'No system will be perfect': FA chief Richard Masters speaks about likely changes to PSR as new system soon to come in
Nothing has held Newcastle United back more since our 2021 takeover than the Profit and Sustainability Rules put in place to, allegedly, stop clubs spending themselves into oblivion.
What the rules have done in reality is create a bigger divide between the "big six' with their monumental revenues, achieved during a time when there were no restrictions, and stifle those who may have the means to use their own money to close the gap by putting blocks in place to prevent that.
The very real threat of points deductions for breaking PSR rules forced Newcastle into selling two of its brightest young stars last summer, something that still infuriates Eddie Howe to this day.
Premier League clubs have discussed scrapping PSR several times, but the 'big six' won't allow it, and smaller clubs are too scared to oppose those who wield too much power, while some are simply terrified of what Newcastle could do with the leash off.
PSR has been the bane of Newcastle's existence post-takeover
The current rules, however, are outdated. The three-year loss limit that governs spending has not changed since the rules were introduced, and the cost of players has increased significantly since then.
Change is on the horizon, however, as Richard Masters confirmed when speaking at the Leaders Sports Conference on Thursday (via Newcastle World).
“That's not to say we don't think the PSR system works. It's about closer alignment with European regulation, which is the squad-cost ratio, a revenue test.
"The PSR is a look-back profitability test and has its own strengths and weaknesses. No system will be perfect. We have to keep these things balanced and continue the conversation with our clubs, and that's an important decision, so we should take the time to get it right. But that decision is coming up.
"In UEFA, it's now set at 70 per cent. Our system will be 85 per cent because we always want our clubs to have the ability to invest. So when you compare the Premier League system at 85 per cent, if it happens, and you look at the other big European leagues, we have a more permissive system, too permissive some might say.
“The Premier League has been built on the back of investment in which international capital flows (are) coming in. We don't want that to be stifled off."
How can we see the problems, but those who make the decisions can't?
The change is a positive one; we won't deny that. But it won't fix the problem we have of ring-fencing the bigger clubs. Newcastle are grafting so hard to close the revenue gap, but we're miles behind even Tottenham Hotspur, who you'd argue aren't as good a side. We understand the reasoning behind setting limits based on what the club earns, but in the case of Newcastle, and indeed several other clubs, what the club earns and what the owners can afford to spend without any danger are entirely different things.
Masters is right when he says that no system will be completely fair. It also doesn't help that there is a disparity between England and UEFA, given that those clubs who achieve qualification into European competition then become bound by the UEFA rules, which creates a penalty for success as they suddenly go from being able to spend 85% of their revenue to 70%.
How is it that some fat bloke sitting in front of his computer writing about a sport he gets out of breath just watching can see the problems, and those inside the game can't?
PSR has killed the game, and moving to a different system won't fix it; it will only exacerbate the problem.
