Could a Premier League Club Lose Their European Place Once Again?

The Tightrope of Multi-Club Ownership

Could a Premier League club lose – The Premier League is facing a new challenge in its quest for European football slots, as clubs scramble to meet UEFA’s evolving multi-club ownership (MCO) regulations. These rules, designed to protect the integrity of European competitions, have sparked a flurry of activity across the league, with several teams racing to submit their compliance documents before the March 1 deadline. The stakes are high, as failure to adhere to these guidelines could result in a club being demoted from a prestigious competition like the Champions League to the Europa League, or even being excluded from European football altogether.

UEFA’s strict criteria focus on two key aspects: control and decisive influence. Ownership structures are scrutinized to ensure no single entity holds too much sway over multiple teams. For instance, a club must demonstrate that it does not have more than 30% ownership or voting rights in another team. But the rules extend beyond mere percentages—UEFA also considers key decision-makers, such as directors or executives, who might influence critical operations. This has led to a situation where even indirect connections can raise eyebrows, forcing clubs to re-examine their relationships and structures.

“Sporting integrity is of ‘fundamental importance’ and must be ‘undisputable,’” said UEFA, emphasizing that two closely linked teams should not occupy the same European competition simultaneously.

A Case Study in Uncertainty

Everton’s situation highlights the complexity of these regulations. The club, currently ranked 11th in the Premier League, remains just three points away from securing a Europa League spot. Meanwhile, Roma is locked in a tight race for Serie A’s Europa League qualification, with both teams tied on points with fifth-placed Como. Despite their separate standings, the potential overlap of their ownership structures has raised concerns, prompting urgent action from Everton’s management team.

Everton and Roma are both under the umbrella of the Friedkin Group, though they operate through distinct subsidiaries. Everton is managed by Roundhouse Capital Holdings Limited, while Roma falls under Romulus and Remus Investments. The connection between the two clubs is subtle but significant. The individuals with substantial control in Roundhouse Capital are Analaura Moreira-Dunkel and Marcus Watts, who are also senior figures at Everton. However, they no longer hold visible roles at Roma, which may alleviate some concerns. The critical link, though, lies with Dan Friedkin, the US billionaire who serves as chairman of Everton and president of Roma. His dual involvement has become the focal point of UEFA’s investigation.

UEFA’s interpretation of “control” is broad, encompassing not just financial stakes but also decision-making power. Even if Friedkin owns a minority share in both clubs, his influence in key areas—such as transfers or strategic appointments—could trigger a conflict. Everton must prove that Friedkin’s involvement in Roma does not pose a risk to the club’s European qualification. This task is complicated by the fact that the Friedkin Group’s ownership structure is intricate, with multiple layers of subsidiaries and associated entities.

Previous Incidents and the March 1 Deadline

Last season, UEFA’s new compliance deadline caught three clubs off guard, leading to their demotion from European competitions. Crystal Palace was the most notable case, being stripped of its Europa League place and relegated to the Conference League. Similarly, Drogheda United from Ireland and FC DAC 1904 from Slovakia faced the same fate, with their cases dismissed by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas). These rulings reinforced UEFA’s stance that the March 1 date is not a suggestion but a firm cutoff for submissions.

In December, UEFA reiterated its strict adherence to the March 1 deadline, citing the earlier decisions as a precedent. This prompted a rush among Premier League clubs to finalize their ownership plans, with Everton and Roma at the center of the storm. While Everton has yet to disclose its strategy, it has ruled out a blind trust model, which Nottingham Forest opted for. This approach allows a third party to hold the majority stake, reducing the risk of perceived control. However, Everton’s situation is unique, as its ownership ties to Roma are not as straightforward as a blind trust would make them.

The urgency of the situation is underscored by the fact that UEFA’s Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) has the authority to intervene. If a conflict is deemed to exist, the higher-ranked team in the competition will take precedence. In cases where both clubs are in the same stage, such as the Champions League qualifying rounds, the domestic league position becomes the deciding factor. Finally, UEFA coefficients—a measure of a country’s performance in European competitions—can also influence outcomes, with the Premier League currently leading the rankings.

Broader Implications for the League

The MCO rules are reshaping the landscape of the Premier League, as half of its clubs now operate under multi-club ownership arrangements. This trend has created a web of interconnected teams, complicating UEFA’s ability to assess independence. For example, Chelsea, which is part of a larger consortium, recently had Todd Boehly, Paul Winstanley, and Behdad Eghbali removed from its director list as part of efforts to satisfy UEFA’s requirements. This move reflects the league’s growing awareness of the need to maintain compliance.

Everton’s case, however, is more nuanced. While it has not been forced to make drastic changes, the club’s confidence in its solution has not yet been fully shared with the public. This cautious approach has sparked debate among fans, with some questioning whether Everton is hiding a potential conflict or simply taking time to ensure its strategy is solid. The club’s board, which includes figures from the Friedkin Group, has the responsibility to demonstrate that its operations are independent of Roma’s, even if the two teams share a common parent company.

The implications of these rules extend beyond individual clubs. They challenge the traditional model of football ownership, where wealthy investors have historically acquired multiple teams to build competitive advantages. With UEFA’s scrutiny intensifying, clubs must navigate a delicate balance between financial synergy and regulatory compliance. This could lead to a shift in how ownership is structured, potentially favoring models that minimize direct ties between teams.

As the deadline approaches, the focus remains on whether Everton and Roma’s ownership arrangement will hold up under UEFA’s rigorous examination. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for future conflicts, influencing how clubs approach European qualification in the coming seasons. For now, the Toffees are holding their cards close to their chest, leaving fans to speculate about the true nature of their solution. One thing is certain: the fight for European football spots is no longer just about league performance—it’s also about proving ownership independence to the world’s governing body.

What’s Next for the Premier League?

The race to meet UEFA’s compliance requirements has become a defining aspect of the Premier League’s European campaign. Clubs like Brighton, which took proactive steps three years ago, may have already secured their positions. However, the pressure remains on teams like Everton, as their ability to compete in Europe hinges on the success of their restructuring efforts. With the March 1 deadline now a fixed point, the coming weeks will reveal whether the league’s ambitions in European football can withstand the scrutiny of Uefa’s bureaucrats.

As the CFCB reviews submissions, it will look closely at the ownership details and the roles of individuals like Dan Friedkin. If a conflict is identified, the decision could come down to a combination of factors: the level of control, the impact of shared decision-making, and the broader context of each club’s performance. For Everton, this means not only ensuring its own compliance but also persuading UEFA that its relationship with Roma is not compromising the integrity of its European participation. The stakes are clear—failure to meet these requirements could see the club lose its spot in a coveted competition, marking a return to the uncertainty that plagued the league last season.