Premier League raises the stakes in bitter war with footballers’ union as competition threatens to pull funding

The Premier League has significantly upped the ante in its war with the PFA – and is considering two highly controversial moves which could trigger serious ruptures between clubs and players.

Earlier this month the union threatened the competition with legal action should it press ahead with a vote on new financial rules it says will limit players’ earning power.

The PFA believes it can veto the anchoring and squad cost rules (SCR) systems via its membership of the Professional Football Negotiating and Consultative Committee (PFNCC), a body made up of the PFA, FA and leagues which ensures agreement is needed before any major changes to player contracts can be implemented.

However, Mail Sport understands that Premier League boss Richard Masters has now told clubs the league is now considering taking legal action against the union via arbitration and, in what would be a significant step, could also withdraw the competition from the decades-old body should the challenge prove unsuccessful.

Masters is also thought to have reminded clubs that the Premier League remains the primary funder of the PFA. In 2023 they signed a new five-year deal which is thought to have been an uplift on the previous £24.9m a year.

While the PFA declined to comment, either move is unlikely to go down well with its members. It would be viewed as a last-resort but the union, which sees the proposals as an artificial salary cap, could ballot its players on strike action should it see no other alternative.

CEO Richard Masters has reminded clubs that the league is the primary funder of the PFA

The Premier League had been due to vote the new systems through for next season at a meeting earlier this month. However, following Manchester City’s victory in their legal challenge on rules around sponsorship deals the ballot was postponed.

Instead, the systems will continue to run in ‘shadow’.

SCR sees clubs limited to spending 85 per cent of their revenue on player salaries, transfers and agent fees. Anchoring restricts clubs to spending a multiple of the amount the bottom club receives in broadcast and prize money in the same three areas. That multiple is expected to be five times.

Both Manchester clubs are against anchoring, with others now known to harbour concerns.

There is a precedent in that the PFA previously won its case against the EFL salary cap on the basis that the league acted in breach of the PFNCC’s constitution.

It is understood that the Premier League have been left frustrated by what they perceive as a lack of engagement from the PFA. They have responded to a legal letter and are yet to receive a reply.

Earlier this month a Premier League spokesman said: ‘We are extremely disappointed that instead of engaging with the substance of the proposals, the PFA has chosen to issue legal demands.’

Masters has also written to clubs to complain about the PFA’s behaviour.

‘We had hoped that this could be resolved through discussion and consultation,’ he said. ‘Unfortunately, this now seems unlikely, and so… we will have to consider how best to address this going forward.’