By 
In his latest column for The Times, Martin Samuel has sparked debate by critiquing the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability (PSR) rules, arguing that they unfairly “handicap” clubs like Newcastle United to protect the dominance of the so-called “big six.”
Samuel claims the financial regulations, designed to promote financial fair play, instead perpetuate a system that hinders ambitious clubs from challenging England’s elite. “It’s a purposely flawed system that stops the likes of Newcastle, Forest, Brighton, or Brentford from getting too good,” he writes, describing it as a safeguard for the traditional powerhouses of English football.
One striking example Samuel highlights involves Newcastle forward Alexander Isak. Reflecting on Isak’s winning goal against Arsenal last weekend, he notes the reaction in some quarters: “After Alexander Isak scored the winning goal against Arsenal on Saturday, he was talked of as having passed his audition, because Isak is the striker Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta has his eyes on to bolster his forward line and relieve Kai Havertz.
“Yet why should a club that is backed by the wealth of Saudi Arabia have to sell their best goalscorer to Arsenal? It’s because profitability and sustainability requires Newcastle to pretend they are poor.”
Samuel’s critique has struck a chord with Newcastle fans, who often express frustration over the constraints imposed on their club. One supporter said, “We’re backed by one of the wealthiest owners in world football, yet we’re constantly told we must sell our best players to free up funds. How does that make sense?”
Samuel also argues that the PSR rules are designed to ensure ambitious clubs remain in mid-table obscurity. “It keeps them [Newcastle] exactly where the elite wants them: tenth, at present, so that their finest players become frustrated and wish to leave. And where would they go? To the established elite, the ones who shape the rules to ensure they stay at the top.”
He added: “Selling could strengthen a rival, so the impact of buying has a diminished effect. Clever, isn’t it? And all because those elite entities were so unhappy about what almost happened to Portsmouth 14 years ago, when they nearly went bust, but didn’t. They still haven’t got over it, poor lambs.”
Critics of the current system argue it undermines the competitive spirit of the league, which has long prided itself as the “best league in the world.” Reflecting on the Premier League’s history, Samuel laments that the days of underdogs like Blackburn or Leicester City lifting the title may be gone for good.
The league rules stink of corruption and really clubs like Villa, Forrest, Brighton, Everton, and Newcastle should get together and challenge this corruption in the highest court in the land.
The rules are anti competitive which is against British law and i cannot understand why clubs are lying back and accepting being held back by these anti competitive rules.