{"id":192913,"date":"2025-11-21T17:10:11","date_gmt":"2025-11-21T17:10:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/192913\/"},"modified":"2025-11-21T17:10:11","modified_gmt":"2025-11-21T17:10:11","slug":"aston-villa-among-three-premier-league-clubs-breaching-green-threshold-of-new-scr-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/192913\/","title":{"rendered":"Aston Villa among three Premier League clubs breaching &#8216;Green Threshold&#8217; of new SCR rules"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Premier League clubs have voted in favour of squad cost ratio (SCR) replacing profit and sustainability rules (PSR) as the new system of financial fair play and the latest financial results reveal the three clubs which would be facing sanctions had it already been in place.<\/p>\n<p>The new rules will limit\u00a0the amount of revenue a club can spend on player and manager wages, transfers and agents\u2019 fees to 85%.\u00a0Bournemouth, Brentford, Brighton, Crystal Palace, Fulham and Leeds voted against the change, but the minimum of 14 clubs was reached.<\/p>\n<p>Both Chelsea and Aston Villa were handed heavy fines by UEFA for the 2024\/2025 campaign for breaching their SCR limit, which was at that stage 80% and is now set at just 70%. That far stricter level means a\u00a0club competing in Europe next season could be sanctioned by UEFA but be compliant in the Premier League.<\/p>\n<p>Any team above the 85% mark in the Premier League \u2013 the Green Threshold \u2013will face a fine, though they\u2019ve provided significant wiggle room to avoid sporting sanctions,\u00a0with a multi-year rolling allowance of 30% permitting clubs to spend beyond the limit.<\/p>\n<p>The Red Threshold is 85% plus the allowance; any club beyond\u00a0that\u00a0threshold will be given a six-point deduction plus another point for every \u00a36.5m over that mark.<\/p>\n<p>It means that any Premier League club can have a squad cost at 115% of their revenue and avoid a points deduction, though those percentages will change for 2027\/2028 and the seasons after that if some of the allowance has already been used.<\/p>\n<p>If, for example, a club spends 95% on their squad next season, they\u2019ve used 10% of their allowance and can therefore spend 105% on their squad the season after, using the remaining 20% of their allowance, without sporting sanction. Got it? Great.<\/p>\n<p>Anyway, here are the revenues and squad costs of the 18 current Premier League teams who were also competing in the 2023\/2024 season, <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.deloitte.com\/content\/dam\/assets-zone2\/uk\/en\/docs\/services\/consulting\/2025\/deloitte-annual-review-of-football-finance-2025.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\">the latest financial results available from Deloitte<\/a><\/strong>, ranked from lowest to highest squad cost\/revenue ratio, which shows the three clubs that were above the new Green Threshold.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>1) Tottenham<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3518m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3222m<br \/>Ratio: 43%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>2) Arsenal<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3613m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3328m<br \/>Ratio: 53%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>3) Manchester United<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3662m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3365m<br \/>Ratio: 55%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>4) Manchester City<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3719m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3413m<br \/>Ratio: 57%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>5) West Ham<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3271m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3161m<br \/>Ratio: 59%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>6) Liverpool<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3614m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3386m<br \/>Ratio: 63%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>7) Brighton<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3223m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3146m<br \/>Ratio: 66%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>8) Brentford<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3169m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3114m<br \/>Ratio: 68%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>9) Newcastle United<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3320m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3219m<br \/>Ratio: 68%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>10) Burnley<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3134m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a393m<br \/>Ratio: 70%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>11) Crystal Palace<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3189m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3134m<br \/>Ratio: 71%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>12) Chelsea<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3468m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3338m<br \/>Ratio: 72%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>13) Wolves<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3178m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3142m<br \/>Ratio: 80%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>14) Everton<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3187m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3157m<br \/>Ratio: 84%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>15) Bournemouth<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3161m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3136m<br \/>Ratio: 84%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>16) Fulham<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3181m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3155m<br \/>Ratio: 86%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>17) Aston Villa<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3272m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3252m<br \/>Ratio: 93%<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><strong>18) Nottingham Forest<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Revenue: \u00a3174m<br \/>Squad costs: \u00a3167m<br \/>Ratio: 96%<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Premier League clubs have voted in favour of squad cost ratio (SCR) replacing profit and sustainability rules&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":192914,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[76],"tags":[2725,4699,1010,7234,792,3205,2052,5000,18,1322,793,7235,19,17,8254,1009,20,2353,1270,5,7236,795,132,7237,3613,7238,4336],"class_list":{"0":"post-192913","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-sports","8":"tag-arsenal","9":"tag-aston-villa","10":"tag-bournemouth","11":"tag-brentford","12":"tag-brighton","13":"tag-burnley","14":"tag-chelsea","15":"tag-crystal-palace","16":"tag-eire","17":"tag-f365-features","18":"tag-front-page","19":"tag-fulham","20":"tag-ie","21":"tag-ireland","22":"tag-leeds-united","23":"tag-liverpool","24":"tag-manchester-united","25":"tag-manchester-city","26":"tag-newcastle-united","27":"tag-news","28":"tag-nottingham-forest","29":"tag-premier-league","30":"tag-sports","31":"tag-sunderland","32":"tag-tottenham-hotspur","33":"tag-west-ham-united","34":"tag-wolves"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ie\/115588800528091289","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192913","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=192913"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192913\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/192914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=192913"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=192913"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=192913"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}