Loads of them.
And all before 30th June.
I saw a headline from an article by The Athletic that references why Wolves haven’t been charged. Can someone with a subscription please read it and post a copy if it’s worth reading?
How did Wolverhampton Wanderers avoid breaching PSR regulations?
WOLVERHAMPTON, ENGLAND - MAY 20: Ruben Neves of Wolves celebrates on the pitch with his family during the Premier League match between Wolverhampton Wanderers and Everton FC at Molineux on May 20, 2023 in Wolverhampton, England. (Photo by Naomi Baker/Getty Images)
By Steve Madeley
Mar 20, 2024
53
Save Article
Just when Wolves thought they were out, they got pulled back in.
Yes, we are talking again about financial fair play, or the Premier League’s profit and sustainability rules (PSR) to give the official title.
Having not been charged with breaching the league’s spending limits this year, Wolves thought they had heard the last of the issue — for a few months at least.
Think again.
The report explaining Nottingham Forest’s four-point deduction for a PSR breach dragged the Molineux club back into the picture by stating Forest had alleged Wolves had to sell Ruben Neves in June last year to avoid a breach of their own.
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
What is PSR and why do Premier League rules only allow clubs to lose £105m?
Not so, say Wolves, who were both baffled and mildly annoyed to have their name dragged into a case they felt had nothing to do with them. Wolves have worked hard to educate their fans on the realities of the PSR regulations and will not be impressed to have that mission set back by what they regard as misinformation.
So, what do we know?
PSR rulings and their effect on the Premier League
Forest feel aggrieved… yet they know PSR sanction could have been much worse
Forest’s points deduction explained and what it means for Everton and Man City
What was said in the Forest case?
The report published by the Premier League on the findings of an independent commission ran to over 50 pages yet was only a summary of the hearing that was held into Forest’s PSR breach.
Forest’s argument against receiving a punishment was that they had breached PSR’s maximum losses limit by not selling forward Brennan Johnson in June last year, instead waiting until September to achieve a higher transfer fee (when he joined Tottenham Hotspur), which was then included in the following financial year’s accounts.
Johnson did not join Spurs from Forest until September (Visionhaus/Getty Images)
One section, on page 30, states: “The commission did note Forest’s submission that Wolves had managed to sell a player in the same two-week period to avoid a PSR breach, although no evidence of these facts was put before the commission at the Hearing or in the documents.
“But it also noted Mr Bonser’s (Thomas Bonser, Forest’s finance director) admission at the hearing that ‘not many’ players are sold in that part of the summer transfer window.”
The only Wolves player sold in the two-week period that was crucial to Forest, from the opening of the transfer window to their PSR deadline of June 30, was Neves, who left for Saudi Pro League side Al Hilal on June 23 for £47million ($59.8m at the current exchange rate).
Forest have been approached for comment.
What do Wolves think?
There was surprise and a little aggravation at Molineux to see Wolves drawn into the Forest case, given that club officials are adamant the sale of Neves had no bearing on them avoiding a PSR breach for the three-year period that ended last summer.
Wolves say that, while Forest choose to calculate their annual accounts to end on June 30, their own accounting periods run from June 1 to May 31. So they say the accounts for 2022-23, which had to be submitted to the Premier League in December to be checked against PSR rules, covered a period that ended more than three weeks before the Neves transfer.
Neves joined Al Hilal from Wolves in June 2023 (Francois Nel/Getty Images)
That means the income from Neves’ sale, which will be significant in PSR terms as the Portugal international had a low ‘book value’ by the time of his departure, will be included in the 2023-24 accounts, which will include all business up to May 31 this year.
Wolves have the option of adjusting their accounting period to end on June 30, which other clubs including Aston Villa have chosen to do and which would bring it into line with players’ contracts, which usually run to the end of June.
But they are expecting to continue filing accounts up to May 31. The advantage of that date is the summer transfer window, which usually opens in mid-June, then falls entirely into one accounting period.
What is Wolves’ overall PSR position?
Officials at Molineux were never unduly worried about breaching the limit — Premier League clubs are not permitted to lose more than £105million over a rolling three-year period — for the seasons from 2020-23 and so join Everton and Forest in being referred to an independent commission this year.
There has long been an acceptance, however, that Wolves were more at risk of a breach in the 2021-24 period, for which clubs who do so will be punished next season. They are confident at present, though, that they will stay within the £105million limit then, too.
A forecast drawn up by the club’s financial team this year predicted they would end up £2.7million inside the PSR threshold, and those figures were based on a 17th-place finish this season with a minimal number of their league games being selected for live television broadcast in the UK.
A better-than-expected season means Gary O’Neil’s side are likely to achieve a much higher league position than that, and appear on TV more frequently than expected. The additional prize money and broadcast income from those televised matches means they should be further away from the PSR tripwire.