Sir Jim Ratcliffe, co-owner of Manchester United, is against the introduction of a football regulator and says he can understand why Manchester City is challenging the Premier League rules.
Ratcliffe has acquired a 27.7 percent stake in United, but has been given de facto control of day-to-day operations by the Glazer family.
He has appointed Jason Wilcox as the new technical director, with Omar Berrada set to take over as managing director next month. United will appoint Dan Ashworth as sporting director once a severance package is agreed with Newcastle.
Ratcliffe also oversaw the decision to retain manager Erik ten Hag, despite United having spoken to a number of potential successors.
He has also approved a £50 million upgrade of the club’s training complex at Carrington, with work currently underway that will see the first team move out of the main building for much of next season.
While he focuses on the problems at United, however, Ratcliffe is also aware of the wider issues facing football. Top of the list is the question of a new, state-backed football regulator.
“If there is a government regulator, at the end of the day it will regulate and that will not be good,” Ratcliffe said in a detailed interview with Bloomberg, external.
The plans were part of the Draft Bill on Football Governance, This programme was put on hold with the announcement of the general election, but both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party have committed to it if they form the next government.
Premier League chief executive Richard Masters had previously warned of potential “unintended consequences” that the introduction of a regulator could bring, saying it could jeopardise the league’s status as the world’s most lucrative league.
This is just one of numerous regulatory issues facing Premier League clubs, who will have to comply with current profit and sustainability rules for at least another season.
City are currently question the legality the league’s Associated Party Transactions (APT) rules, which determine whether sponsorship deals are financially “fair.”
Premier League champions City are not the only ones who believe these rules should be abolished.
“I can understand why they would challenge that,” Ratcliffe said. “You can understand why they say they want an open market, a free market.”
The Premier League has put talks with the Football League over a “new deal” for funding on hold until it has sorted out its own revised financial rules, with many top clubs opposed to the idea of handing out extra funds to clubs that could in some cases be seen as rivals.
At their annual meeting earlier this month, the clubs agreed to test an “anchor plan” that would link spending to the income of the club that finishes at the bottom of the table.
Ratcliffe is not a fan of it and thinks there are too many regulations overall.
“What would an anchor spot achieve?” he said. “The last thing you want in the Premier League is for the top clubs to not be able to compete with teams like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich and PSG.”
“We have more accountants at Manchester United than sports people. If we’re not careful, the Premier League will end up spending more time in court than thinking about what’s good for the league.”