Stoke City and almost all other clubs in English football face a constant battle to stay on the right side of strict rules and pundits and experts are befuddled by Chelsea situation
14:15, 17 Mar 2026
Ibrahim Afellay tracks Chelsea star Eden Hazard at bet365 Stadium.
View Image
Eden Hazard.(Image: Richard Heathcote)
The football world has been scratching its head today in the aftermath of the Premier League's decision to fine Chelsea £10 million and hand out a suspended transfer ban for making £47m in secret payments to unregistered agents and third parties over seven years from 2011.
It is the largest fine imposed by the Premier League but Chelsea avoid any sporting sanction, such as a points deduction, being stripped of titles or relegated, because, in 2022, new owners, BlueCo, a consortium led by Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly, self reported to the Premier League after buying the club from Roman Abramovich.
A report from the Premier League catalogued a number of transfers with unregistered payments, including Eden Hazard, David Luiz, Andre Schurrle, Nemanja Matic, Ramires, Willian and Samuel Eto'o.
The club have also been handed an immediate nine-month ban from registering academy players from Premier League and EFL clubs and will pay a £750,000 fine, following an additional investigation into the registration of youth players between 2019 and 2022.
Experts, pundits and supporters have been surprised by the scale of the punishment at a time when almost all other clubs in English professional football, including Stoke City and Port Vale, have been battling to stay on the right side of off-the-pitch rules or expect severe penalties.
Sophy Ridge, Sky News presenter
She said: "At the risk of angering Chelsea fans, £10m, a suspended transfer ban, no sporting sanctions despite something that would have clearly given them a sporting advantage.
"As a Sheffield Wednesday fan you just look at the difference, I think, and how bigger clubs and smaller clubs are treated.
"Luton Town 2008, 10-point deduction; Sheffield Wednesday, 18-point deduction in this current year, on its knees, which means we're the only club in English Football League history to have been relegated in February, trying desperately to get some kind of owner, some kind of future for a club that is at risk of going under. And we learn that we're in line for a 15-point deduction next season as well.
"So how attractive is that going to be genuinely for an owner that might be looking at back-to-back relegations?"
She added: "The pyramid is so important to football and the smaller clubs - not that Sheffield Wednesday is a small club, by the way, it's a big club - are really, really struggling over some of this."
Kieran Maguire, football finance expert
He wrote on X: "Interesting that in the Everton points deduction verdict the Premier League said 'A financial penalty for a club that enjoys the support of a wealthy owner is not a sufficient penalty' and that 'the requirements of deterrence, vindication of compliant clubs, and the protection of the integrity of the sport demand a sporting sanction in the form of a points deduction’.
"Presumably the Chelsea fine (which ultimately is just a deduction from what billion dollar Clearlake will pay to billionaire Abramovich from the £150m held back at the deal date) is then neither punishment, a deterrent or protecting the integrity of the sport? If I was an Everton or Forest fan would not be happy with this outcome."
He added: "Are the ‘senior former officers and/or directors’ of Chelsea who had knowledge and approved of the illicit payments of over £47m to unlicensed agents and others linked to the directors who shared £49.75m for services linked to the sale of the club? Why are these execs/directors not named, are they still working in football today? All seems a bit baffling."
Martyn Ziegler, The Times chief sports reporter
He wrote in The Times: "The sheer scale of Chelsea’s cheating of the system over seven years during the club’s previous ownership, and revealed by a Premier League sanctions judgment, is jaw-dropping.
"The lightness of the £10.75million fine and suspended transfer ban has caused waves at other clubs.
"Manchester City will also no doubt be analysing the findings before the outcome of their 115 alleged rule breaches, especially the statement from the Premier League’s board that had it not been for the self-reporting and cooperation, an 'appropriate' sanction would have been 'a ban from registering new players… for two complete and consecutive transfer windows'.
"In other words, secret payments to players and agents, even when there has been “deception and concealment in relation to financial matters”, would not trigger a points deduction, or worse. The Premier League has made a big noise about how the £47.5million secret payments would not have led to a Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) breach, but other clubs believe that is besides the point: this was cheating, plain and simple."
Stefan Borson, football finance expert
He told The Guardian: “They’ve clearly signed players in competitive situations by paying £47m off book, which according to the written sanctions agreement, was deliberate and involved deception and concealment. On the face of it, these are serious matters that relate to sporting performance. Admitted conduct as egregious this would ordinarily result in sporting sanction.
"Just because you sold a business doesn’t mean links to the past are severed. If the owners of Manchester City were to sell the club tomorrow nobody would expect the [charges of rule breaches] to disappear."
Simon Jordan, former Crystal Palace owner
He told TalkSport: "The interesting thing for me is the materiality of the numbers. When you look at Chelsea and during that period of time between 2011 and 2018 they were spending £1 billion transfers and probably another £100m on agent fees they have legitimately disclosed, £47m almost seems like an immaterial amount. We are talking about something like three per cent. You have to wonder why, what was the point in making payments this way? If you're going to spend £6m on an average spend of £120m a year, it's kind of neither here nor there."
He added: "In real terms (they have got away with this) because the offence is not considered to be as serious as Nottingham Forest or Everton, who breached PSR and got sanctioned by points. They were told the way they were operating was deeply inappropriate and they got the ultimate sanction, which concentrates people's minds...
"It goes to the heart of how the rule are drafted and the thinking behind them. The only consequence they are mindful of is PSR. They make a big deal of it in the summation that 'this would not have breached PSR' so the only thing you really have to be smacked for is a breach of PSR. Why? That's the point, why?
"The overriding message is that football-related fraud is less of a concern, all of a sudden, and you have to work your way back with that and ask why. Why is that? Why is a big six football club whose ex-directors were potentially involved in the appointment of people of significant influence in the Premier League, rules that have been constructed. Why has this latitude seemed to find its way into the rule construction and ultimately an outcome that doesn't affect Chelsea.
"It would be horrible for (co-owners, Todd) Boehly and (Behdad) Eghbali to have this on their toes but they bought a football club and know the consequences of it."
Chelsea manager Liam Rosenior
He said: "I think actually that's a line drawn through that issue. We can move on and we can plan to make this club as strong as possible in the long term. That's the idea from the ownership, myself and everybody involved with the club."
Chelsea
A statement from Chelsea said: "The club wishes to make clear that following robust financial analysis by the Premier League, it was concluded that 'in no scenario would the club have exceeded the maximum allowable loss of £105 million over the three-year assessment period in the rules.'
"Accordingly there is no scenario in which the club could have been in breach of the applicable limits in the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules during the applicable seasons historically.
"From the outset of this process, the club has treated these matters with the utmost seriousness, providing full cooperation to all relevant regulators. The club welcomes the recognition from the Premier League of its 'exceptional cooperation' and that 'without those voluntary disclosures and the act of self-reporting, a number of the Premier League rule breaches may never have come to the attention of the league."
What do you think? Click HERE to join the debate
We have launched a new WhatsApp group to deliver the latest Stoke news directly to your phone. Click the link select 'Join Chat' and you're in. If for some reason you decide you no longer want to be in our community, you can leave at any time by clicking on the name at the top of your screen and clicking 'Exit Group', simple as that.
Content cannot be displayed without consent
Every day, the StokeonTrentLive football desk strive to deliver news, features and transfer-related stories as a part of our overall package of Stoke City content.
Our dedicated reporter Pete Smith - who you can follow on X - follows Stoke home and away and offers you comprehensive coverage from matchdays, press conferences and everything that happens in between.
Article continues below
With so much going on, we send out a daily free Stoke City newsletter which you can sign up for - and means you'll have a round-up of the key stories land in your email inbox.
If you prefer reading our Stoke stories on your phone, consider downloading the Stoke-on-TrentLive app, in which you can personalise the content you see by selecting Stoke City as one of your designated topics. You can get it from Apple