Man City or Chelsea could win £97m | Real eye Trent deal for Club World Cup | Arsenal stun Real thanks to Russo brace
19:30 Share

Welcome to Back Pages, bringing you everything you need to know about the biggest sports stories making headlines in the morning's newspapers. I'm David Garrido and joining me are Miguel Delaney from The Independent and Sam Dean from The Telegraph. Welcome along to you both.

Right then, where shall we start? Let's go for Todd Burley, shall we? And the story that we've got in the mail here, Chelsea Civil War is the headline. Listen, when we're talking about sort of probes and, you know, fit a proper person's tests and all these sort of things, it's normally for fans waiting to see if that person has passed that in order to take over their club, not when they're already in charge and the fans are wanting it. Miguel, can you unpack this story for us?

Well, I mean, it's bringing to a head, well, not quite a head because I feel like this is going to go on, but it's bringing to yet another peak, an emotional peak. This long-running dissatisfaction, very justified dissatisfaction from Chelsea fans about the running of their club and the, I suppose, the economic outlook of the owners.

And it's interesting you mentioned the fit and proper persons test there and all that, because, I mean, one of the major issues with English football and something that has, I suppose, has been more of a live discussion, given the pending independent football regulator, has been over who gets to own clubs. Because it's not just a... It shouldn't... I mean, one of the long-running arguments has been right up to the issue of state ownership, say, hasn't been that it shouldn't be about just kind of, you know...

whether they don't have a criminal record, which used to be the only parameter. It should also be, you think about the political outlook or the economic political outlook and whether that fits what a club should be. But obviously, the Premier League in particular has adopted this economic model that has seen an influx of...

of a certain type of very capitalist-driven ownership. And what we are seeing now, I think this season has actually been a massive watershed moment because it does feel like we're seeing unrest across a number of clubs for different but related reasons. I can't really remember a season like it in that sense. And a lot of them are actually, of course, related to either the performance of clubs or, linked to that, ticket prices.

Yeah, and on sort of this topic, let's just sort of focus in specifically on Chelsea. And by the way, on this story that Chelsea fans, as the mail says, has taken the step of demanding the Premier League investigate Todd Burley over his connection to Vivid Seats, a ticketing website. We have, by the way, spoken to... Well, asked Chelsea for comment, asked the Premier League for comment and waited to hear back from them. But, I mean, this...

points to a wider malaise, doesn't it, Sam, amongst fans across the country, particularly to do with what Miguel mentioned right at the end there, ticket prices. And this is all related to cost of living and, as you say, that real disconnect between the people who own the clubs and the people who go to the games.

Yeah, absolutely. And I think you're right to zero in on this particular story at the start of this, because it's actually quite extraordinary when you think about it just on a narrow scale. The two facts that add a real weight to this story is that Boli is a director and investor in this company, Vivid Seats. And this is a website, an American website, that resales tickets for considerably more than face value. Now, this website, Vivid Seats, is on the Premier League's list of unauthorized ticketing websites.

I mean, that in itself is an extraordinary fact that you've got a man who owns a Premier League club and yet he also owns a business that's effectively banned by the Premier League.

And they've also got the situation where Chelsea's own website stated last year that any supporters who are found to be selling tickets for more than face value, which is what Vivid Seats does, will be subjected to a club investigation and potential sanctions. So where does that leave Bowley as the part owner of this company? It's a very unusual situation. And clearly, as we've seen, the Chelsea Supporters Trust are not happy with it. I think the one thing I should say just to make clear, though, is that you can't buy Premier League tickets online.

from the UK on this website, if that makes sense. You have to be a sort of American visitor or someone who's outside the UK. So I think it would be illegal for anyone in England to use it to buy tickets here. So that's the sort of narrow issue on this one. But you're right in saying that the wider ticket issue is absolutely reaching boiling point, I think, now. And we've seen, Miguel mentioned it rightly, that this season's been a very...

vocal one for fans, but also I think it goes back to last season too, and you're starting to feel that rising tide of anger and real sort of dissatisfaction among supporters who are seeing these prices go up and up and up, and they're seeing their fans defend it with sort of, their clubs, sorry, defend it with excuses about PSR and saying, oh, they need to get every penny, it all counts. But it's very hard to stomach that when a club is spending sort of £100,000 a week on one player's wages.

Just really quickly, Miguel, one of the little quotes here from the Chelsea Supporters Trust, they quote a ticket for Liverpool's final home fixture of the season listed for almost £20,000. I wonder, should this be allowed to continue? And, you know, the...

urge to probe or the request to probe Todd Burley, et cetera, by the Premier League results in nothing. Do you think we might get essentially ultimately a change in profile of fan who attends these games because of the prices rising?

I mean, it does feel like that is already happening. That discussion has been particularly prevalent around Manchester City this season, where there's been regular supporter complaints about supporters in there that have no affiliation to the club or kind of just seem to be treating the day as tourists. And it does fit into something wide. I mean, as Sam excellently kind of summarised there, there are very specific details to this Bowley story.

But they are, as distinctive as that is, it's reflective of this trend where, and it kind of speaks to what I was talking about at the top of the show there, I suppose, where

Ultimately, you have a strand of ownership that, and this really applies to most ownerships at Premier League level and really elite football, they don't really see these clubs as community institutions the way they should. I mean, if you think about it, if you stand back really, why do these clubs exist? Well, they exist because a number of people from a local area were willing to watch them over a long period of time.

to play football and evolve from that. That obviously became so powerful and so socially important that it attracted all manner of interests. And right now, the two primary interests are on one side, you have kind of state ownership who view the political capital of these clubs. And on the other side, where there's much more of this type of ownership, ownerships who basically look at them in terms of pure financial capital. And nowhere...

fitting into that really is the idea of what a club is supposed to be. And hence, within that context, in a world where they are constantly trying to expand, they're constantly looking for growth, they're constantly looking to kind of have this massive global imprint, in some ways, the idea of an old-fashioned season ticket is just a nuisance to them, really. Now, look, clubs will deny this.

At the start of the season, the newspapers and media sat down with Richard Masters, Chief Executive of the Premier League, and I actually directly put to him that there is a growing fear among fan groups that a lot of ownerships want to gradually erode the numbers of season tickets to create almost kind of these single ticket events.

game, sorry, you know, single game tickets that would cost, say, around £400, comparable, say, to if you go to America and go to an NBC, sorry, an NBA game or an NFL game. And I mean, because, I mean...

That sort of fan or supporter or tourist, if you like, isn't just spending so much on a ticket. They're also going to spend much more on the club shop and all the rest of it, whereas a season ticket holder isn't. Masters denied that at the time, but it does feel like... I mean, the evidence is mounting and mounting, and it does... It's just...

Another theme here that kind of raises or should raise serious questions about football's modern direction, even if it does long feel as if the horse is bolted. But there is something that we, the media and fans should be fighting for here.

Often, you know, ticket prices being high is stated as a reason because of, like, PSR and clubs trying to sort of defend themselves against PSR. One thing that will definitely help clubs defend themselves against PSR is if they manage to win the prize money of £97 million for winning the Club World Cup. So Manchester City and Chelsea have got a chance to alleviate their pains there. Let's get to that page of The Express.

"97 Million Reasons to Take On World" is the headline for David McDonald's piece. Sam, what's your take on these numbers?

Well, fundamentally, they're huge numbers. And we've all been talking for quite some time now about the Club World Cup and wondering what's the point and wondering who cares. And a lot of players don't seem particularly interested. A lot of clubs haven't seemed particularly interested. But now the figures are out there and here we can see why it's worth going to for clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City. I mean,

I mean, for Chelsea especially, we know the struggles they've had are keeping on the right side of PSR and financial regulations. And the thought of winning this, and it's very much a winnable competition, there's not that many games to play, to make nearly £100 million for that would make a huge difference to their financial performance.

strategy to everything really and suddenly right now this tournament looks a lot more appealing I think than it has at any previous point and I think it will be interesting to see how this manages to shape football and the economic future of football in the years to come because we already know the disparity between teams in European football and the Champions League and teams who aren't in Europe and that gap is growing ever bigger with each season and now you throw this in there too another 100 million pounds and

You can see this gap is going to grow and grow and grow. And that difference between the biggest clubs and the smaller clubs is going to get larger. I think also it's worth noting, too, that the bigger clubs are going to get more money for playing in this tournament than the smaller clubs. If you're from Europe, you're going to get more just for turning up than you are if you're from Oceania or Africa or South America. Yeah, fair to say it's not...

fully meritocratic in terms of winning football matches equals just getting more pay because there are some who start off with more simply by turning up, as you say. Miguel, I just wonder on one of the points there that Sam mentioned about how this could just change the face of football at those elite levels and really just the whole structure of football. What would you take on that?

I think the impact that this is going to have has been, even though we've talked about a lot, it's actually underestimated. I think this is going to be the start of an immense shift in football. It actually coincides with the 2026 World Cup. And let's not forget as well, the only reason that FIFA has really been able to offer this kind of prize money has been because of other shifts where, through the DAZN deal,

um and uh saudi arabia's or city raven interests uh ownership of 10 stake in the company uh they've been able to invest 1 billion that has made its way through to these clubs and if you think about what that does as well i mean

obviously for the last decade, whatever, we've been used to kind of this, you know, delicate balance in how football has structured domestic leagues, feeding up to the Champions League, the Champions League itself becoming a problem because of how much money it gives the biggest clubs. And now suddenly we're in a situation where, I mean, like,

there are currently agreements that the Club World Cup will only be four years. But if clubs are able to make 100 million out of it, what's going to happen within a few months? There are going to be pushes to make this be played more regularly. And also, what will that do as well? I mean, it's...

This actually fits into exactly what we're talking about in terms of ownerships wanting these clubs to be global entities. Well, given America is seen as the new frontier for football fandom, as a booming commercial market, given how much interest in the sport has taken off, well, essentially, everyone wants to play games there. I mean, La Liga have already talked about it.

Yeah, the Champions League, or UEFA deny it for the Champions League, but everyone in football talks about it as something that's going to happen. They've just struck a deal with a US agency relevant, who are, with all that seen very much in this perspective. And it's not hard to envisage a situation 10 years down the line where,

football has become kind of unmoored from its domestic roots. And we see kind of a truly globalized games where the major European clubs, major Saudi clubs, major US clubs, or major South American clubs are all kind of playing more kind of properly competitive games

all over the world. And it's just, it's a properly globalised system. And at the very least, a development like this, with prize money like this, is the potential spark for it. Let's go to the mail, shall we? The overall subject that we've been talking about very much is money. And I suppose, I wonder if we kind of like make the segue from the previous subject of the Club World Cup. Sam, could Real Madrid effectively offset what they're going to earn

to try and pay for Trent Alexander-Arnold if they're not going to get him on a free because they have to pay Liverpool for him because they've got to get him before his contract expires? Yeah, this is...

We're very much in uncharted territory here. So effectively, Real Madrid can sign Alexander-Arnold before the Club World Cup starts, which would be during, as it stands, in the midst of Alexander-Arnold's Liverpool contract. But that would mean, therefore, they'd have to pay for him, which would be doing so three weeks before he becomes a free agent. So...

I can't think, or surely there's never been an example like this in football history of how do you evaluate a player based on what he can offer you for three games? What kind of money would Liverpool demand for a player who can't even play for them in that period because they've not got any fixtures? It's a totally strange and bizarre situation. My hunch is that there will be no need for Real Madrid to get involved in those discussions because...

the three Club World Cup group games that they've got are against Al-Hilal, Pachuca and Salzburg. So I don't think they're going to be too worried about getting through those without Trent Alexander-Arnold. And the beauty of signing a player as a free agent is you don't have to deal with the club. So...

By trying to get him early, they would end up having to deal with those complications of negotiating with Liverpool and trying to find a fee. But you wouldn't rule it out, of course, but it does feel slightly unusual and perhaps unlikely at this point. Yeah, it's not a bad sort of player to bring in, you know, because you can bring in two players mid-tournament. I'll tell you what, let's bring in Trent Alexander-Arnold. That would certainly, you know, boost their options, wouldn't they, going into a potential, I don't know, quarterfinal or whatever, Miguel?

Yeah, yeah. And maybe a fresh player, given that all of Madrid's will likely be coming from a long Champions League run, although let's see what happens at Arsenal, a long season, and then straight in from internationals to the Club World Cup. And just to pick up on something Sam said there, he said like there's nothing ever been like this before. But it again points to the strangeness of this Club World Cup, that FIFA have just imposed it on their own calendar across the usual kind of boundaries. And then it's even started kind of to impinge on their own World Cup qualifiers a little bit. And yeah, so Trent Alexander-Arnold could feasibly have a few weeks off

where all of his new teammates have been playing for weeks on end. So yeah, something different. And let's not forget with that, to be fair, bro, we've been talking about, you know, the issues, the Club World Cup, the attractions. Given Real Madrid's history as the first European Cup winners, they are obsessed with winning the first Club World Cup.

Yes, I can appreciate that. They always like to make history, don't they, around Madrid? Let's talk a little bit about, on the money theme, two players at major Premier League clubs who have been in the headlines. Back page of the star looks like this. Money, money, money. So on Mo Salah, Robbie Fowler urging Liverpool to give him what he wants, to try and keep him at the club. Do you think that that holds much weight, Sam?

It's a tricky one this because obviously everyone has seen what Salah has done this season and how well he's played. I mean, it's a historic individual season for him and he's going to lead Liverpool to the Premier League title. But that's different to giving him a contract for the future. I mean, a contract is not a reward for current performance. It's effectively a calculation and a projection for future performance.

So the argument that they should give him what he wants because he's scoring goals now, I don't think really holds weight. And I don't think it's quite that simple. I think the fact that it has not happened yet and the fact that it's still ongoing and it's still so much uncertainty is proof of how complicated this is. Because Salah is 32. The question for Liverpool is not, is he good now? It's, will he still be good for the duration of the contract length that he wants?

At any point, he could drop off, he could have injury issues. I mean, even in the last five games, I think he's only scored in one of those. So there are always moments and dips and things like that. And for a player of that age, it's really hard to commit that sort of fee for that amount of time, especially when they're an explosive attacking player. So...

While I totally understand Robbie Fowler's point of view, and I'm sure it's one that many Liverpool fans share, it really isn't as simple as just putting 400 grand a week on the table and saying, sign it here because you've been so good for the past few years. It's more about what will you be like? And they've got all the data, they see his physical numbers, they know about his biology.

what will you be like, Mohamed Salah, in two years' time when this contract comes to an end? So it's very difficult and far more complex than I think some of the headlines over the past six months have made it out to be. The other player mentioned back page at the start is Andre Anana. Do you think Manchester United fans, Miguel, will be delighted that he's rejecting the riches of the Saudi Pro League to fight for another contract and fight for his place at Manchester United?

Well, it's really fair to say he's not been the most popular Manchester United goalkeeper due to some performances. But sometimes you do sense it almost out of that, a defence of him. I think the story is more interesting in the context of what's going to happen this summer. This is the first major transfer window after Saudi Arabia has had the 2034 World Cup confirmed. And that is basically going to, that's another massive element that's going to dictate the next decade of football, where there's going to be huge expenditure, I think even bigger expenditure on

on the Saudi Pro League. But I think where they would have thought maybe the last two years would be kind of normalized big signings or players going to Saudi Arabia, that's maybe become a bit more complicated because some players have left their stories about certain players kind of not being happy with the standard there or the structures. And I mean, you do wonder whether that kind of feeds into this Onana story a little bit because, I mean, look...

whatever about his performance at United, he's still kind of a major European player, I say a major player at an elite level in Europe. And that comes with huge attractions like the prestige of the game. So,

I mean, I think it's actually to his credit if he's turned it down because he wants to aim for the most prestigious trophies in Europe. And people might laugh at Manchester United, but of course they're attempting to make bigger changes at the club there. Sam, very briefly, we've got about 45 seconds or so. Arsenal women, I don't know if you watched the game, but through to the Champions League semi-finals after beating Real Madrid 3-0 at the Emirates, what did you make of this? Alessio Russo there, back page of the Times.

Yeah, I think that's really one of the great nights in Arsenal women history, I think. I was just quickly talking to a colleague who was reporting from the match and he said the atmosphere was fantastic and obviously Alessio Russo gets the headlines. But also Chloe Kelly was exceptional for Arsenal having joined them on loan from Man City in the winter window. And yeah, that sounds like an incredible night. And for them, that dream is very much still alive of Champions League success.