Newcastle United are reluctant to outwardly join forces with Manchester City in Premier League civil war over state-sponsored spending freedoms. Saudi-owned club is expected to take a neutral stance in other competition-wide financial discussions on Thursday.
They want to avoid being caught in the crossfire of an escalating dispute. Club sources also refused to be drawn on whether Newcastle is the undisclosed team backing City. This involves their landmark legal hearing next week.
City’s two-week private arbitration looms as league’s wider financial systems top the agenda. This will be at a club shareholder meeting in Yorkshire on Thursday. The Telegraph disclosed earlier this week how the league will advise teams to trial rather than vote on new squad cost controls. They will also consider spending caps.
Early indications are that Newcastle will abstain on two other potential votes. They aim to avoid being seen to be taking sides. Aston Villa will propose at the meeting to increase spending limits from £105 million to £135 million. This is for this final three-year period of monitoring under the current rules.
Newcastle had been expected to back City given their previous opposition to tightening associated-party transaction (APT) rules. Newcastle secured major uplifts on sponsorship agreements under new ownership. It includes £25 million-a-year front-of-shirt deal with Saudi events company Sela. That increased deal came even though APT rules had been initiated in December 2021 amid concern over Saudi Public Investment Fund takeover of Newcastle.

Newcastle Co Owner Staveley’s Anger Over Rule Changes Revealed
Staveley’s anger over rules was laid bare last year in Amazon’s four-part documentary ‘We Are Newcastle United’. “I was shocked that we could buy club pay full price and then rules just change,” she said. “I think that’s what p—ed me off because we had so little revenue anyway. That if you’re just going to ban everything. We were 20th. We had nothing. I was angry then yes.
“You’ve got to remember. Nobody likes competition. The Champions League places are tight, there are only four. Other clubs do everything they can to make sure those places are available to as few people as possible.

“Because of wealth of PIF, obviously there was a lot of push-back from other clubs. I think there was a fear that we’d have an unfair advantage.”
Should City succeed in their claim that APT rules are unlawful, the club will attempt to exploit precedent to weaken 115 financial-breach case against them this autumn.
Representatives from City are expected to join shareholder meeting in Harrogate. They claim in a case beginning on Monday that they are victims of “discrimination” from rival clubs.
They also assert they are being targeted by a “tyranny of the majority”. Rival clubs believe defeat for the league in City arbitration case would eventually lead to end of meaningful financial controls in competition.