Ruben Neves from Al-Hilal in Saudi Arabia is considered a possible loan player for Newcastle United in England. Both clubs are owned by the Saudi Arabian sovereign wealth fund – it’s a new test of the rules around multi-club ownership.
Premier League clubs are due to vote on November 21 on whether to ban loan deals between clubs with the same owner. This is reported by several English media outlets. This is initially a temporary measure that could later be designed and defined in more detail. This could lead to Al-Hilal’s loan deal with Newcastle United around Ruben Neves is prevented.
Neves – via Saudi Arabia to Newcastle?
Neves, like several other players, moved to Saudi Arabia in the summer of 2023, where the league is currently being upgraded with European stars. The Al-Hilal club paid 55 million euros to acquire the defensive midfielder Wolverhampton Wanderers pick up. However, there was a need for action at Newcastle United in this position, as the defensive midfielder Sandro Tonali was banned for ten months for match-fixing. A loan from Neves could close the gap.
The problem: Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund PIF, which majority owns both clubs, would move a player, Neves, between its clubs and, so to speak, loan him out to themselves. An advantage for Newcastle United. Because not all clubs can have such availability of a suitable player from a structurally allied club.
Multi-Club Ownership as a test for the rules
Newcastle is one of many English clubs that are in networks with the same owners. Some examples: Chelsea’s Owners bought last Racing Strasbourg in France, Manchester City has shares in numerous clubs such as FC Girona in Spain, Aston Villa is in the same network as Vitoria Guimaraes from Portugal. Multi-club ownership, the majority stake in several clubs, is currently constantly putting the rules to the test.
Newcastle only became the focus of attention in this regard in the summer. The change of player Allan Saint Maximin to the Saudi Arabian club Al-Ahli was suspected of using the transfer fee to restructure the club Financial fair play-Newcastle’s balance sheet was completed. Here, too, the advantage over others: the right buyer of a player is available at the right time and at the right price. The change was allowed because it complied with the rules of the Premier League corresponding to one “fair market price” took place.
Only if the transfer and thus the transfer fee had been overvalued could the league have intervened. Because then Newcastle would have gained unlawful leeway in the financial rules through the higher transfer income.
UEFA allowed several clubs with similar ownership structures
In July 2023, UEFA’s financial control chamber approved several clubs in the European Cup, even though they previously had the same majority owners. Changes in the management of the clubs have resulted in no club “decisive influence” on other clubs. The chamber had a similar case in 2017 Red Bull judged by the RasenballSport Leipzig and Red Bull Salzburg clubs.
The criticism of multi-club ownership goes beyond the suspicion of possible match manipulation. Possible advantages in transfers relate to the availability of players, as is the case with Newcastle. Tax avoidance or circumvention of financial regulations are also possible consequences.