Premier league and english football must rip away veil of secrecy that surrounds who owns our clubs

Jason Burt Chief Football Correspondent 25 February 2022 2:06pm GMT The Premier League and English football is hardly of major importance in the midst of Europe's worst military crisis

since 1945, but Thursday was a day that the sport’s executives must have long dreaded. The citing of Roman Abramovich's suitability to own a football club - or lack of it - was raised

by Labour MP Chris Bryant. Similar questions have been raised about Alisher Usmanov, a major backer at Everton, although neither were formally sanctioned by the UK Government. These

developments beg a very simple question: is it too easy to buy an English football club? The answer is not so straightforward. Ultimately, it is easier to buy a club in the Premier League

than any other major European league. Not just easier but actively encouraged. Anyone with the means to do so can make their move and - crucially - without having to explain their

motivation, provide any substantial guarantees beyond financial or be open to scrutiny or questioning. Abramovich, as the first foreign businessman to buy a major British club, is a

barometer for this. Chelsea were far from his first choice when he decided to enter the market in 2003. He looked at Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan and other European giants and discovered

deals would be extremely complicated, largely because of their ownership structures and fan involvement. He also considered Manchester United and met with Tottenham Hotspur before settling

on Chelsea, partly because a sale could be completed swiftly, confidentially and with a minimum of fuss. Key players in the takeover even later spoke about the adrenalin rush of getting it

done at breakneck speed and everyone congratulated themselves that it all took place secretly and without the media even having a sniff of it. “We were nervous there would be a leak,” Bruce

Buck, who was involved as a lawyer on the Abramovich side and became Chelsea’s chairman, recalled in _Chelsea FC: The Official Biography_ - mainly because if the news broke, as he put it,

“the price goes up”. What is even more apparent is that Abramovich, who has never talked about his ownership of Chelsea, craved secrecy - something English football is happy to provide.

Inquiries about takeovers and ownerships are routinely swatted aside with a response that the clubs are ‘private businesses’ - when they should be considered community assets. It is a screen

which can be hidden behind. Abu Dhabi’s purchase of Manchester City in 2009 was also completed under the cloak of secrecy, with the takeover completed dramatically on the last day of a

transfer window. The same was true of the Saudi Arabian deal to buy Newcastle. When I first approached the Premier League about that story it simply refused to discuss it - as did Newcastle.

Everyone wanted to cite commercial confidentiality, but while there can be non-disclosure agreements that surely does not preclude a body such as the Premier League from engaging in

legitimate and specific questions about the ownership of a club, the motivation of the would-be owners and the process. Football is not alone in this regard. The UK government has made it

very clear to the world that it is open for business; that it has a regulatory framework which comes with a very light touch and that it welcomes money from all corners of the globe with a

minimum amount of due diligence. The Premier League could convincingly claim that it is simply following the lead set from the top. It is not for the Premier League to block foreign

takeovers of clubs without legitimate grounds - it would open itself up to all kinds of legal action if it did – but it can demand greater clarity when it comes to ownership. It can amend

its rules and its new ‘owners charter’. Clubs may resist because, frankly, they want to make it as straightforward as possible for them to be sold, but morally it is the right thing to do.

The Premier League is a united nations of owners - Russia, the Middle East, China and others. It is obviously dangerous and xenophobic to lump them all together but there are various issues

and legitimate concerns surrounding the money flowing from these countries. These range from where that money actually originates to human rights abuses to now watching on in horror as the

Russians invade Ukraine and waiting to hear if Abramovich or Usmanov will face sanctions. Nobody is saying that Abramovich or Abu Dhabi or Saudi Arabia should be barred from ever owning a

club. But it should be more difficult for them, or anyone else, to buy one. There should be clear mechanisms around accountability and be far easier to question them about their means and

motivation. Secrecy is nothing to celebrate.