January, like every year, is the month of the winter transfer market, the session of the so-called repair market in which many clubs try to sign new players to try to straighten the fate of a season that may not be as exciting so far as thought. If the big hit, the one that had worldwide resonance, is the passage of Cristiano Ronaldo to the Arabs of Al Nassrin Europe there is a club that is attracting the spotlights on itself and which, without some regulation, could also end up under the magnifying glass of UEFA and Financial Fair Play.
Let’s talk about Chelsea, a club that until a few months ago was doing really badly due to the forced sale of Abramovich after the outbreak of war in Ukraine. The Blues, however, against all odds they put flowers of millions on the marketgoing so far to spend crazy amounts that only for a really clever gimmick might not end up at the center of a scandal.
Chelsea’s spending spree in defiance of Financial Fair Play
From June to today, or rather between the summer and winter transfer markets, Chelsea under new patron Todd Boehly has moved large amounts of money in defiance of Financial Fair Play. Between purchases of Datro Fofana and Ukrainian Mychajlo Mudrykin fact, the Blues have spent a good 150 million pounds, but the business certainly didn’t end there.
Many remember the passages in the summer of cucurella (65 million), Sterling (56 million), Koulibaly (38 million), to which were added the aforementioned purchases plus those of Badiashile (38 million) e Honey (35 million). Summing up, with a few minor deals here and there, the Chelsea accounts are more than 460 million issued in the course of a single year, numbers which, reading the data from the Deloitte Football Money League, even jump to 568 million in turnover. Figures that deserve more than a scrutiny by UEFA which has so often been harsh with the Italians in matters of Financial Fair Play.
Financial Fair Play, the Blues gimmick
Recalling that one of the fundamental points of the FPF is to obtain a balanced budget at the end of the accounting year, how is it therefore possible that Chelsea does not end up under the sights of UEFA? Without considering the costs that the club has to face, in fact, it seems unlikely that Londoners have managed to get as many income as there are exits. In fact it is so and at the basis of the “scam” there is a rule so to speak stolen from the world of baseball.
As can be seen from a study published in the journal Undici, in fact, the patron Boehly imported a custom, which has become trick, in sports. What is it about? There multi-year signature. In fact, looking at the club’s latest signings, it can be seen that everyone has found agreements for five years or more, even with the latest addition Mudryk who has signed for eight years. Starting from the assumption that FIFA recognizes five years as the maximum contract term, but leaves the federations the option of setting a different duration, the Blues have decided to exploit the regulatory void to get the better of the controls of the UEFA commission (here we told you about the possible return of CR7 in Europe).
In fact, by making the players sign multi-year contracts, the costs of the card do not weigh only for one season, but are spread and amortized over the course of all the years. Remaining on Mudryk, whose price tag cost 70 million, the operation will cost only 8.2 million in Chelsea’s budget for eight seasons. With a quick calculation, therefore Chelsea will not spend over the year more than 80 million euros for his new signingscompared to eight times higher figures.
A trick, however, that could be short-lived. In the face of this massive recourse to long contracts, UEFA could take measures, arriving at the regulation of a maximum duration of contracts.
Leave a Reply