From the Athletic - sounds like the huge wages are untrue if Chris Waugh is correct
Surely getting a rumoured £15million and Lloyd Kelly’s alleged high wages off the bill is “free money” in a PSR world? — Chris M.
Waugh: The Kelly situation is not one which was envisaged when the winter transfer window opened at the start of the month. That is not to be misconstrued as thinking Newcastle have been, or indeed are, actively looking to sell him. Rather, an opportunity may present itself with Kelly which, in PSR (the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules) terms, makes sense for the club.
Advertisement
With Kelly arriving on a free transfer from Bournemouth last July after his contract there expired, there was no fee paid, meaning there is no amortisation cost. Usually, transfer expenditure is spread over a contract so, if Newcastle paid £25million ($30.8m) for someone on a five-year deal, that would be £5m per season over that time. Often when a player is sold, not all of the fee can immediately be ‘banked’ for PSR, because the remaining amortised costs must be deducted.
But Newcastle do not have any expenditure to write off with Kelly, so any fee they receive for him would bolster their PSR in full. To clarify, however, rumours that the 26-year-old defender is among the club’s highest earners are untrue.
Theoretically, Kelly could be expendable given his squad status. He has made only four Premier League starts this season and just seven in all competitions. With Sven Botman and Emil Krafth fit again, alongside Dan Burn and Fabian Schar, there are four senior centre-halves available to Howe, plus Lewis Hall and Matt Targett at left-back.
Kelly has only made seven starts in his debut season with Newcastle (Stu Forster/Getty Images)
Even so, ideally Newcastle would hold onto Kelly. Yes, he has struggled this season, but he has three previous years of Premier League experience and only turned 26 in October, while most of Newcastle’s centre-halves, Botman aside, are already 30 or over, and the defence’s age profile needs to be reduced. Signing a replacement who can cover two positions, like Kelly can, would not be cheap, so that must be considered too.
Neither Fenerbahce of Turkey nor Italy’s Juventus have seriously tested Newcastle’s resolve yet. The former’s permanent offer was too low — their vice-president going public with their interest was received negatively inside St James’ Park — while the latter’s loan bid is not in Newcastle’s interests.
If any club were to make a serious bid — probably in excess of £15million, if not £20m — then Newcastle would have a decision to make, given the potential PSR effects. For now, though, Kelly is not set to leave before the February 3 deadline.
