Copy linkFacebookXPinterestEmailShare this article 0Join the conversationFollow usAdd us as a preferred source on GoogleNewsletterSubscribe to our newsletterThe furore over FIFA's attempt to sell off the World Cup had only just died down when VAR controversies reared their ugly head in the opening weeks of the Premier League season. The demise of PSR appeared to offer temporary relief, yet those minded to celebrate its sudden obsolescence should be wary, EPL executives included. Its replacement abbreviation, SCR, threatens to gravely damage what made England's top tier so successful in the first place.Some explanations are in order. Last November, Premier League clubs voted to change the financial rules that govern their transfer dealings. Out went Profit and Sustainability, which allowed adjusted losses of a maximum of �105m over a three-year period. In came Squad Cost Ratio, which permits clubs to spend up to 85% of their football-related revenue on squad costs, namely transfers, wages and agent fees.There is something faintly depressing about the extent to which modern-day football fans have to be clued up on accountancy terms to make sense of their clubs ins and outs, but at least we now all know the definition of amortisation. Besides, football cannot be a free-for-all. Competitive sport relies on, if not a level playing field, then at least a semblance of parity. Allowing clubs to spend whatever they like would be a recipe for disaster, especially in the era of state ownership.'A fudge so considerable it would have delighted Willy Wonka'PSR was far from perfect. The bigger clubs were already able to splash more cash than the smaller ones because of their larger established revenues. This frustrated many, particularly ambitious outfits striving to break the glass ceiling like Aston Villa and Newcastle.The regulations incentivised the sale of academy products, whose departures could go down in the books as pure profit. A loophole that allowed clubs to count non-football income in their earnings was cynically and predictably exploited. Most egregious was Chelseas sale of two hotels to a sister company controlled by their owners, a fudge so considerable it would have delighted Willy Wonka. You may like Premier League referees need to take tactical offending seriously this season 15 reasons that prove the Premier League is the Super League in disguise Why Newcastle, Everton, Crystal Palace and others must be wary Yet SCR is a step in the wrong direction. That aforementioned loophole has been closed, but the issue of youth-team graduates remains unresolved. More worryingly, middle-ranking sides face a tighter financial squeeze.PSRs fixed �105m figure at least acted as a form of equalisation, imposing the same loss ceiling on all established Premier League clubs regardless of revenue. Under SCR, financial headroom is tied only to revenue, giving the elite clubs greater scope to splash the cash. The closed shop has had a padlock bolted on for good measure.Get FourFourTwo NewsletterThe best features, fun and footballing quizzes, straight to your inbox every week.Contact me with news and offers from other Future brandsReceive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsorsBy submitting your information you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy and are aged 16 or over.That is not all. SCR operates on a seasonal basis, as opposed to PSRs three-year assessment period. This means that a Brighton or a Crystal Palace has less scope to keep a team together for a couple of campaigns before selling off assets in the third season to bring its cumulative losses under the �105m limit. Ambition is circumscribed before it has had the chance to bear fruit.True, the 85% ratio is not a hard-and-fast limit. The Premier League terms it a green threshold, in contrast to a red threshold that comprises the 85% plus a multi-year rolling allowance of 30%. A points penalty is reserved only for those who exceed the red threshold; breaching the green one is punishable by a fine. But that additional allowance is available to the richest teams too, so it only serves to strengthen their relative advantage.The SCR problem is particularly acute for clubs that have qualified for Europe, who must simultaneously meet UEFAs stricter ratio of 70%. Bournemouth, Sunderland, Crystal Palace and Brighton, who will soon begin their continental campaigns, face greater constraints than those who missed out on the Europa League or Conference League.It is telling that three of that quartet voted against SCR, along with Brentford, Fulham and Leeds. These upstarts realised the new regulations would be detrimental to their prospects going forward. The Premier Leagues marketing department might soon need to rethink its anyone can beat anyone mantra.Even under PSR, we would not have seen a repeat of Leicesters 2015/16 title triumph, an achievement that did not merely upset the apple cart but sent it hurtling down the hill. Yet the likes of Brighton, Brentford and Bournemouth have shown in recent years that through smart recruitment, astute management and a long-term vision, it is possible to not only survive but to thrive in the Premier League, sometimes outperforming the established powers in the process.The advent of SCR makes that harder. For a league that has long prided itself on its competitiveness, it is a dangerous development.TOPICSNewcastle UtdNewcastle UnitedBrighton and Hove AlbionBrightonAston VillaCrystal PalaceBournemouth FCAFC BournemouthSunderlandPremier LeagueGreg LeaSocial Links NavigationGreg Lea is a freelance football journalist who's filled in wherever FourFourTwo needs him since 2014. He became a Crystal Palace fan after watching a 1-0 loss to Port Vale in 1998, and once got on the scoresheet in a primary school game against Wilfried Zaha's Whitehorse Manor (an own goal in an 8-0 defeat).
