Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham warned about major changes to ...

Premier League CEO Richard Masters has suggested that an independent football regulator could be established this summer, despite his reservations about its implementation.

A government bill on the subject is currently making its way through Parliament and could potentially be approved this year.

This would mean that Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur would be overseen by a watchdog that has the power to assess finances, ownership and other structural issues. The Premier League is often portrayed as being against the regulator, due to the inevitable loss of ultimate power that will result from it.

Masters has argued that the current regulation framework implemented by the Premier League "really works". The league has clashed with several of its current and former member clubs over the past 12 months.

Everton had their initial 10-point deduction for financial breaches last season reduced to six upon appeal, while Leicester City also successfully overturned attempts to impose sanctions on them while still in the Championship.

This summer, a commission found Manchester City were correct in claiming that part of the Premier League's Associated Party Transaction (APT) regulations were 'unlawful'. However, it also emphasised that there was indeed a need for such laws to be in place.

Meanwhile, the high-profile financial charges against Man City, which emerged in February 2023 and include over 100 allegations, have been vehemently denied by the club. An initial verdict is anticipated in early 2025 but appeals from either side seem likely, depending on the outcome.

Premier League chiefs may contend that a victory would demonstrate their ability to self-regulate, while a defeat could suggest the need for an independent regulator and bolster support for one. Premier League Chief Executive Richard Masters has acknowledged his lack of influence over the impending regulator.

In a discussion with Sky Sports on 'The Boardroom' podcast, Masters remarked: "There's a process for the [regulator] bill to become law... I don't think that it would be wise for me to predict that the bill isn't going to see its way through to fruition at some point in the summer, and then the regulator will be established."

The timing of the Premier League's charges against City prompted discussion, given they were published just weeks before the release of a government white paper for the regulator. It lead to speculation that the league was attempting to prove its capacity for self-regulation.

Masters defended the league's regulatory role on the podcast, stating: "Football clubs are already regulated - we are the regulator," reinforcing his belief in the league's effectiveness.

"If you have a third party coming in from the side - and then regulating a part of the system financially by being to look at clubs' business plans and potentially constrain their ability to invest - that worries us.

"We have always been pro-investment within measured risks. The Premier League is not a pension fund. It's a place where capital is put at risk.

"So we do worry that a new regulatory function might be risk averse and might inhibit clubs' ability to invest, and the ability to invest is key to competitive imbalance.

"A new regulator could change that investment environment and we don't want that to happen because we think we have a virtuous circle which really works - we don't want that to change."