How did Liverpool vote on allowing loan moves between affiliated clubs?

Premier League clubs will continue to be allowed to loan players from other affiliated clubs after a motion to ban the practice, put before member clubs, failed to reach the two-thirds majority needed during a vote held on Tuesday.

The motion, deliberated upon in a shareholders' meeting, sought to prevent clubs under the same ownership model from engaging in loan deals with each other during the upcoming January transfer window.

Despite the Premier League's backing of the ban as a measure to uphold fair play, the motion fell one short of the 13 votes required for implementation.

According to The Times, Liverpool were among the group of 12 clubs in favour of the ban. On the opposing front were Newcastle United, Sheffield United, Manchester City, Chelsea, Everton, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Nottingham Forest and Burnley.

Diverse interests

The list of dissenting clubs includes a diverse array of ownership backgrounds, each with distinct ties to various other football entities.

Newcastle United, who have been linked with a loan move for Al Hilal's Rúben Neves in January, are backed by the Saudi-based Public Investment Fund, which holds interests in Al Hilal, Al Nassr, Al Ittihad and Al Ahli.

Similarly, Sheffield United, owned by the Saudi-based United World Group, boasts connections with Beerschot, Al-Hilal United, Châteauroux and Kerala United.

The dissenting group also encompasses Manchester City, owned by Abu Dhabi's City Football Group, renowned for its extensive global club portfolio (New York City, Melbourne City, Girona FC and more); Chelsea, who under Boehly/Clearlake Capital ownership, has ties to Strasbourg; and Nottingham Forest, whose owner holds a stake in Rio Ave FC.

Wolverhampton Wanderers also voted against the proposal. They are owned by Chinese multinational conglomerate Fosun International, which has future aspirations of purchasing further football clubs.

The final team that stood against the proposed ban on related-party loans was Everton. They, too, could soon be associated with multiple clubs (Genoa, Standard Liège, Red Star F.C., CR Vasco da Gama and Hertha BSC) should their acquisition by 777 Partners go through.

FSG's ownership structure

With regard to Liverpool, a crucial point of distinction lies in the ownership structure under Fenway Sports Group (FSG). FSG, while having no direct ownership of elite football clubs other than Liverpool, maintains financial interests across various sports such as baseball, golf and ice hockey.

Consequently, Liverpool would not be directly impacted by a ban on related-party loans due to FSG's ownership model.

The revelations highlight the complex interconnections and diverse global interests present within the ownership structures of these Premier League clubs. This divided stance on regulatory matters concerning related-party transactions underscores the ongoing debates and divergence of opinions within the league.

The upcoming transfer window might witness these clubs leveraging their interclub relationships, pending any potential future regulatory adjustments.