement about his future. Every day his contract remains unsigned is statement enough; equally every game he plays makes a statement too. He came on and won the day at Leicester City, just as his performances throughout this season have been largely exemplary.
Alexander-Arnold has never given any indication of being distracted, never agitated for a move, never said a word that could be considered divisive or disrespectful. He has been outstanding for Liverpool, just as Liverpool have been for him. To drop him now with the club so close to the title would be childish and ungrateful — and Arne Slot does not seem like a man who is either.
Slot will also know by now whether he sees Conor Bradley as Alexander-Arnold's successor. Bradley has started 11 matches this season, coming off the bench in 14 more, so an extra game or two before the end of the campaign is unlikely to tell the head coach much he doesn't already know. Until the title is won, Liverpool should start their best team — with Alexander-Arnold at right back. After that, they can shake hands. It's a fair exchange, and no robbery.
Barrott fails to prove credentials
In the face of much evidence, Sam Barrott appears to be on a fast track as a Premier League referee. Taking charge of Crystal Palace against Bournemouth on Saturday, he sent off Palace's Chris Richards for two bookable offences having already let off Alex Scott of Bournemouth despite an almost identical sequence of events. It was the embodiment of the inconsistency that drives managers, and supporters, mad, with absolutely no rationalisation for the courses of action taken. Given his youth and the encouragement he is receiving, Barrott could well be the next Stuart Attwell, which is not the endorsement it might sound.
Wells needs perspective
Contract talks between promotion-chasers Bristol City and their striker Nahki Wells have stalled. Wells has started 17 games in the Championship and scored ten goals, but feels the club have dragged their heels over a new deal, with his present one expiring at the end of the season. Maybe his agent thinks he could do better too. Yet Wells is 34. He has never scored a goal, or started a game, in the Premier League, and has broken the 20-goal barrier only once, across all competitions for Bradford City in League Two in 2012-13. Meanwhile his head coach at Bristol City, Liam Manning, is very keen for him to stay — even if the club win promotion through the play-offs. How much better does Wells, or his adviser, think it will get?
Rivals' pain is Reading's gain
Reading's April 22 deadline for a sale passed and the EFL, as expected, granted an extension. Understandably so. The alternative would have been to expel the club from League One over the owner Dai Yongge's disqualification, which would have been incredibly harsh on the club's supporters, particularly if a takeover deal is only days away. With Rob Couhig's £25million buy-out imminent, why destroy a club with a 153-year history? Even by EFL standards that would have been spiteful.
And yet, Reading are in the mix for promotion from League One. They sit in seventh place, level on points with Leyton Orient. So what about the fans at Orient; or for that matter, supporters of Wrexham, Wycombe Wanderers, Charlton Athletic and Stockport County, who could all meet Reading in the play-offs? And what about followers of Bolton Wanderers and Huddersfield Town, whose league positions could be greatly altered if Reading's record was expunged?
As it stands, neither would be able to overhaul Orient. Yet scratch all games with Reading, and the table would look very different. Orient would drop six points, Bolton three, Huddersfield one. Huddersfield would leapfrog Bolton to sit two points off Orient and three points would separate the three clubs. Then there are those at the bottom. If Reading were summarily relegated, that would save two of Cambridge United, Crawley Town, Bristol Rovers and Burton Albion. Reading's scrapped record would move Bristol Rovers four points clear of the relegation places and put Burton three points behind them.
So, in being fair to Reading's fans — which seems the right thing to do — the EFL has potentially disadvantaged supporters of 11 other League One clubs, and perhaps some litigious owners. Very soon this will be a matter for a government regulator, and these judgments will be made by civil servants who do not have to possess feeling for the game or those around it at all. Good luck everybody and, as always, enjoy the choices you have made.
Romero's new horizons
