A Premier League investigation into secret transfer-related payments made by Chelsea during the Roman Abramovich era will include the scrutiny of financial transactions around the signings of Willian and Samuel Eto’o.
Sources have told The Times that the transfers of the Brazilian midfielder Willian and the Cameroonian striker Eto’o from the Russian club Anzhi Makhachkala in August 2013 are part of the investigation after they were flagged up by Chelsea’s present owners.
The Times understands that financial records indicate that payments may have been made to “Russian entities” that were separate to any transfer fee.
Anzhi signed Willian for £30 million from Shakhtar Donetsk in January 2013, and then sold him to Chelsea for the same amount in August that year. Eto’o joined Chelsea on a free transfer a day afterwards. There is no suggestion either player had any knowledge of separate payments.
As previously revealed by The Times, the Premier League is investigating payments of millions of pounds by Chelsea between 2012 and 2019 to secretive offshore companies.
Advertisement
The payments were uncovered during the due diligence process that was undertaken by the Todd Boehly-Clearlake Capital consortium when they were buying the club from Abramovich last year. After the takeover was concluded, Chelsea then reported these payments to the FA, Premier League and Uefa.
As well as the payments to offshore companies and Russian entities, at least one alleged payment to a player’s family is understood to be under scrutiny.
Chelsea said in a statement: “These allegations pre-date the club’s current ownership. They concern entities that were allegedly controlled by the club’s former owner and do not relate to any individual who is presently at the club.
“Chelsea FC’s ownership group completed its purchase of the club on May 30, 2022. During a thorough due diligence process prior to completion of the purchase, the ownership group became aware of potentially incomplete financial reporting concerning historical transactions during the club’s previous ownership. Immediately following the completion of the purchase, the club proactively self-reported these matters to all applicable football regulators.
“In accordance with the club’s ownership group’s core principles of full compliance and transparency the club has proactively assisted the applicable regulators with their investigations and will continue to do so.”
Advertisement
Sources with knowledge of the case have claimed that payments to at least six offshore companies have been identified, which raise questions as to whether they were linked to the transfer of players. The alleged payments, which run into seven figures, appear not to have been registered as part of the club’s annual financial reporting to the FA, Premier League and Uefa, which would be in breach of their rules.
In some of the cases there are links to figures in football behind the offshore companies, but in others it has not been possible to establish the ownership.
Even though any rule breaches would have been under Chelsea’s previous ownership, the club could face sanctions from the Premier League, such as heavy fines and points deductions. The present owners would hope the fact they reported the irregular payments acts as mitigation.
Chelsea have already agreed a €10 million (£8.57 million) settlement with Uefa to cover Financial Fair Play rule breaches. Uefa said the fine was for “instances of potentially incomplete financial reporting under the club’s previous ownership”.
Uefa’s Club Financial Control Body considered the filed accounts for only 2018 and 2019 due to its five-year statute of limitations, but the Premier League has no such time bar and can look back to all the payments from 2012 onwards.
Advertisement
As previously reported, the investigation is set to cover payments by Chelsea to the father of the Denmark defender Andreas Christensen, who was signed in 2012.
The “Football Leaks” documents published by the Danish newspaper Politiken in 2018 showed that Chelsea appeared to recruit Sten Christensen as a scout on the day they signed the defender, and paid him £656,640 over four years while he was still employed by Brondby as the Danish club’s goalkeeping coach.
Sten Christensen told Politiken in 2018: “That is not something I want to discuss. That’s the way it is. If you want to use information hacked from Chelsea then go ahead.”
The Premier League investigation could involve questions for Chelsea’s former chairman Bruce Buck and former director Marina Granovskaia, the two main people in charge of running the club during the latter part of Abramovich’s ownership.
Granovskaia, the Russian-Canadian businesswoman who was in charge of Chelsea’s transfers during the latter part of the Abramovich era, declined to respond when asked by The Times in August about the investigations. “I wouldn’t be making any comment on that, really not,” she said.
Advertisement
Sources said the Boehly-Clearlake consortium had initially intended to keep Granovskaia and Buck involved for a transition period to help with transfers but it was decided to make a clean break after the due diligence process.
Within two weeks of the takeover going through, Buck and Granovskaia had both left the club. Chelsea’s accounts published in April this year revealed a payment of £49.75 million to former club directors for “services related to the club’s sale”, with Granovskaia receiving £35 million. The remaining £14 million appears to have been split between Buck and others involved in the sale.
In June last year The Times reported that the new owners of Chelsea withheld £100 million from the final purchase price amid concerns that they could inherit “unforeseen liabilities” — that is understood to relate to the transactions they had uncovered.
The Premier League’s chief executive, Richard Masters, confirmed the investigation into Chelsea in August after it had been revealed by The Times.
“If the Premier League believes a club has breached the financial regulations and there is a case to answer, that case will be put to the club,” Masters said. “We want due process to be served in as efficient a way as possible, as quickly as possible.”
Why would what Chelsea are alleged to have done be a breach of financial rules?
Advertisement
All clubs have to accurately report all their financial transactions to the FA, the Premier League and — if they are involved in European competition — to Uefa. If any payments have been made, such as to an intermediary to facilitate a transfer, and that has not been declared to the football authorities, it would be seen as a breach of the rules. That would also cover payments for services related to the club or transfers that are made by a source of funds not directly connected to the club and not reported.
Is there a likely outcome of the Premier League’s investigation into Chelsea?
Given that Uefa has already fined Chelsea €10 million for similar breaches, it seems certain there will have to be some kind of sanctions from the Premier League as a result of the wider investigation. Uefa, however, only covered rule breaches from 2017 and 2018, as it is only permitted to go back five years. The Premier League has no such time restriction, so it is not only dealing with potentially considerably more rule breaches, but possibly more serious ones too. For those reasons, Chelsea could be facing tougher sanctions such as a points deduction or transfer ban.
What about mitigating factors?
There must be some mitigation given that it was the new owners of Chelsea who reported the apparent rule breaches themselves. Nevertheless there is nothing in the Premier League’s rules which state a change of ownership provides any protection over disciplinary measures. It is also difficult to predict what will happen as this is uncharted territory for the Premier League. It is similar to the situations with Manchester City, who are facing 115 charges of breaching rules, and Everton, who are facing a single charge of breaking financial rules, in that the Premier League has not dealt with such cases before.
