Points deductions hurt the fans, not the owners. That is the Premier League's greatest failure.

Nottingham Forest become the latest club to be docked points for breaching Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR). But ask yourself: who suffers? The supporters. The players who fought for those points. Not the owners who gambled with the club's finances in the first place. The current system is designed to protect the status quo, not to penalise those who actually make the decisions.

A brief history of financial sanctions: clubs punished, owners untouched

The Premier League has hit clubs with points deductions before. In 2004, Leeds United were docked 10 points for going into administration. More recently, Derby County, Reading, and now Forest have all been penalised. Each time, the story is the same: the club suffers, the points are lost, and the owners either walk away with impunity or restructure under a new name.

The underlying logic of PSR is flawed. It targets the symptom — the club's financial loss — not the cause: reckless ownership. By punishing the club, the league essentially tells owners that they can take risks, as long as the club suffers the consequences, not them. That is not accountability; it is a perverse incentive.

Why the current model fails: three reasons points deductions are a cop-out

  • Owners escape liability: When a club breaches PSR, the owner can simply write off the debt through administration or sell the club. The points deduction is a slap on the wrist for a crime that can cost the club tens of millions in lost revenue from relegation. Owners should face personal fines or be forced to inject equity as a penalty, not dock points from the club they already damaged.
  • Fan punishment is not deterrence: Fans have no say in financial mismanagement, yet they are the ones who lose out when their team is stripped of points. The threat of relegation due to a deduction does not deter an owner who plans to cash out anyway. Instead, it creates an adversarial relationship between fans and the league, not between fans and the owner.
  • The rules protect the big clubs: Manchester City and Chelsea have spent billions, but their revenue streams are so vast that PSR bites only for smaller clubs. City’s sponsorship deals with Abu Dhabi entities are questioned, but no points deduction has yet been imposed on the elite. The system appears to enforce discipline on the have-nots while the have-somes avoid real scrutiny.

Counter-argument: clubs must be responsible, not just owners

Critics argue that the club is a legal entity and should be held accountable for its breaches. If the owner is an individual, they may not have the personal wealth to pay a fine. Moreover, punishing the owner directly could deter investment altogether. But this is a straw man. The Premier League could require owners to provide a personal guarantee against FFP breaches, or impose a levy on dividends and asset stripping. The current system allows owners to walk away after a points deduction, leaving the club in the same financial mess. That is not responsible regulation; it is regulatory theatre.

Verdict: a specific prediction for the future of ownership regulation

By 2026, points deductions will be replaced by a hybrid model: clubs will be fined based on the severity of the breach, with a mandatory personal liability for directors who oversaw the spending. If a club is relegated due to financial mismanagement, the owners will be barred from being involved in English football for five years. This will force owners to consider the consequences of their gambling, and it will protect the fans who are the lifeblood of the game. The alternative is to continue punishing the innocent and letting the guilty depart. That is not justice; it is a farce.

Filed under: Opinion | LA Premier League Home