Simon Jordan slams UEFA’s handling of Chelsea’s £31m financial penalty

Chelsea and Villa Caught in UEFA’s Financial Net

Chelsea have been fined £31 million by UEFA for breaching financial sustainability regulations, with a further £51 million penalty looming should they fail to comply over the next four years. Aston Villa, meanwhile, have been issued an £11 million fine, with another £15 million suspended depending on their compliance over a three-year period.

This comes as UEFA continues its push to enforce stricter control over club finances, part of an effort to bring European football’s balance sheet in line with evolving rules around spending and revenue. While English clubs have become familiar with domestic Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), UEFA’s guidelines are notably tighter, and this latest development highlights the growing disconnect between domestic and continental governance.

UEFA’s Transfer Rules Add Pressure on Clubs

The sanctions carry more than just financial implications. Both Chelsea and Aston Villa risk being barred from registering new players in UEFA competitions for the upcoming season unless they end the summer window with a positive net transfer balance.

Such a requirement places enormous pressure on recruitment departments and senior executives, especially at Chelsea where years of heavy spending under the current ownership model have pushed the club dangerously close to regulatory thresholds.

While domestic PSR rules allow for certain accounting practices—such as the sale of women’s teams or other assets—UEFA remains less flexible. It does not recognise some of these internal transfers as legitimate financial fair play compliance, meaning creative accounting may hold less sway in European competitions.

Simon Jordan’s Verdict: Governance Gap Undermines Fairness

Speaking on TalkSport, Simon Jordan was forthright in his assessment of the situation, pointing to a deepening divide between UEFA and Premier League regulations. Jordan highlighted how clubs like Chelsea and Villa are penalised with financial fines for breaches, while Crystal Palace may face demotion or exclusion from European competition due to issues surrounding multi-club ownership.

According to Jordan, this disparity reflects a broader issue: governance across football lacks coherence. While Chelsea’s fine will have little practical impact on their competitive standing, the uncertainty surrounding Palace’s European eligibility could deliver a substantial blow to players and fans after an historic FA Cup win.

“Different rules, different punishments—none of them appear consistent,” Jordan argued. “You’ve got clubs incurring huge losses for strategic growth, and others punished severely due to administrative complications. That’s not sustainable.”

Need for Reform Across European Football Governance

UEFA’s Financial Sustainability Regulations, introduced as a phased replacement for Financial Fair Play, aim to control squad costs as a percentage of turnover. This ratio has gradually been reduced—90% in 2023, 80% this year, and set to drop to 70%. Still, clubs like Chelsea continue to struggle with compliance, suggesting that enforcement alone isn’t enough.

The lack of alignment between UEFA and the Premier League continues to frustrate clubs, executives, and fans alike. While UEFA acts as a competition organiser with its own regulatory scope, the Premier League operates independently, often leading to contradictions in how breaches are assessed and punished.

The case of Crystal Palace—awaiting a verdict on whether their ownership structure contravenes UEFA rules—only underscores the confusion. Their potential exclusion from the Europa League would be a crushing setback for supporters who have never seen the club compete in such a prestigious tournament.