Chelsea and Manchester City will not be given space to start the 2025-26 Premier League season later if they get to the final of the expanded Club World Cup, despite a break of potentially just 33 days and minimal pre-season. The Premier League’s Chief Football Officer Tony Scholes said this is simply down to the fact the “calendar is squeezed as much as it can be”, as he attributed the issue to a problem “imposed upon us, particularly by Fifa”.
Although that expanded tournament will take place in the USA, where a number of clubs are looking to expand business, Scholes also stated that “there are no conversations taking place” about potential 39th games or fixture moves to the country.
There was also strong support for refereeing standards and the application of VAR, with the Premier League pointing to improved accuracy according to their independent panel, with an assistance that VAR potentially having to correct senior referees is not an issue. The competition will also press ahead with the implementation of semi-automated offside technology this season.
Perhaps the biggest headache could come if either City or Chelsea reach the Club World Cup final, which is scheduled to take place on 13 July. That is just 33 days before the Premier League’s 16 August start, and potentially just 26 days before the Community Shield, with the effect compounded by the fact the expanded tournament starts just two weeks after the 2025 Champions League final. Progress through the competition could create complicated decisions around the contracted minimum break for players of three weeks.
Scholes nevertheless insisted the Premier League can’t give way any more here.
“We’ve looked at it,” he said. “We’re having this imposed upon us, particularly by Fifa, so that there’s an element of saying why adjust our competition when we’ve been imposed with a competition we don’t agree with.
“The more significant element is we simply can’t, the calendar is squeezed as much as it can be at the moment and we can’t afford a delay to the start of the season.”
Scholes similarly insisted there are no discussions about a 39th game, despite the expanded Champions League potentially setting a precedent for leagues that are no longer round-robin formats.
“I think our clubs pre-season, last couple of years, have played a number of games in the US, we’ve an extra broadcast partner in the US, and viewing figures are strong there, so I would personally say I don’t see a need to do that and I can absolutely say there are no conversations taking place to do it.
”There is also a conviction that the introduction of semi-automated offside technology part way through the season will not raise any competition issues.
“The operation of semi-automated offside technology or indeed automated technology does not change the integrity of the offside law, and doesn’t change the integrity of the decision-making. In fact, given we got 100% accuracy on offside post-VAR this season, it won’t improve the accuracy, what it does is make the process more efficient.“
So if we hold true to that basis, that we’re not actually changing the integrity of it, we’re just making it more efficient, you arrive at a place that says “why wouldn’t you introduce it when you’re absolutely confident it’s ready?”
Scholes acknowledged that might be different if there were just two or three games left out of pragmatism, as he revealed there had been considerable progress with the system over the last six weeks.
There was meanwhile a defence of the current VAR process, despite debate over whether there is any issue with senior referees being told they are making a mistake. Scholes stated that the PGMOL technical director Howard Webb’s position is that “we want our best officials on the pitch”, but also that there are now “fully-trained VAR specialists”, with training increased so they have the “courage of their convictions”.
“PGMOL have looked at this, to determine whether or not there are any issues,” Scholes said. “I think the starting point is Howard’s position is we want our best match officials on the pitch…because decision making begins and ends on the pitch.“
Alongside that, though, the training that the VAR are given, the rigour of it, the frequency of it, has gone up considerably and part of that training is they have to have the courage of their convictions. If it’s a factual decision, they can overturn it on their own, and I don’t think anyone’s got a real issue with that. If it’s a subjective decision, it goes to the referee on the pitch anyway. So the referees are trained and developed to ignore who the individual is on the pitch, effectively, and make the decision based on what they see in front of them.
“With regards to teams, we’re constrained by numbers to be honest at the moment, but we’re now at the point who are fully-trained specialist VARs and that’s led to such an increase in accuracy and efficiency this year.”
There was also a general point of praising refereeing standards.
“These guys are good, I know that’s not always the perception, but these guys are good. The rest of the world sees that, the rest of the world recognise how good they are. If we benchmark them against previous years, they’re very good as well. Do we live in a world where trust is lessened, I don’t know?”
