What Does Chelsea Sanctions Mean To The Club? ‘Following the implementation of sanctions by the UK Government, the Premier League Board has disqualified Roman Abramovich as a Director of Chelsea Football Club,’ said a statement from the Premier League.
‘The Board’s decision has no bearing on the club’s ability to train and play its games, as stipulated by the rules of a government-issued license that expires on May 31, 2022.’
After Russia’s invasion, Abramovich put the club up for sale, and the government has since sanctioned him.
They’ve initiated talks with the oligarch’s advisers about the sale’s terms, which Downing Street is eager to complete as soon as possible.
What Does Chelsea Sanctions Mean To The Club? Roman Abramovich Disqualified As Chelsea Director By Premier League
According to the Telegraph, Abramovich has agreed to writing off loans of over £1.5billion without receiving any of the proceeds.
It is understood Abramovich has instructed The Raine Group – the American bank that paused the sale after the Russian was sanctioned on Thursday due to his reported links to Vladimir Putin – to continue the process of completing a takeover.
The same outlet also claims a deadline of the end of next week – pushed back from Tuesday – has been set for prospective new buyers’ first bids to be submitted, with Abramovich now hoping for a rapid sale and Raine hoping it attracts more bidders.
Chelsea can continue playing games and pay their players and staff but cannot transfer players in or out as the government tries to prevent Abramovich from benefiting in any way.
The UK Government have amended Chelsea's special licence.
Find amendment in full: pic.twitter.com/pzHe1f5Ykp
— Chelsea FC (@InsideChelsea) March 12, 2022
On Thursday morning, the Chelsea owner, Roman Abramovich, had his assets frozen as part of a range of British government sanctions against seven Russian “pro-Kremlin” oligarchs closely linked with Vladimir Putin’s regime.
It means Abramovich can no longer sell Chelsea or make money from owning them. The club are also now subject to a special government licence which strictly regulates what they can and cannot do, and makes it a criminal offence if they do not comply.
What are Chelsea barred from doing?
From now on, only season-ticket holders and those who have already bought tickets will be allowed to attend Chelsea games. The club are no longer permitted to transfer or loan players, while broadcast and prize money is also frozen.
On Thursday lunchtime, the official Chelsea club shop was forced to close. However, the club can continue to play fixtures and are permitted to have “reasonable travel costs” to and from games up to a maximum of £20,000. Fans at games will still be able to buy food and drink.
What has been the reaction inside Chelsea?
The club were blindsided by the timing of the government’s decision and, understandably, there has been some alarm among players and their agents. One dressing-room source described the situation as “chaos” and said people feared the club could enter administration.
Such talk is probably premature. However, there is certainly huge uncertainty swirling around Stamford Bridge. The men’s team have three first-team players whose deals are will end in the summer: César Azpilicueta, Antonio Rüdiger and Andreas Christensen. Five women’s players – Ann-Katrin Berger, Maren Mjelde, Jonna Andersson, Ji So-yun and Drew Spence – are also set to leave at the end of the season.
What will Abramovich do next?
That is the £1bn question. Government sources have stressed that the Russian will not make a penny from any sale. Essentially, Abramovich has two choices: to sell the club he has owned since 2003 and walk away quietly as a hero to many supporters, or stay and fight, which could lead to further sanctions and the club being run down.
Even if Abramovich decides to go gracefully, the government will have to issue another licence to allow that to happen. It is also unclear where the money – which could be more than £1bn – could end up, with discussions continuing between the Treasury, the Premier League and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. As one source put it: “The primary thing today is about taking action on oligarchs with close ties to the Kremlin. We’re working through some of those wider implications, including around a potential sale at the moment.”
What about Chelsea’s sponsors?
Three, the British telecoms company which is the team’s principal shirt sponsor on a deal believed to be worth around £40m a year, has confirmed it is suspending its partnership with the club. A spokesperson said: “In light of the government’s recently announced sanctions, we have requested Chelsea Football Club temporarily suspend our sponsorship of the club, including the removal of our brand from shirts and around the stadium until further notice.
“We recognise that this decision will impact the many Chelsea fans who follow their team passionately. However, we feel that given the circumstances, and the government sanction that is in place, it is the right thing to do. As a mobile network, the best way we can support the people of Ukraine is to ensure refugees arriving in the UK from the conflict and customers currently in Ukraine can stay connected to the people who matter to them. Therefore, we are offering connectivity packages to all Ukrainians arriving in the UK, and those in Ukraine.”
Hyundai, Chelsea shirt sleeve sponsor, has also released a statement. It reads: “Hyundai has become one of the strongest partners in football over the years & the company supports the sport to be a force for good. We are currently assessing the situation with Chelsea FC.” The car manufacturer’s deal is reportedly worth £10m a year.
Does the news lead to wider questions for English football?
Undoubtedly. Chelsea are not the only Premier League club whose owners and sponsors have been called into question. Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund has a majority stake in Newcastle. The Abu Dhabi United Group runs Manchester City. Meanwhile last week, Everton suspended all sponsorship deals with the Uzbek oligarch Alisher Usmanov.
While the decision to impose sanctions on Abramovich was welcomed by Tracey Crouch, the MP who chaired the recent fan-led review into football governance, she said it illustrated the need for better scrutiny of owners and directors. “There has been a huge desire for this to happen,” Crouch said. “But I would also say that the situation at Chelsea does demonstrate, yet again, why we need an independent regulator with really tough owners’ tests,. It’s not going to solve this particular problem. But a lot of the issues involved are highlighted in the fan-led review.”
