EFL Chairman Rick Parry launces onslaught of demands on Premier League
06 May 2020 07:58 am, by Ellandback1
Eight months into his reign as EFL Chairman, Rick Parry launched an onslaught of demands and expectations of the fat cats from the Premier League as the Merseysider went head to head with MP's yesterday. Finally, have the EFL found their backbone? Why should there be such a discrepancy between first and second tier clubs? Is it fair that Norwich should pocket 100m from television rights whilst Leeds receive £3m?
EFL Chairman warns of 'very messy' legal proceedings
The Chairman of the EFL, Rick Parry went on the warpath yesterday, telling MP's (including the Media and Sports Committee) to expect three clubs to be promoted as normal to the Premiership or expect 'very messy' legal proceedings.
The former Chief Executive of Liverpool has become disillusioned at the dysfunctional relationship between the EFL and the fat cats of the Premier League. The current system of promotion and relegation must be retained and (Parry) said:
‘If it doesn’t happen, you can expect the lawyers to get wealthy.
The 65yo went on to say that the PL will not enter discussions about an EFL bailout until they know if, when or how the season will resume.
The £200m shortfall is acute and we do need a rescue. But we need to address the long term otherwise we will be back in this situation in three years. We need hope. We need a plan. We need clarity. We can’t go from one bailout to another.
Season must be concluded by 31st July
Parry warned that any resumption of the EFL season must be completed by July 31 because hundreds of players are out of contract this summer.
If it goes beyond that it will be a complete mess,’ he said. ‘There are 1,400 EFL players coming out of contract. That is a train coming down the tunnel very quickly.
PFA chief executive Gordon Taylor’s has proposed shortening matches - to accommodate packed schedules! How would you feel if the remainder of the matches were just 30 mins each half? Parry did not dismiss it.
EFL clubs will lose money if they play behind closed doors
The financial implications of having to fulfil fixtures behind closed door will financially cripple many clubs, not only in the lower divisions. For instance, Leeds gain £550,00 in revenue from every home game.
It’s not about finishing the season to generate revenue, it’s about sporting integrity,’ Parry said. ‘At our level, if we start behind closed doors it actually costs some clubs to play. Without spectators the clubs are hurting.
EFL players will need to take wage cuts
Parry was adamant that EFL players would have to take wage cuts once the PFA’s appointed accountants at Deloitte had been through the books.
The players are not aware of the seriousness, so we will show them how deep the pain is,’ ‘The overall principle of players taking a share of the responsibility is absolutely essential
Parry quizzed by MP on Leeds current predicament
Tory MP for Winchester Steve Brine quizzed Parry on Leeds current predicament. Brine said:
Leeds United are top of the Championship but it's a one point difference from second place. If the season didn't conclude, as has happened in other European countries, should Leeds be awarded the Championship title and should your old club Liverpool be champions?
Because they will always be 'sort of champions', won't they? There will always be an asterisk next to them on the Wikipedia entry. Should that happen?
My view would only be a personal one, I think it's premature. If and when the season doesn't finish that will be one for measured debate and consideration. There won't be a right answer, there is no right answer but what we have to try to do is come up with a fair and balanced answer that is appropriate in all of the circumstances. But not one for me to speculate on today – I think. Apologies.
Should parachute payments be Abolished? Parry said...
Parachute payments are an evil that need to be eradicated. We have six clubs in the Championship receiving parachute payments of an average of £40m per club. The other 18 clubs get £4.5m each. These payments are a symptom of the chasm that exists. You could have a much fairer distribution system.