Simon Jordan considers Aston Villa's decision to vote against the proposed Premier League spending cap to be an 'interesting' decision. Reports emerged on Monday that the Premier League clubs had voted 16 to 3 that they wished to see the introduction of a spending cap - Chelsea were the 20th club who abstained from voting - and that meant Villa, as well as both clubs from Manchester, were defeated, for there needed to be a majority of 14.
The cap would involve the teams at the top being able to spend on transfer fees and salaries a multiple of what the bottom club in the division earns - last year, basement side Southampton made just over £100m. The proposals are with creating a fairer financial landscape in the Premier League in mind. For many, Villa's call to vote against came as a surprise.
Jordan believes Villa are voting in such a way now with their long-term ambitions in mind and, while in the short-term that might appear a curious decision, if Villa are to reach a level they're aiming for then they ought to be able to spend what they want to compete with the elite - as they have been this season, under Unai Emery, albeit with a clear glass ceiling currently in place.
READ: John Terry reveals why Aston Villa player 'broke down' and the job offer he rejected
READ: Villa given potential Olympiacos fitness boost as Europa Conference League glory beckons
"That's an interesting one," Jordan told talkSPORT. "Villa are looking at themselves. I imagine there's an element of thinking about where they're going, what they want to achieve, American ownership models in one respect - albeit with the contradiction that this intellectual capital that a lot of this will be coming from American principles.
"The draft mechanism - the team at the bottom gets the most rewarded with the most opportunity. The owners are protected. Whether you play in the Super Bowl, you play in the Super Bowl of leagues because revenue is shared in a certain way. It makes it a more even landscape for the franchises within the NFL.
"Certainly Man United and Man City, I would understand their point of view. Their challenge is that they aren't the only voices in the league. There have been six clubs who have been able to influence the direction of travel and they may find themselves in a slightly different position this time around.
"I can see their point of view in terms of where they are economically and what they're able to generate. The fact that the European leagues in principle have already started to do this, the Spanish league has and some of the intellectual capital behind this is from the other leagues and UEFA, in the first instance, kind of contradicts that argument.
"Manchester City and Manchester United will have an objection, because they're both capable of generating £7-800m a year, as Man City are proving - and United, if they start being more successful on the pitch, would be able to prove as well. They won't like the idea that a business that can generate £800m a year, that can be highly profitable, is being told what it can and can't spend on the fundamentals - player salaries and player transfers."
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Rachel Marsden
Donald Low
Bradley Blankenship
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
Abbas Juma
Michael Kwet
visit website
