In recent days, the debate around the Premier League’s proposed salary cap intensified, and many discussions on Cricket Exchange reflected how sharply divided the league has become. The twenty clubs are preparing to vote on whether to adopt the Top-to-Bottom Anchoring system, a model similar to salary structures used in North American sports leagues. Ever since this concept appeared last March, it has drawn heavy criticism. Manchester City and Manchester United remain firmly opposed, arguing that the new rule would reduce competitiveness and erode the Premier League’s long-standing advantage over Europe’s top leagues.
The Professional Footballers’ Association strongly objects as well, saying the rule strips players of their natural right to earn freely. The union has warned that if the proposal is approved, it will file a legal challenge against the league. It is also organizing a meeting for the twenty club captains before the final vote. Although widely referred to as a salary cap, the system is more accurately described as a spending cap since it bundles wages, transfer amortization, and agent fees into a single limit. The calculation is based on the previous season’s broadcasting revenue of the lowest-ranked Premier League club, and each club receives a spending multiplier according to its league finish.
Under the current framework, the champions are allowed a multiplier of five. Using last season as an example, Southampton earned 109.2 million pounds as the bottom-placed club, meaning Liverpool’s total spending as champions could not exceed 546 million pounds. Higher-ranked clubs are assigned higher multipliers, while lower-ranked sides receive smaller ones. The penalties for violations are extremely harsh: a second offense brings an automatic six-point deduction, followed by an additional point for every 6.5 million pounds overspent.
Last year’s preliminary vote showed clear divisions. Sixteen clubs supported the proposal, while Manchester City, Manchester United, and Aston Villa opposed it and Chelsea abstained. The final vote on November 21 will require two-thirds approval to pass. Alongside this rule, the league also plans to introduce a cost ratio system similar to UEFA’s Financial Fair Play, limiting combined spending on salaries, transfer amortization, and agent fees to 85 percent of annual revenue. For major clubs frequently competing in Europe, this ratio is manageable because they already comply with UEFA regulations, but the salary cap adds a far more restrictive layer.
Liverpool generated 700 million pounds last season, which would allow 595 million in spending under the cost ratio model. Under the proposed salary cap, however, they would be limited to 546 million. Manchester United’s numbers would shrink even further due to their fifteenth-place finish. Meanwhile, UEFA’s rule allows clubs to spend up to 70 percent of revenue, a threshold that remains higher than what several Premier League clubs would face under the new system. As revenues continue to grow for English clubs, the proposed cap risks becoming a chain holding them back against European giants like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, and Paris Saint-Germain.
Concerns shared on Cricket Exchange point to another consequence: limiting wages and transfer budgets will make it easier for top European clubs or even high-salary destinations such as Saudi Arabia to attract Premier League stars. Players’ union CEO Molango argues the rule will not survive legal challenges, insisting football cannot impose artificial limits on earnings. The union is confident about its chances, especially after successfully stopping salary caps in League One and League Two in 2021.
Smaller clubs have also begun to voice their opposition, worried about how parachute payments will interact with spending restrictions. Relegated clubs usually receive between 20 million and 49 million pounds per season for up to three years, helping them return quickly to the Premier League. But if the Championship adopts a similar cap, relegated clubs would face major financial limits, reducing their chances of bouncing back. This places the entire parachute payment tradition in jeopardy, creating uncertainty for future seasons.
As the vote approaches, Cricket Exchange discussions capture the anxiety across the league, and the central question remains unresolved: will the salary cap strengthen long-term financial stability or quietly erode the Premier League’s global competitive edge?