Fair Isn't Really the Point; Spending Rules and Sympathy for Villa and Newcastle
Why I feel for Villa and Newcastle under the spending rules, even if I wouldn't actually change them drastically
I had a bit of a weird feeling come over me as I sat down to write this: sympathy for Aston Villa and Newcastle.
Over the last few seasons these clubs have clearly wanted to spend more on the talent in their squads, but the rules in place have done exactly what they were meant to do and given them a hard limit.
I’m not against spending rules. Guardrails to protect the solvency of these privately owned but very much community and public institutions are prudent. As I understand it, the gripe from Villa and Newcastle (and others) is that the rules as implemented are a continuation of the structural unfairness that has always been built into the game.
It’s the same feeling I get when I see a “smaller” team hit on less heralded players through good scouting and development, only to have that team picked apart as the bigger clubs come in for the talent.
It only goes so far, though, because I have the same tribal streak that’s inherent in most Premier League fans, and you can only feel bad for fellow teams for so long. The structure and hierarchy of the sport isn’t new, and it shouldn’t surprise anyone. Even as an Arsenal fan, where we sit in a privileged spot able to scoop up plenty of that talent, we understand that there are still a handful of clubs above us (more when we were at our recent low point) with the ability to do the exact same thing to us.
There were proposals to move towards a more American-style cap that would have been the same for everyone, but that was voted down. I’d have been interested to see how that changed the game, but it was a radical proposal, one that would have shifted the whole landscape of the league and potentially the Premier League’s spot as the de facto Super League.
That last part is really the key here. The current Premier League feels like it’s in a pretty good place: enough overall balance between the teams, but still room for clubs to build themselves into long-term good sides. My own view is that you don’t want perfect parity. If all of the teams are too equal, it starts to feel like a season is too much up to chance. The other extreme isn’t great either. Look at France and Germany, where one team is such an overwhelming favorite that the title race can feel like a formality, just confirming what was expected all along.
To a certain extent we saw that in the Premier League last season. The quality top to bottom has never been stronger (as you can see any time a PL team faces a non-PL team), but the gap inside the league was more compressed. The story of the season became that it was the worst ever, because people have come to expect a more stratified league with clearer tiers, rather than one where the margins are this fine.
Everyone is aware of the pecking order, and how talent flows up towards where more of the money and prestige sits. Spending rules themselves aren’t new. The current version is (and it’s actually a bit looser than previous ones), but the concept has been around for nearly a decade and a half now. The rules predate the current ownership at both clubs, and both have had a voice in shaping the latest regulations that came into effect this season.
The exact thing Villa and Newcastle want, a quick, owner-funded route to the top of the pile, is exactly what the rules were designed to slow down, a direct response to what clubs like Chelsea, Manchester City and PSG had done previously to shake up the established order. It can feel unfair, and it no doubt is unfair, especially because it looks like the ladder has been pulled up.
Like the saying goes, life isn’t fair, so you have to deal with it and just try to be better/smarter/luckier than everyone else to build something that can take you where you want to go.